THE REPLY OF THE MOST ILLUSTRIOUS CARDINAL OF PERRON, TO THE ANSWER OF THE MOST EXCELLENT KING OF GREAT BRITAIN THE FIRST TOME TRANSLATED INTO ENGLISH  
Imprinted at DOVAY; by MARTIN BOGART, under the sign of Paris. 1630.   

TO THE MAJESTY OF HENRIETTA MARIA OF BO-URBON QUEEN OF GREAT BRITAIN  
YOUR MA JESTIE,  
MAY please to be informed, that I have in this dedication delivered you that right, that I durst not withhold from you: your challenge hath so many just titles, as had I given it to any others protection, I had done your Majesty a palpable injury. You are a daughter of France, and therefore fittest to own his work who was in his time, an Ornament of your country. You are the Queen of England, and therefore fittest to patronise the making him an English man, that, was before so famous a Frenchman. You are King james his Sons wife, and therefore, since the misfortune of our times, hath made it a presumption, to give the Inheritance of this work (that was sent to the Father in French) to the Son in English, whose proper right it is, you are fittest to receive it for him, who are such a part of him, as none can make you two, other then one. And for the honour of my Sex, let me say it, you are a woman, though far above other women, therefore fittest to protect a woman's work, if a plain translation wherein there is nothing aimed at, but rightly to express the Author's intention may be called a work. And last (to crown your other additions) you are a Catholic, and a zealous one, and therefore fittest to receive the dedication of a Catholicke-worke. And besides all this which doth appropriate it to you for my particular, your Majesty is she, to whom I profess myself.  
A most faithful subject, and a most humble servant.   

TO THE READER.  
READER  
thou shalt here receive a Translation welintended, wherein the Translator could have no other end, but to inform thee aright. To look for glory from Translation, is beneath my intention, and if I had aimed at that, I would not have chosen so late a writer, but here I saw stored up, as much of antiquity, as would most fitly serve for this purpose. I desire to have no more guest at of me, but that I am a Catholic, and a Woman: the first serves for mine honour, and the second, for my excuse, since if the work be but meanly done, it is no wonder, for my Sex can raise no great expectation of any thing that shall come from me: yet were it a great folly in me, if I would expose to the view of the world, a work of this kind, except I judged it, to want nothing fit, for a Translation. Therefore I will confess, I think it well done, and so had I confessed sufficiently in printing it: if it gain no applause, he that writ it fair, hath lost more labour than I have done, for I dare avouch, it hath been four times as long in transcribing, as it was in translating. I will not make use of that worn-out form of saying, I printed 〈◊〉 against my will, moved by the importunity of Friends: I was moved to it by my belief, that it might make those English that understand not French, whereof there are main, even in our universities, read Perron; And when that is done, I have my End, therest I leave to God's pleasure.   

IN LAUDEM NOBILISSIMAE HEROINAE, QVAE HAS EMINENTISSIMI CARDINALIS DISPUTATIONES ANGLICE REDDIDIT.  

ESSE quid hoc dicam, quod in uno foemina mense  
Tam varium, doctum, grande crearit opus?  
Nun hoc est ipsam cursu praevertere lunam  
Quae simili spatio circuit omne solum?  
An vero Elixir, quod tactu protinus ipso  
Maxima in auratas pondera mutat opes?  
Sic est, illa sui fere Quintessentia sexus  
Quod micat in reliquis omnibus, una tonet.   

The same in English.  

ONE woman, in one Month, solarge a book,  
In such a full emphatik stile to turn:  
Is't not all one, as when a spacious brook,  
Flows in a moment from a little Burne?  
Or is't not rather to exceed the 〈◊〉  
In swift performance of so long a race,  
To end so great and hard a work as soon,  
As Cynthia doth her various galliard trace?  
Or is she not that miracle of Arts  
The true Elixir, that by only touch  
To any metals, worth of gold imparts?  
For me, I think she values thrice as much.  
A wondrous Quintessence of woman kind,  
In whom alone, what else in'all, we find.    

ANOTHER.  

BELIEVE me reader, they are much deluded  
Who think that learning's not for ladies fit;  
For wisdom with their sex as well doth sit,  
As orient pearl in golden chase included.  
'Twill make their husbands; if they have true eyes,  
Wise beauty, beauteous wisdom dear prize.   

Who doth not praise th' Empress Eudoxias fame,  
That made old Homer tell our gospels story?  
Or noble Proba Rome's immortal glory,  
That taught sweet Virgil sing our Saviour's name?  
Or gracious Elpis, sage Boetius love,  
Whose sacred hymns holy Church doth approve?   

But will you see in one brave Ladies mind  
These three great gracious Ladies full compri'zd,  
Their worth, their wit, their virtue equalised  
Look on this work, and you shall plainly find  
Eudoxia, Proba, Elpis yield in all  
To this Translatresse of our Cardinal.   
F. L. D. S. M.    

〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 To the most noble Translator.  

I Would commend your labours and I find  
That they were finished with such ease of mind  
As in some sense the praise I give must fall  
Under the title of Mechanical,  
When those who read it come to understand,  
The pains you took were only of your hand  
Which though it did in swiftness overgo  
All other thoughts yet to your own was slow.  
As the Sun Beams no sooner do appear  
But they make that which stands in their light clear  
Your bright soul did but once reflect upon  
This curious piece, and it was cleared ', and done.  
But that a Woman's hand alone should raise  
So vast a monument in thirty days  
Breeds envy and amazement in our sex  
Of which the most o'er weening wits might vex  
Themselves thrice so much time and with far less  
Grace to their Workmanshipp or true success.  
Why should I not speak truth without offence?  
Behold this Mirror of French Eloquence,  
Which she before the English view doth place  
Filled with the whole Original truth and grace  
That the most curious Author would avow  
〈◊〉 were his own well pleased, if he lived now  
And though you know this where to weack a frame  
To raise up higher the greatness of your name  
Which must from your own rich inventions grow,  
As Rivers from the springs whence they first flow:  
Yet be who truly knows your noblest will  
To profit others and your various skill  
In choseing and in marking cut the ways  
May think this might add something to your praise  
As he who coppying a rare Picture, shall  
Equal, if not exceed, the Original,  
By many shallbe held in as high fame  
As was the first inventor of the same.  
Nor can your work be any whit disgraced  
By those who think it done with too much 〈◊〉;  
For had it been in Michael Angels power  
To perfect his great judgement in one hour,  
He who for that should value it the less,  
His own weak judgement would therein express,  
And though we in a common Proverb faith,  
That Rome was not built all up in one day:  
Yet could we see a City great as Rome  
In all her 〈◊〉 in one minute come  
To such perfection, we might more express.  
Our wonders, and not make the glory less.  
So I conclude with modest truth, and dare  
All their free Censures who can but compare  
And whosoe'er shall try may spend his Age  
Ere in your whole work he shall mend one Page.    

A TABLE OF THE TITLES AND SUMMARIES OF THE CHAPTERS CONTAINED IN THESE FOUR FIRST BOOKS OF THE REPLY TO THE MOST EXCELLENT KING OF GREAT BRITAIN.  

THE FIRST BOOK.  
CHAP. I. OF the use of the word Cathòlicke. fol. 13.  
II. Of the conditions of the Catholic Church. 17  
III. Of the proceeding of the fathers for the preservation of the unity of the Church. 21  
IU. Of the necessity of communicating with the Catholic Church. 23  
V. Of the marks of the Church. 25  
VI From what places of the voice of the Shepherd the marks of the Church ought to be taken. 32  
VII. Of the examples which we have from the practice of the Apostles. 35  
VIII. Of the definition of the Church, and in what union it consists. 36  
IX. Of the union of the predestinate, and (by way of adiunction, of the visibility or invisibility of the Church. 39  
X. Of the unity of eternal faith. 48  
XI. Of other invisible unions. 51  
XII. Of the knowledge that the Predestinate have of their predestination. 52  
XIII. Of the inequality of these two phrases, to communicate with the Catholic Church; and, to communicate with some member of the Church departing from the rule of faith. 55  
XIV. How to understand the words of S. Gregory Nazianzen, there is a sacred war. 57  
XV. Of the pretended precepts to go forth from the visible communion of the Church. 58  
XVI. Of the consequence of the places alleged by the Fathers, for the authority of the Catholic Church. 68  
XUII Of the distinction of the heretics and schismatics. 69  
XVIII. Of the agreement of the ancient Catholic Church with the modern. 70  
XIX. Of the conformity or inconformity of the sense wherein the word, Catholic, hath been common to the ancient Catholic Church, and to the modern. 74  
XX Of the comparison of the Church with the city built upon a mountain. 76  
XXI. Of the conformity or inconformity of the Donatists and Protestants in the question of the Church. 77  
XXII. Of the extent of the ancient Catholic Church and the modern. 78 78  
XXIII. Of the communion that the Bishops of the East had by letters with those of the west. 79  
XXIV. Of these words of the constitution of S. Clement, the universal Episcopate is committed to Bishops. 80  
XXV. Of the comparison of the Pope with other Bishops. 81  
XXVI. Of form letters. 113  
XXVII. Of pretended excommunications attempted against the Pope. 116   

THE SECOND BOOK.  
CHAP. I. OF Counsels. 125  
II. Of the effect of Counsels for the visibility of the Church. 127  
III. Of the comparison of the Pope with the other patriarchs. 128  
IU. Of the difficulties of Scripture, concerning the time of S. Peter's 〈◊〉 at Antioch, and at Rome. 137  
V. Of the Canon of the Council of Nicaea, touching the government of the patriarchs. 147  
VI Of the addition of the word, Church's suburbicarie, made by Ruffinus in the Latin translation of the Council of Nicaea. 161  
VII. Of the claim of the Bishops of Constantinople. 178  
VIII. Of the order of sitting in the Council of Nicaea. 204  
IX. Of the order of the sit in the first Council of Ephesus. 217  
X. Of the order of the sit in the second Council of Ephesus. 219  
XI. Of the order of sit in the Council of Chalcedon. 220  
XII. Of the order of the sit of the fifth Council of Constantinople. 222  
XIII. Of the order of sitting in the sixth Council of Carthage. 229  
XIV. Of the order of the sit in the Council of Aquilea. 231  
XV. Of the calling of Counsels. 232   

THE THIRD BOOK.  
CHAP. I. OF Appeals. 244  
II. Of the opposition of saint Ireneus to Pope Victor. 249  
III. Of the opposition of S. Cyprian. 251  
IU. Of the commission of the Emperor Constantine the great for the judgement of Cecilianus Archbishop of Carthage 264  
V. Of the decree of the Milevitan Council concerning the beyond-sea Appeals. 273  
VI Of the order and distinction of the Council of Carthage. 281  
VII. Of the African Council. 309  
VIII. Whether the Latin edition of the African Canons, be more faithful than the Greek rhapsody. 315  
IX. Of the difficulty touching the Epistles that are at the end of the African Council. 326  
X. Of the question of Appeals treated off in the sixth Council of Carthage. 329  
XI. Of the Council of Sardica. 348   

THE FOURTH BOOK.  
CHAP. I. THE Estate of the Eastern Church. 376  
II. What the division of the Empire hath wrought to the division of the Church. 378  
III. Of the interpretation of those words; Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock, I will build my Church. 379  
IU. Of the indivisibility of the Church. 398  
U. Of the effect that division brings to the Church. 399  
VI Of the pretended corruption of the Church. 400  
VII. Of the exclusion of heretics from the body of the Catholic Church. 402  
VIII. Of the quality wherein the Catholic Church attributes to herself the name of whole. 410  
IX. Of the sense where in the Roman Church, is called Catholic. 411  
X. Of the causes wherefore the Roman Church hath cut off the rest from her communion. 413  
XI. Of the sense wherein the Heretics belong not to the Catholic Church. ibid.  
XII. Of the proceeding of other sects. 414  
XIII. Of the persuasion that other sects pretend to have of the truth of their Church by scriptures. ibid.  
XIV. Of the sense wherein Heretics have disputed the word Catholic. 415  
XV. Of the cases wherein the communion in vow with the Catholic Church may be imputed as actual. 417  
XVI. Of the equivocation of terms diminutives employed for negatives. 419  
XVII. Of the authority of the work iutituled imperfect. 422  
XVIII. Of the understanding of these words of saint Augustine. To seek the Church in the words of Christ. 423  
XIX. Of the understanding of the words of saint Chrisostome in the thirty third Homely upon the Acts. 427  
XX. Of the rules to judge admitted by saint chrysostom and saint Augustine. 429  
XXI. Of the application of the Thesis of this observation to his Hipothesis. 430  
XXII Of the personal succession of the Bishops. 431  
XXIII. Of the succession of doctrine. 434  
XXIV. Of the holding of a Council. 436  
XXV. Of the reduction of the disputation, to the state of the Question. 437  
XXVI Of the invention of order, in the justification of the reformation before the proof of the deformation. 438  
XXVII. Of the indefectibilitie of the Church. 439  
XXVIII. Of the sense wherein the Fathers have intended that their doctrine had been holden from the beginning. 441  
XXIX. Of the exceptions that the King produceth to show that he hath not separated himself from the Church. 442  
XXX. Of the demands made for Reformations since the five last ages; 443  
XXXI. Of the agreement of the English reformers, with the Donatists. 444  
XXXII. Of the authority of the rest of the Christian people, which denied to the Church the title of Catholic, 446  
XXXIII. Of the testimonies of our writers. 447  
XXXIV. Of the begging of the principle contained in this hypothesis, ibid.  
XXXU. Of the temporal causes of the separation of England. 448  
XXXVI. Of the comparison of the English Church, with the judaical. ibid.  
XXXVII. Of the comparison of the Charity of the ancient African Church and the modern Roman Church. 462  
XXXVIII, Of the innocence of the Church in the matter of conspiracies against his majesty ibid.  
XXXIX, Of the writings of the illustrious Cardinal Bellarmin. 463    

An admonition to the Reader.  
COurteous reader, (for so I will esteem of thee, whosoever out of a true desire of understanding the truth, takest this learned work into thy hands, to peruse it with judgement, and yet without prejudice,) vouchsafe before thou begin the perusal thereof, to take these few observations from me.  
First, whereas the most eminent author thereof, had projected to divide it into twelve several books or partial treatises, and died before he could make a complete end thereof being often diverted from it, by manifold employments which his high estate & calling was subject unto, & by some more necessary dispute & writings, which the condition of France did then afford: his friends, either not marking this his project, or because all the work was not ended, neglecting that division; set is forth reparted into six books only, and those so unequally sorted, that the first book alone is in the French edition far bigger than all the other ensuing five books taken together. This unproportionable partition we have amended in this English translation; as we might easily do by the citations, or quotations with which the author himself bordered his margin: for in them, he sometimes refers himself to such a chapter of the second, seventh, eleventh, twelft book, whereby he sufficiently insinuates into how many books he intended to divide this his excellent work, & at what matter every book should take its beginning: which his intention we have observed in this that now we present to thy view, that the fit division of matters therein handled, may make it more intelligible and less tedious.  
Secondly the humour of the French demanded for their satisfaction that the many places which are cited out of learned, holy, and classical autours, hold not only be faithfully translated in the text, but also placed at large in their original languages in the margin: that the learned reader might without recourse to the several volumes (which required a copious library, whereof few are furnished) out of hand examine the faithfulness of the translation, & consequently how fitly the alleged authority made for the purpose. But this humour not yet (for aught I have seen) much reigning in our country, we have thought it sufficient, to cite the places only in the margin, which are fully expressed in the text; the rather because the excellent translatresse copy, which we have faithfully expressed contained no more; and more beseemed not her translation, as not desiring to make show of skill in greek, and other such learned languages; but only of that which was sufficient, for her assumpt that it is of a faithful translation according to the significant expressement of the French.  
Thirdly, we have not presumed to alter or change any one word of her translation, but in some few places, where the French allusions could not be so well understood, if they were expressed in English properly corresponding thereunto: for every tongue hath some peculiar graces and elegancies, which be lost in the translation, if they be put word for word; And yet this have we done (as we said) very seldom, and that especially in the word Church, which we English men use derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the house dedicated to our Lord's service, which tropically we use also to signify the congregation of the faithful, most solemnly and usually made in the Church; The French express it by the name of Eglise from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vocatus ad professionem fidei, the company of the faithful called by Christ to profess his law by which word they secundarily, or tropically understand and call the Church or house of prayer. So in the name of S. Peter, in French S. Pierre, which word also signifies a rock or stone in French, as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greek, and Cephas in Syriak do; but in our English we have no such allusion. No other change, but in these few, and such like have we made; neither was it needful, the translatresse having so fitly, and significantly expressed the autours' meaning, that it would have been lost labour to strive to do it better, and rather marring, then mending so perfect an expression.  
Lastly, I desire thee (gentle reader) to bear with the faults of the press: The printers being Walloons, and our English strange unto them it was incredible to see how may faults they committed in setting: so that in overlooking the proofs for the print, the margins had not room enough to hold our corrections: and do what we could, yet the number of our corrections being so many, a great many of them remained uncorrected by the fastidious fantasy of our workman. Yet we judge there is no fault that may hinder, or change the sense, but is amended; and for the rest we desire thee to pardon us, considering how hard it is to make a stranger here to express our orthography. Farewell in our Lord, and he of his goodness give thee grace to take profit by reading these learned discourses.  
Thy Wellwisher in Christ jesus F. L. D. S. M.   

APPROBATIO.  
TRanslatio haec operis excellentissimi (quod eminentissimus Cardinalis Perronius, pro fides catholicae doctrina ad potentissimum Regem ac Dominum nostrum Jacobum totius Britanniae, Franciae, & Hiberniae, Monarcham, summa cum cruditione pariter & modestia conscripsit) facta a nobilissima quadam Heroina provinciae nostrae, & serenissimae, Reginae Dominae nostrae, Mariae 〈◊〉 Borboniae dicata: per omnia fideliter concordat cum ipsa autoris ment verbis, & sententiis, Qua propter dignam eam 〈◊〉, quae typis tradatur, utex tanti Praeceptoris accuratissimis cloquentiaque incomparabili vestitis disputationihus fructum copiosum capiatur Anglia nostra, qualem universa Gallia cum perpetua Magni autoris veneratione se percepisse protestatur.  
2. Decemb. 1631 F. Leander de S. Martino, sacrae Theologiae Doctor, Hebraeae linguae in alma Academia Duacena professor Regius, Benedictinorum conventus S. Gregorij Angliae, Prior.   

THE LETTER OF THE LORD CARDINAL OF PERRON, SENT TO MONSIEUR CASAUBON INTO ENGLAND.  
SIR. the letter that you delivered to Monsieur de la Bodery, was delivered to me by him, even as I was upon my departure for a voyage into Normandy; and since my return from thence, I have been almost perpetually sick, which hindered me from answering with more speed. Now that my disease begins to be at some truce with me, I will pay the arrearages of this delay, and will first thank you for the good office that you have done me, in showing the letter I writ to you, to the most excellent king of great Britain, and in procuring me an interest in his favour: I will strive so to husband it by my humble service s, (and partakerly by celebrating his praises, which is the only fruit that good and virtuous kings, such as he do gather from allthe labours and thorny cares, that the burden of a kingdom loads them with,) as his majesty shall have no cause to be sorry, that it be declared to after ages, how he hath honoured me with his well wishes, and how I have had his 〈◊〉 in reverence and admiration. As for the translation of the verses of Virgil, whereof you writ to me that he desires a Copy, that which I sent you being lost; I defer yet for some days, to acquit myself of that duty, because I have put it to the press, with the addition of a part of the fourth, which I have ended expressly for his majesty; sake, to enlarge my present to him. As soon as those few Copies which are in doing, shall be finished, I will not fail to address one of them to you, to offer up to him on my behalf The third point of your letter yet remains; which is, that his Majesty was astonished at those words in my letter; That, excepting the title of Catholic, I knew nothing wanting in him, to express the figure of a perfect and complete Prince: and that he pretends, that since he believes all things that the Ancients have with an unanimous consent esteemed necessary to salvation, the title of Catholic cannot be donied him. Now as on the one side, I can not but greatly praise his majesty's piety and Christian humility, in not disdaining to submit his judgement, adorned with so many lights natural and acquired, to that of those clear beams of antiquity; (imitating therein the wisdom of that great Emperor Thodosius; who thought there was noebetter means to agree the dissensions which disturbed the Church of his time, then to exact from either part an answer; whither thy believed that the Fathers which had flourished in the Church before the separation, had been orthodoxal; and that being confessed, to summon them to submit themselves to whatsoever they should be found to have believed:) so on the other side, there are many observations `to be made upon this Thesis, before we pass to the hypothesis; which since I Cannot represent to his majesty, I shall be glad to inform you of them for your particular satisfaction.  
The first is, that the name of Catholic, is not a name of belief simply, but of Communion also; else antiquity would not have refused that title to those Which were not separated from the belief, but from the Communion of the Church: nor would they have protested, that out of the Catholic Church, the Faith and Sacraments may be had, but not Salvation. Out of the Catholic Church, saith S. Augustin, in his treaty of Conference with Emeritus, a man may have orders, he may have Sacraments, he may sing Alleluya, he may answer A men, he may keep the Gospel, he may have and preach the faith in the name of the Father, of the Sonn, and of the holy Ghost, but he can no where find Salvation, but in the Catholic Church. And in the Book, De utilit, credendi, There is a Church as all men grant, if you cast your eyes over the extent of the whole world, more full in multitude, than all the rest; and as those, that know themselves to be of it, affirm, more sincere in the doctrine of truth. But of the truth, that is an other question: that will suffice for this search, that there is one Catholic Church, upon which sever all heresies impose several names; whereas they are all call called every one by his particular name, which they dare not disavow; from whence it may appear to the judgement of any arbiter (that is not prepossessed by favour,) to whom the name of Catholic, where of all are ambitions, aught to be attributed. And in the Book against the fundamental Epistle: Then to omit this wisdom which you deny to be in the Catholic Church, there are many other things, which do most justly retain me in her bosom: the consent of people and nations retain me therein; the authority begunn by miracles, nourished by hope, increased by charity, confirmed by antiquity, retains me therein: the succession of Prelates even from the very seat of Peter, to whom our Lord delivered his sheep to be fed after his Resurrection, even to the present Bishop's seat, retains me therein: and finally; the very name of Catholic retains me therein, which not without cause this Church alone, amongst so many heresies, hath in such sort obtained, as though all heretics would be called Catholics; nevertheless, when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church doth assemble, there is not one 〈◊〉 that dares show his 〈◊〉, or his house. And in his treatise of Faith, and of the Creed: We believe the holy Church and that Catholic; for heretics and schismatics, call their Congregations Churches: but heretics believing of God false things, violate faith; and schismatics separate themselves from brotherly charity by unjust divisions, although they believe the same things that we believe: and therefore neither can the heretic belong to the Catholic Church, because she loves God; nor the schismatic, because she loves her neightour. And in the Book, Of the unity of the Church: All those that believe, as hath been said that over Lord JESUS is come in the flesh, and is risen again in the same flesh wherein he was borne, and hath suffered, and that he is the son of god, god with god, and one with the Father, and the only immoveable word of the Father, by which all things have been made; but yet descent so from his body, which is the Church, that their communion is not with the whole; or is spread in deed, but yet is in some part found to be separate; it is manifest, they are not in the Catholic Church. And Prosper, his scholar: He, saith he, that Communicates with this universal Church, is a Christian and a Catholic; but he that communicates not therewith, is an heretic and Antichrist.  
And for this cause we see, that the Fathers denied the title of Catholic to the Donatists, because of the separation of Communion, and yet granted it to those, from whom the Donatists had taken their doctrine, because of the unity of Communion Cyprians people, saith S. Pacian, hath never been called otherwise then Catholic. And Saint Vincentius Lerinensis: O admirable change! the authors of oneself same opinion, are adjudged Catholics; and the 
Contra literas Petil. l 2. c 95  Sectaries heretics! And S. Augustin; Dissension and division, saith he, makes you heretics, and peace and unitìe makes Catholics. And that in the fourth Council of Carthage, this article was inserted into the trial of the promotion of Bishops; whither they believe, that out of the Catholic Church none can be saved. And that in the Epistle of the Council of Cyrtha, it was repeated by S. Augustin, who was Secretary thereto, in theses words: Whosoever is separated from this Catholic Church, how praiseworthy soever he conceive his life 
Epist. 1 52  to be, by this only crime, that he is separated from the unity of Christ, he shall not have life, but the wrath of God shall remain upon him. And after by Fulgentius in these words: Believe firmly and doubt it not at all, that no heretic or Schismatic baptised in the name of the Father, of the son, and of the only Ghost, if he be not reconciled to the Catholic Church, what alms soever he may give, yea though he should shed his blood for the name of Christ; can in any sort be saved. That I say was 
De side ad Petr. c. 39  against, or principally against the Donatists. And nevertheless, the Donatists agreed in all the doctrine of the Creed, and of the Scripture with the Catholics: Your are with us, saith S. Augustine, in Baptism, in the Creed, and 
Epist. 48.  in all the other Sacraments of our Lord; but in the spirit of unity, and in the bond of peace, and finally in the Catholic Church, you are not with us And yet they differed only in one point of unwritten tradition, which, as S. Augustin himself (who principally triumphs over this heresy) confessed, could not be demonstrated by Scripture. This, saith he, in the Book of the unity of the 
Cap. 29.  Church, neither thou, nor I, do evidently read. And in the first Book against 
Cap. 33.  Cresconius; though for this there be no example in the scriptures, yet even in this we follow, the truth of the Scriptures, when we do that which hath pleased the universal Church, which the authority of the same scriptures doth recommend. And in the second Book of Baptism against the Donatists: And ourselves, saith he, durst 
Cap 4.  affirm no such thing, but that we are upheld by the unanimous authority of the Church. And in the fifth. The Apostles have in this, prescribed us nothing; but this custom which was opposite to Cyprian, aught to be believed to have taken its original 
Cap. 23.  from their tradition; as many other things, which the universal Church observes, and for this cause are with good right believed to have been commanded by the Apostles, although they have not been written. From whence it appears, that to obtain the name of Catholic, it sufficeth not to hold, or rather to suppose to hold the same belief that the Fathers held, unless they communicate with the same Catholic Church, wherewith the Fathers did communicate, and which by succession of persons, and, as we pretend, of doctrine, is derived down to us: and if she have lost any thing of her extent in our hemisphere, she recovers as much and more daily in the other hemisphere, that these prophecies may be fulfilled: 
a Gen. 12. 26.  In thy seed, shall all the nations of the earth be blessed. 
b Gal 3.  In the last days, the mountain of the house of our Lord, shall be upon the top of mountains, and shall be exalted above all the high 
l sa. 2.  hills, and all nations shall come up to her. 
c Matt 14.  This Gospel of the Kingdom must be preached over all the world, and then the end shall come; and such like, in right 
De unit.  whereof the Church, as saith S. Augustin, hath obtained the title and the 
Eccles. ca 2. & 3. & alibi.  mark of Catholic.  
The SECOND observation is upon the restriction in Cases necessary to salvation: For besides points necessary to salvation, there are two other degrees of things, the one sort profitable to salvation, as it is (according to the opinion of your own ministers) to sell all our goods and give it to the poor: to fast in affliction to appease the wrath of God: to pray our brethren in the faith to pray to God for us; and the other sort lawful, and not repugnant to salvation, as to fly from persecution; to live by the Altar, since we serve at the Altar, to put away our wives for adultery, and other the like for I allege these for examples, and not for instances. Now it is needful to be comformable to the integrity of the belief of the Fathers, to believe all things that they have believed, according to that degree wherein they have believed them: to wit, to believe for things necessary to salvation those things that they have esteemed to be necessary for salvation: and for things profitable to salvation: those things that they have esteemed to be profitable to salvation: and for things lawful and not repugnant to salvation, those things that they have holden to be lawful and not repugnant to salvation: and not under colour that the two last kinds, are not things necessary to salvation, but only profitable or lawful, to condemn them, and to separate ourselves for their occasion from the Church, which then had them in practice, and still practiseth them to this day.  
The third observation is upon the ambiguity of the word necessary to salvation, which because of the diverse kinds of necessity which have place in matters of religion, is capable of diverse senses: for there is an absolute necessity, and a conditional necessity; a necessity of means, and a necessity of precept; a necessity of special belief, and a necessity of general belief; a necessity of act, and a necessity of approbatio, I call an absolute necessity (not simply, but by virtue of God's institution,) that which receives no excuse of impossibility, nor any exception of place, time or persons: as in regard of those that are of age, capable of knowledge, the belief in Christ mediator between God and man: for neither the circumstance of being in a place where we cannot be instructed in that article; nor the prevention of time, in dying before we are informed thereof; nor the condition of being an ignorant person, unlearned, dull not apt to comprehend; a sheep and not a shepherd, can warrant those from damnation, that believe it not actually, for as much as who believes not in the only Sonn of Gods, is already judged: And in regard of little Children, baptism only according to our doctrine, may supply the defect of Faith in Christ in their behalf, agreeing with that sentence of S. Augustin: Do not believe, do not say, do not teach if thou wilt be a Catholic, that little children which are 〈◊〉 by death, from being baptised, can come to the remission of original sin. And of this kind of necessity the examples are in small number. I call that conditional necessity which obligeth not but in case of possibility, and receives exception of place, time and persons: and that again hath diverse branches: For first in regard of Faith there are many points that are necessary to be believed, if a man be in place where he may be instructed in them, or who hath time to be informed of them, which are not necessary for a man that lives in a wilderness, or so pressed with the instant of death, as he hath no leisure to receive instruction: as that Christ was borne of a virgin that he was Crucified under Pontius Pilate, that he rose again the third day. And many things are necessary to be believed and holden for points of Faith, either by the body of the Church in general, or by the order of the ministers and pastors, which are the eyes of the Church: which are not necessary for every particular person to know, and hold to be points of Faith; as that the persons of the Trinity, are the same in essence, and distinct in subsistence; that the Father hath begotten the son necessarily and not freely; that they are the divine people which produce, and are produced, and not the essence which doth neither produce, nor is produced: that the works of the trinity without are undivided: that the only person of the son hath been incarnate, and not any of the others: that in Christ there are two substances and one subsistence: that the divinity was not to him in the steed of a soul, but that besides his Body and his divinity, he had a Soul sensible and reasonable: that what he once took in hypostatical union he hath not abandoned: that the devil was created good and made hinself evil by the freedom of his will: and other such like. And in regard of action, there are many things necessary in case of possibility, and according to the opportunity of places, times and persons, which are not absolutely necessary, when the commodity to accomplish them is wanting, as the assistance at Church Service, the actual participation of the Eucharist. And many are necessary to some, as mission and imposition of hands to the Pastors of the Church; and marriage to those that will have issue which are not necessary to others. And in brief, some things are necessary to obtain Salvation others some to obtain it more easily for oneself, and others to procure and mediate it for other men: some for the constitution of the Church, and others for the edification and more ample propagation of the Church some for the simple being of Christian Religion; others for the better being, that is to say, for the comeliness, dignity, and splendour of Christian Religion. I call necessity of means that, that is in behalf of the things themselves as that of Sacraments to which god hath granted power to Confer some grace and real operation to salvation, that of the Commandments of the moral law, whose necessity is imposed upon us by the law of nature, that of repenting sins, which is a means necessary to obtain their remission. I call necessity of precept, that which is only obligatory in regard of the Commandment, as the celebration of the first day of the week in memory of that wherein our lord did rise again, which we for that cause, call our Lord's day, and other such like observations, the omission whereof, could be no hindrance to Salvation, but in respect of disobedience, and breach of the Commandment. I call necessity of special belief, that of thoses points, which all Faithful, if they be not prevented by death, are obliged to believe with faith express, distinct and determinate, which the Schoolmen call explicit faith; as the twelve articles, of the Creed. I call necessity of general belief, that of those things which every particular man is not obliged to believe with a distinct ad explicit faith: as the doctrine of original sin the article or the two wills in Christ, the article that the holy Ghost proceeds from the Father and from the Son; the belief that Baptism given forth of the Church (provided it be in the form of the Church) is true Baptism, and that heretics which have received Baptism, must not be rebaptised when they return to the Church: and other such like, when the simple sort of faithful people, are not obliged to believe, with a distinct and explicit faith, but it sufficeth that they believe them generally in the Faith of the Church; that is to say, that they adhere to the Church that believes them, by whose faith they live whiles they remain in her Communion, as Children live by their mother's nourishment whilst they are in her bowels. I call necessity of act, that of those things which every particular person is obliged to execute actually, as to Confess the name of Christ, to forgive offences done to them, to restore the Goods of an other man. I call necessity of approbation, that of those things which every particular man is not bound to execute actually but only not to contradict them, and not to condemn those that do them nor the church that approves them, add not to separate themselues from her upon this occasion, upon pain of separating themselves from their own salvation as the choice to live in virginity and single life, and other the like. Of all which kinds of necessity, the Fathers have hold 〈◊〉 many things (every one according to it is degree) diversly necessary to salvation as we shall make manifest in those occasions that will offer themselves wherein to examine them: it is not to be conformable to the ancient belief and practice of the catholic church, to hold the points of doctrine or action that the Fathers have holden, to be necessary to salvation, according to some of these kinds of necessity, and to reject the others; but to conform ourselves to the ancient belief and catholic practice, we must hold for necessary to salvation, all those things that the Fathers have holden to be necessary to salvation, in that degree, and according to those kinds of necessity, as they have holden them.  
The fourth observation is upon the word FATHERS, which some, when it comes to the effect of their promise, to submit themselves to the judgement of antiquity, would restrain to the first or second age after the Apostles, not that they hope to find in that space of time, any thing in their behalf: but because the Church being then oppressed with persecutions, there remains to us so few writings of that date, and those against persons, and about points, for the most part so differing from the disputations of this present age, as the face of the ancient doctrine and practice of the Church, cannot evidently appear to be therein represented. Now equity would, that being to compare the state of the Societies of this age, which pretend to the title of the Catholic Church, with the state of the ancient Church; we should look to take such a time, wherein not only our competitors might agree with us, that the Church of the Fathers was still the true Church, the true Spouse of Christ, she in whom resided the lawful authority to judge questions in Religion: but also those monuments do sufficiently remain to us, to manifest throughly all her doctrines and all her observations. Which can never be better chosen for both parts, then in the time wherein the four first Counsels were holden; that is to say, from the Emperor Constantine, who was the first Emperor that was publicly a Christian, to the Emperor Marcian. And it seems to me, that his Majesty hath yielded to this, and also more liberally in some of his writings, having extended this space, to the first five ages. For besides that the delivery from the yoke and subjection of the Pagans, than gave the Church means to speak louder, and to have more communication with all her parts, situated in so many different regions of the earth, and to flourish in a greater multitude of learned and excellent writers, which is the cause that there remain to us without comparison more monuments of those ages, wherein to view the entire form of the ancient Christian Religion, then of the former ages: Besides this, I say, our adversaries cannot deny, but that church which nursed up the first Christian Emperor's, which rooted out the Temples and services of the false Gods, which exercised the Sove reign Tribunal of Spiritual authority upon earth, by the condemnation which she denounced upon the four most famous heresies in the four first general Counsels, which were the four first Parliaments and Estates general of Christ's Kingdom; must be she of whom it hath 
Isa. 60. 62. 54.  been foretold, that Kings should be her nursing Fathers: that the nations should walk in her light, and Kings in the brightness of her rising: that, every engine set up against her, should be destroyed: that she should judge every tongue that should resist her in judgement: that God had set watchmen upon her walls, which never should be silent by day or night: 
a Matth. 16. 18.  that the gates of hell should not prevail against her: that whosoever should not obey her should be holden for a heathen and a publican: 
1. 〈◊〉. 3.  and in brief, that she was the Pillar and foundation of truth. Shall we loubt, Saith S. Augustin, who lived in the betweene-times of these first 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. c 〈◊〉  four Counsels, to set our-selnes in the lap of that Church, which by succession of Bishops from the seat of the Apostles even to the confession of all mankind, (the heretics in vain barking about her, and being condemned partly by the judgement of the people themselves, part lie by the gravity of Counsels, and partly by the majesty of Miracles) hath obtained full authority: to whom not to give the pre-eminence, must be an act of extreme impiety or of a heady arrogancy? And again, 
b De Symb. & Catec. l. 1, c. 5.  The Catholic Church fight against all heresies, may be opposed, but she cannot be overthrown: all heresies are come forth from her, as unprofitable branches cut From their vine, but she remains in her root, in her vine in her charity. Let that then be holden for truly ancient, and marked with the character of the primitive Church, which shall be found to have been believed and practised universally by the Fathers, which lived in the time of the first four Counsels; and principally when it shall appear to us, that the things testified to us by the authors of those ages, were not holden by them for doctrines, or observations sprung up in their time but for doctrines or observations, which had been perpetually practised in the Church from the age of the Apostles: although perchance, there can not be found for every of them in particular, so express testimonies in the former ages, as in those of the first four Counsels, because of the few writings which the persecution of those times, have suffered to come to our hands. For it sufficeth to assure us of the perpetual use of such things that the Fathers of the first four Counsels, who had more knowledge of the ages before them, than we can have, do testify to us, to have believed and practised them, not as things instituted in their age, but as things that have always had place in the Church, and had come to them by a succession of observation from the Apostles down to their time; and that there is not to be found in former authors any testimony against them, but chose in all places, where there is occasion to mention them, agreeable and favourable testimonies; that is to say in brief, that, is to be holden ancient by us, which those whom we account ancient, have themselves holden to be ancient.  
The fifth observation is upon the consent of the belief of the Fathers, which some contentious spirits would have to be, when one selfsame thing is actually found in the writings of all the Fathers, which is an unjust and impertinent pretence For to have a doctrine or observation to be truly holden by the Fathers for universal and Catholic, it is not necessary it should be in the writings of all the Fathers, who have not all written of the same matters, and of whose writings, all have not come to our hands: but there are two other lawful ways, to secure ourselves of them: The one is, when the most eminent Fathers of every country agree in the affirmation of the same doctrine or practice, and that none of the others that have been without note of dissension from the Church, have opposed it: As when S. Augustin hath cited against the Pelagians, the 
Contr. jul. l. 5. & 2.  testimony of eleven eminent Fathers, all consenting in one and the same doctrine; he supposeth he hath sufficiently produced against them, the Common belief of the Catholic Church: and when the Council of Ephesus had produced ten Fathers of former ages, they conceived they had sufficiently expressed the consent of the former Church against Nestorius 
Vincent.  his doctrine: Because none, saith Vincentius Lerinensis, doubtetb but 
Lirin. c. 42  that those ten did truly hold the same with all their other brethren. The other is, when the Fathers speak not as Doctors, but as witnesses of the Customs and practice of the Curch of their times; and do not say, I believe this should be so holden, or so understood, or so observed; but that the Church from one end of the earth to the other, believes it so, or observes it so: For than we no longer hold what they say, for a thing said by them, but as a thing said by the whole Church and principally when it is in points whereof they could not be ignorant, either because of the Condition of the things, as in matters of fact, or because of the sufficiency of the persons: and in this case we argue no more upon their words probably, as we do when they speak in the quality of particular Doctors, but we argue thereupon demonstrativelie. That then shall remain truly universal and Catholic, that the most eminent Fathers of the times of the four first Counsels, have taught in several regions of the earth; and against which, none (except some persons noted for dissension from the Church) hath resisted; or that the Fathers of those ages do testify to have been believed, and practised by the whole Church in their times: And that shall remain truly ancient and Apostolic, that the Fathers of those ages do testify to have been observed by the whole Church, not as a thing sprung up in their time, but as a thing derived down to them either from the immemorial succession of former ages, or from the express tradition of the Apostles. For these things having been holden universally by the Catholic Church in the time of the first four Counsels, they could have no other original, but from an universal authority; for as much as in the Catholic Church, which did then so strictly observe the rule mentioned by Saint Vincentius Lirinensis, of opposing universality to particularity; a doctrine or observation from a particular beginning could not be slipped in, and spread into an uniform and universal belief and Custom, through all parts of the Earth; and principally so as the Fathers that were next after these universal innovations, could not perceive it: but it must needs be, that all that was then universally observed in the Church, must have come from an universal beginning. Now there were in those ages, according to the belief of your ministers, but two beginnings of universal authority in the Church; to wit, either the Apostles, or the general Counsels; for they Will not yield that the Sea Apostolic had then any universal authority And therefore whatsoever was universally and uniformly observed in the Church by all the Provinces of the Earth in the time of the first four general Counsels, and had not begun in that time, but had been before practised; that is to say; before there had been any general Council in the Church; must necessarily have been from the tradition of the Apostles, following these rules of S. Augustin: Those things, said he which we observe, 
Epist. 118.  not by writing, but by tradition, which are kept over all the extent of the earth, must be understood to have been retained from the appointment and institution, either of the Apostles themselves, or from the general Counsels, whose authority is most wholesome in the Church. And elsewhere; what custom soever, men looking upward can 
De Bapt. cont Don. l. 4. c. 6.  not discern to have been instituted by those of later times, is rightly believed to have been instituted by the Apostles: and there are many such, which would be too long to repeat. And again; If any one herein seek for divine authority, that which the universal 
〈◊〉 c. 24.  Church observes, and which hath not been instituted by the Counsels, but hath always been held, is justly believed not to have been given by tradition, but by Apostolical authority, etc. Which Rules of S. Augustin, if they have place in those things which the Fathers of the time of the first four Counsels testify to have been observed in the Church before the four first Counsels, how much more ought they to have it in those things, that the same Fathers affirm not in terms equivalent, but expressly to have been instituted and ordained by the Apostles?  
These five observations then made upon the theses, I will say, to pass unto the hypothesis, that your ministers to whose society his Majesty outwardly adheres, are so far from holding all the same things that the Fathers have believed and practised as necessary to Salvation, that in the only Synaxis or Church Lirurgie, which is the Seal of Ecclesiastical Communion, the four principal things for which they have separated themselves from us, which are the real presence of the Body of Christ in the Sacrament, the Oblation of the Sacrifice of the Eucharist, prayer and oblation for the dead, and the prayers of the Saints, the Fathers have all universally and uniformly believed, holden and practised as things necessary (but in different kinds of necessity) unto salvation. By which means, if your ministers had been in the time of the Fathers, as 〈◊〉 have for these things renounced our Service and our Communion; so must they for the same causes have renounced the Service and Communion of the Fathers, and Consequently, the title and Society of the Catholic Church. I have said the real presence of the Body of Christ in the Sacrament, not but that I could have gone farther, and said, the Substantial transition of the Sacrament into the Body of Christ which we call transubstantiation but I have been content to say, the real presence, because it is not precisely and particularly upon the transubstantiation, but upon the real presence of the Body of Christ in the Sacrament, that we ground the importance and necessity of this Sacrament to Salvation; to wit, the Communion and Substantial union to the Body of Christ; which S. Cyrill 
In joan. lib. 11. cap. 27.  calls, the knot of our union with god. Nor is it particularly and precisely upon transubstantiation, but upon the real presence that the two inconveniences depend, for which your ministers, in this article, separate themselves from our Liturgies; which are, one, the adoration of the Body of Christ in the Sacrament, which they will have to be only sought and adored in heaven: and the other, the pretended distraction of the unity of the Body of Christ, by existence in many places in the Sacrament. Neither have I spocken of the prerogative of the Roman Church, which all the Fathers have holden for the centre and root of Episcopal unity, and of Ecclesiastical Communion; because I will believe you are sufficiently read in antiquity, to know that the first Fathers, Counsels, and Christian, Emperors, have perpetually granted thereunto, the primacy and supereminent oversight, over all religions and ecclesiastical things; which is all that the church exacts as a point of Faith, from their confession that enter into her communion, to the end to discern her society from that of the greeks and other complices of their Sect, which have divided themselves for some ages, from the visible and ministerial head of the Church.  
These four points then, which are the principal springs of our dissension and which being agreed upon, it would be easy for us to agree upon the rest; I say, that the Fathers of the time of the four first Counsels have all holden and practised as necessary to Salvation, though with diverse kinds of necessity. The real Presence, of the Body of Christ; and the oblation of the sacrifice, they have holden as necessary with necessity of means, for the Body of the Church absolutely, and for every particular person conditionnallie. Prayer and oblation for the dead they have holden as necessary, by necessity of means for those for whom it is done that so their deliverace from temporal pains, which remain after this life for sin committed, after baptism, and for which thy have not done such penances as it hath pleased God wholly to accept, may be hastened by the prayers and sacrifices of the Church: and necessary with necessity of precept, and to exercise christian charity and piety both to the Church that offers them, and to the ministers and Pastors by whom she offers them. The prayer of the Saints, they have holden as necessary to the body of the Church, and to the ministers by whom they are made, with necessity of precept, to exercise the commerce between the Church Militant, and the Church Triumphant: and to particular persons out of the offices of the Church, and in their private devotions not necessary with necessity of act, but only profitable, that they may the more easily obtain pardon for their sins, by the concourse of their prayers who are already in the per fect and assured possession of the grace of God: but necessary to them and all others with nessitie of approbation; that is to say, they are obliged not to contradict them, and not to condemn the custom and doctrine of the Church in that article: and not to separate themselves from her upon this occasion, under pain of falling into Anathema, and to be holden for heretics. All which things I will not now stand to prove, lest I make a Book of a letter; but I do oblige myself to justify them, when soever you shall desire it; and to make it appear both by the unanimous consent of the Fathers, that have flourished in the time of the first four council's, and by the forms which remain to us in their writings of the ancient Church Service, that all the Catholic Church of their times hath uninersallie and uniformly believed holden and practised them, throughout all the regions and provinces of the earth. I oblige myself I say, to make it appear to you, that she hath holden these four things in the same sense, and in the same form and for the same end, as our Liturgies are, and not as observations that then sprung up, but as things that the same Fathers testified to have been believed and practised from all antiquity, and to be derived to them by an uninterrupted continuance from the tradition or approbation of the Apostles. So as they cannot renounce the Communion of our Church under pretence of any of these four points, without renouncing the Communion of the ancient catholic Church and consequently the inheritance of salvation: and that by authors and testimonies all able to abide the touch; as you know I am curious to make use of no other; and with clear and ingenuous answers to all objections, collected out of the Fathers of the same ages, or of ages before them. A thing that will be the more easy for me, because the proofs that we will avouch out of the Fathers, are proofs which contain in express terms the affirmative of what we say: whereas our adversaries cannot find one only passage which contains in express term the negative, but only in terms from whence they pretend to infer it by consequence; and which at a just tribunal, would not merit so much as to be heard. For who knows not, that it is too great an injustice, to allege consequences from passages, and even those evil interpreted and misunderstood, and in whose illation, there is always some paralogism hid against the express words, and the lively and actual practice of the same fathers, from whom they are collected, and that may be good to take the Fathers for Adversaries, and to accuse them for want of Sense or memory; but not to take them for judges, and to submit themselves to the observation of what they have believed and practised? To this I will also add whensoever you shall desire it, the present Conformity of all the other patriarchal Churches in these four cases with the Roman and of all those which have remained even to this day, under their jurisdiction; to wit, those that are under the patriarchal jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople; as the Grecians, Russians, Muscovites, and Asians of Asia-minor, separate from us near eight hundred years: Of those that are unde the Greek Patriarch of Antioch; as the Syrians, Mesopotamians, and others yet more Eastern nations: (for those that obey the Syrian Patriarch, as the Maronites, persever in the Communion of the Roman Church; of those that rely upon the Egyptian Patriarch of Alexandria, as the Egyptians whom they call Cophtites, and the Ethiopians which have been divided both from us and from the greeks more than eleven hundred years, even from the time of one of the four first Counsels, to wit, of the Council of Chalcedon. For all these hold these four points; yea, with more jealousy, if it be possible, than the latin Churches, and particularly, the article of the Sacrament, where of they do not only believe transubstantiation, which the greeks at this day call in the very self same sense and phrase, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, but also exercise the adoration with external gesture, more full of humility than ours. A manifest proof that these four points were uniformly holden and observed by the ancient Cahtholicke Church, since all the parts, whereinto the ancient Catholic Church is dismembered, do retain them uniformly to this day; notwithstanding so many distances, separations, and divisions, through all the regions of the Earth.  
These are in general, the causes that have moved me to use that exception in my letter, that you object to me in yours: whereof if the Excellent King of great Britain had as well leisure to hear the particularities, as he hath capacity to comprehend them, I assure myself he would not think it strange, that I should desire in him the title of Catholic; but he would desire it himself, and put himself in state to obtain it, and to cause it to be obtained by those, that are deprived of it: that is to say, he would add yet to is other Crowns, that of making himself a mediator of the peace of the Church; which would be to him a more triumphant glory, then that of all the Alexanders, and of all the Caesars, and which would gain to his Isle, no less an honour in having bred him, them to have bred great Constantine, the first deliverer and pacifier of the christian Church. I pray god that he will one day Crown all the other graces wherewith he hath endowed him, with that; and hear to this effect the prayers of his late Queen Mother, whose tears like those of S. Augustins' Mother, do not only intercede for him in heaven, but her blood also;  
And likewise keep you Sr. in his safe and holy protection. From Paris, 15. julij. 1611.  
AN ADMONITION TO THE READER.  
This letter to Mons. Casaubon, occasioned the whole discourse ensuing. For the letter being showed to his most excellent majesty our Sowerain Lord king james of glorious memory: it pleased him not only to read it, but to take pains to answer it, as he thought most convenient. To which answer of his majesty the Cardinal replieth with that modesty and submission, which is due to the person and worth of so high and mighty a Monarch. and with that learning, and solidyty, that might be expected from so great a master of truth as that most eminent Cardinal was, in behalf of so glorious a cause, as is the doctrine of the catholic Church.   

THE L. CARDIN. PERRONS REPLY TO HIS MAJESTY'S ANSWER TO THE LETTER WRITTEN TO MONS CASAUBON.  
THE FIRST OBSERVATION Reduced into an abridgement by the King.  
THE name of Catholic doth not simply design Faith, but also Communion with the Catholic Church; for this Cause the Fathers would not suffer that those should be Called Catholics, which had separated themselves from the communion of the Church, though they retained the Faith thereof: For there is one only Catholic Church, out of the which, Faith and Sacraments may be had, but not Salvation. To this end there are many places alleged out of S. AUGTSTIN.  

OF THE USE OF THE WORD CATHOLIQVE  
THE ANSWER OF THE KING. CHAPITRE I.  

TO believe the Catholicko Church, and to believe the Communion of Saintes, are put distinctly, as diverse things in the Creed; and it seems the first was ptincipallie inserted to discern the jewish Synagogue from the Christian Church, which ought not to be, (as that was) enclosed within the limits of one only nation, but to be spread in length and breadth, through all the regions of the world. And therefore the reason is not manifest, enough why in the beginning of this observation it is said, that the title of Catholic designeth Communion. These two things are very near one an other, but different notwithstanding, as we have showed.   

THE REPLY.  
WHEN the Philosopher FAVORINUS disputed against the Emperor ADRIAN, and that his hearers were amazed, and reproached it to him that he suffered the Emperor to confute him, and yielded to him; he answered them, should not I yield to a man, that commands twenty legions? So if there were no question in this work, but of humane philosophy & secular learning, it should be easy for me to stop myself at FAVORINUS bounds, and to abstain to contest with his majesty, or to resist him. But since here we treat of his interest, who hath, not legions of men, but of Angels, and which hath for his title, THE KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS; and from whom this excellent King himself makes profession to hold in Fee his life and Crowns; that is to say, the cause of JESUS CHRIST, and of his Kingdom, which is the Church: I will promise myself from his Majesty's bounty, that he will not mislike, where it shall be needful, that I resist and contradict him, with all the respective liberty, that the laws of disputation yield me.  
Then for the argument of the Creed, I will say, after I have kissed my weapons, three things for my defence; FIRST that it is uncertain, whither the cause of the Communion of Saintes, be an article apart, or an explication of the preceding cause, and a declaration that the Catholic Church consists not in the simple number of the faithful, every one considered a part; but in the joinct Communion of all the body of the faithful, in such sort as both clauses make but one article as it seemeth saint JEROM, 
a Hier. adu. Luciser.  RUFFINUS, 
b Ruffin in Symbol.  and 
c August. de fide & symbol & de Symb. ad Catec.  Saint AUGUSTINE, who have omitted the latter, have esteemed it. The SECOND, that it is uncertain, whether it signify the Communion, that the faithful living have one with an other, or the Commerce that the Saints of the triumphant Church do exercise with the Saints of the militant Church, by the prayers, that the Saints of the triumphant, offer for the Saints of the militant; and the commemoration that the saints of the militant make of the saints of the triumphant, which is that, that we in our Liturgy call, to communicate with the memory of the Saints. And the THIRD, that whatsoever it signify, it is most certain, that the word CATHOLIC was not added to that of the Church, to distinguish the Christian Church from the jewish Synagogue, which had never borne the name of Church in quality of a title of a Religion when the creed was Composed, and by consequence did not oblige the Christian Church to take the Epithet of Catholic, to be discerned from that, from which in all cases she had been suffieientlie distinguished by the title of Christian; but it was added to discern the true Church from heretical, and schismatical Societies, which usurp equivocally, and by false marks, the name of Church, for that our Lord was the first that affected and consecrated the word ECCLESIA (which we usually translate in English Church) to signify a society of Religion; whereas before, neither it, nor the Hebrew word that answers to it, had any other use, but that which profane authors give it, which is to signify. Assemblies, convocations, General Estates; as when DEMOSTHENES said to ESCHINES, thou wert dumb to the 
d Demost  assemblies where the greek word is Ecclesijs, the convocations or general meetings. And as when Aristotle 
e Arist. polit 2.  called the convocations of Crete ecclesias. And as when the Scholiast of HOMER said, jupiter gathered together Ecclesias the Assemblies of the Gods: It appears first by the testimony of MOSES, who forbids bastards to enter into the Church of Israel; And 
Deuteron. 23.  of DAVID who singes, I hate the Church of the malignant; And of S. STEPHEN, 
Psal. 25.  who said MOSES was in the Church in the solitary place; that is to say, 
Act. 17.  with the multitude of the people in the desert. It appears secondly, by the testimony of S. JEROM, and of S. CYRILLUS, who interpreting this verse of ESAY, Thou shalt be called by a new name, that the mouth of our Lord shall pronounce, Do affirm, that this new name, must be the name of 
Hieron. in Esai c. 62.  Church It shall no more (saith S. JEROM) be called jerusalem and Zion, but it shall receive a new name, that the Lord shall impose upon it, saying to the Apostle PETER, thou art PETER, and upon this PETRA or rock I will build my Church. And S. CYRILL; It shall be no more called Synagogue, but the Church of the living 
Cyril. ibid.  God. And finally, it appears by the very testimony of our adversaries, that not only in all the texts of the old Testament, where the Greek translation of the Seventie, use the word Ecclesia; but also in all those of the new, where that word hath relation to any other multitude, beside the Christian Church, they express it by Congregation or Assemblies. And if since the coming of JESUS CHRIST, and the edition of the creed the Fathers have sometimes called the Synagogue, by the name of Ecclesia or Church, it hath been by anticipation, to show the successive unity of the one and other society; but not that the jewish Church while it lasted, hath ever undertaken to attribute to herself, the title of a Church, in the quality of a title of Religion. Neither consequently, when the creed was composed, was there need of an Epithet, to distinguish the Christian Church from her: for as the star that the authors call Lucifer, although it be the same with that, that is called Vesper, yet when it goes before the Son, it bears one name; and when it follows him, it hath an other: so although the jewish congregation hath been in some sort one same society with the Christian Congregation, nevertheless, when this society hath gone Before her SUN, which is CHRIST, she hath borne one name, to wit, the Synagogue and when she follows him, she 
Matth. 18.  bears an other, to wit; the Church. And therefore when our Lord said to S. Peter Dic ecclesiae, tell it to the Church, and if he hear not he Church, let him 
Act. 12.  be to thee, as an heathen or a publican; And when S. LUKE, relates, that HEROD set himself to Persecute quosdam de ecclesia some of those of the Church; 
1. Cor. 4  
1. Cor. 10.  and when saint Paul writes; I teach it so in all the Churches; And again, be 
jacob. 5.  without scandal to the jews, and to the Gentiles, and to the Church of God: And 
Iren. cont. Valen. lib. 4. c. 34.  when S. james proclaims; If any one be sick, let him call the priests of the Church: And when S. Ireneus saith, there have been sacrifices among the people, there are sacrifices in the Church; they thought they had sufficiently distinguished, 
Euseb. histor. eod. l. 4. cap. 13.  without any other addition, the Christian Church from the jewish Synagogue. And chose, when the Church of SMYRNA in an age neighbouringe upon that of the Apostles entitles her Epistle, to the Church of PHILOMILION, and to all the ᵃ Dioceses of the Catholic Church, that are throughout the world: And when CLEMENT ALEXANDRINUS writes, There needs not many words to show that the mocke-Councells of heretics, are 
b Tertull. contra Martion. lib. 4. c. 4.  after the Catholic Church. And 
Clem.  when TERTULLIAN sayeth; Martion gave his money to the Catholic 
Alex: Stron. lib. 27.  Church, which rejected both it and him, when he strayed from our truth 
Tertull. cont. Marc. lib. 4. cap. 4.  to heresy; And when saint CYPRIAN advertised the Bishops of Africa that passed in to Italy, to acknowledge and hold fast the root and matrice of the Catholic Church. And when Saint EPIPHANIUS reporteth that under the persecution of DIOCLESIAN those that held the ancient Churches, called themselves, 
a Epiph. haer. 65.  the Catholic Church, and the Militians the Church of the martyrs; And when the Emperor CONSTANTINE ordained, that all the 
b Euseb. de vita Constant. l. 3.  Oratories of the Heretics should be taken from them, and presently after delivered to the Catholic Church: they pretended not by the word Catholic, to distinguish the Christian Church from the jewish, but to distinguish the great and the original body of the Church, from the particular and later sects.  
Yet we acknowledge, that the word, Catholic, in distinguishing by heruniversalitie the true Church from the heretical and schismatical sects, distinguisheth her alsoe by accident from the jewish Synagogue: as a special difference in distinguishing her species from other species of the same genders, doth also distinguish it from that of other genders, though that be not her proper office; for the word reasonable, discerning men from birds, fishes, serpents, and other beasts, leaves him not undiscerned accessarily from plants, metals, and stones. But we maintain, the express and direct end for which the Surname of Catholic hath been added to the Church, (I say to the Church and not to the figures of the Church) hath been to distinguish it from heretical and Schismatical sects. If I should this day by chance enter into a populous town 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Sympr. 〈◊〉 1 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  saith S. PACIANUS, an author celebrated by saint jerom, and find there Marcionistes and Apolinarians (it must be read, Apellecians) Cataphrigians, Novatians, and other such like, which call themselves Christians; by what surname should I know the Congregation of my people, if it were not entitled Catholic: and again, Christian is my name, Catholic is my Surname; that names me, this marks me out; by that I am manifested (prodor & non probor) by this I am distinguished. And saint CYRILL of jerusalem, an author the same age, expounding the creed; For this cause (saith he) thy faith hath given thee this article to hold undoubtedly, and in the holy Catholic Church, to the end thou 〈◊〉 fly the polluted 〈◊〉 of heretics. And a little after: And when 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Cateches 15. 〈◊〉.  thou com'st into a town, inquire, not simply where the temple of our Lord is, for the other heresies of impious persons, do likewise call their dens, the temples of the Lord, neither ask simply where the Church is, but where is the Catholic Church? for that 
Aug. de 〈◊〉 & Symb c. 10.  name is the proper name of this holy Church. And saint AUGUSTINE in his book of the Faith and the creed We believe (saith he) the holy Church, and that Catholic; for the heretics and schismatics name also their Congregations, Churches; but heretics believing in God in a false manner, violate the faith; and schismatics by their unjust Divisions, separate themselves from brotherly Charity, although they believe the same things that we believe; therefore the heretic appartaineth not to the Catholic Church, because she loves God; nor the Schismatic, because she loves her neighbour. So that it amazeth me, that I have had so little industry to explain myself, as to have given his Majesty occasion to answer, that the reason for which I had said in the beginning of my first observation, that the word Catholic was not a title of simple belief but of communion, was not enough manifest. For having alleged these four places of saint AUGUSTINE; schismatics appertain not to the Catholic Church, although they believe 
De 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Symb c. 10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. De 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  the same things with us. Those that disagree so from the body of Christ which is the Church, as their communion is not with all; or that it spread itself, but is found separate in some part; it is manifest they are not in the Catholic Church. There is a Church, if you cast your eyes over the extent of the whole world more abundant in multitude; and also, as those that know themselves to be of it affirm, more sincere in truth, than all the others; but of the truth is an other disputation. Division and dissension 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 2. c. 〈◊〉.  makes you heretics; and peace and unity makes us Catholics. And having accompanied them with these words of saint VINCENTIUS 
Vm. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 9  〈◊〉; O admirable conversion, (or change) the authors of oneself opinion, are called Catholics, and the followers of it beretickes! And with those of saint 
Prosp. de 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉. Dei 〈◊〉. 4. 〈◊〉.  PROSPER; 〈◊〉 that communicates with the universal church, is a christian and a 〈◊〉 catholic; and he that communicates not therewith, is an heretic and Antichrist. It seemed to me that I had sufficiently showed that the title of Catholic is not a simple title of belief, but of communion also. It is true, I expected not, that a question that had been anciently moved and adjudged even with the intervention of the authority of Emperors, should again have been contested against, and put into dispute. For in the controversy of Catholics and Donatists upon the word Catholic (before 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the decision whereof, as saint Austin saith, the Church was never perfectly treated of, no more then before the questions of the Arrians, the Trinity had never been perfectly treated of) the thesis or tenet of the Catholics, was that the word, Catholic, was a word of Communion, and not a word of Simple belief. The Christian Africans are called saith Saint AUGUSTIN, and not with out good right, Catholics, protesting 
Ang. Collatine. Carth. l 3  by their proper Communion the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: And again we show by the testimony of our Communion, that we have the Catholic Church: & the thesis of the Donatists 
August. ibid.  chose was, that the word Catholic, was not a word of Communion but of belief and observation of precepts. The Donatists (saith Saint 
Aug. ib id.  AUSTIN) answered that the word Catholic was not derived from the universality of nations, but from the fullness of the Sacraments; that is to say, from the integrity of the doctrine. 
g Aug. Epist 48.  And in the Epistle to VINCENTIUS Rogat. Thou thinkest (said he) then to saìe some subtle thing when thou interpretest the name of Catholic, not from the Communion of the whole world, but from the observation of all the precepts and divine Sacraments. And again: you are those that hold the Catholic faith, not from the Communion of the whole world, but from the observation of all the precepts and divine Sacraments. And the judgement that was made 
g. Aug ibid.  upon this difference, was that the word, Catholic, was a title, not of simple belief, but of Communion also. After a contention of 40. days, (saith 
a Optat. Milevit. cont. Parm 〈◊〉 1.  OPTATUS Milevit. speaking of the first disputation of the Donatists, the final sentence of the Bishops Eunomius and Olympus, (which were the Bishops deputed to judge the possession of the word, Catholic, between the Catholics 
b. Aug. b revin. col l. 3.  of Africa and the Donatists) was that that was Catholic, that was spread throughout the world. And Saint AUSTIN speaking of the Conference of Carthage; The Commissary, said he, answered, that he could not by 〈◊〉, attribute the name Catholic to any other then to those, to whom the Emperor 
c. In joan. ttact. 6.  (from whom he had his Commission) had attributed it. And in an other place, citing the law of the Emperors, made upon this Conference: The Emperors, said he, have forbidden, that those that usurp the name of Christians out of the Communion of the Catholic Church, and will not in peace adore the author of 〈◊〉, should dare to possess any thing under the title of the Church. And again, 
d Aug. Psal. 57  The Emperors of our Communion have ordained laws against all heretics: now they call heretics, those that are not of their Communion, amongst which you are. 
e. Aug. de pastor. c. 13  And after, disputing with the same Donatists: Thou askest (said he) of a stranger, whether he be a pagan or a Christian; he answers thee, a Christian; thou askest him whether he be a catechumenus or one of the faithful, lest he should intrude himself unlawfully to the Sacraments; he answers thee, one of the faithful; thou askest him of what Communion he is, he answers thee, a Christian Catholic.    

CHAP. II. Of the Conditions of the Catholic Church.  

The pursuit of the king's answer.  
NOw the King believes simply, without colour or fraud; that the Church of God is one only by name and effect, Catholic and universal, spread over all the world, out of which he affirms himself, there can be no hope of Salvation: he condemns and detestes those, which either heretofore, or since, have departed from the faith of the Catholic Church, & are become heretics, as the Man ichees: or from her Communion, and are become schismatics, as the Donatists. Against which two kinds of men principally saint AUGUSTINE hath written the things alleged in this observation.   

THE REPLY.  
TELESIUS a Stripling of Greece, having won the prize and victory of the Combat in the Pythian games, when there was question of leading him in triumph, there arose such a dispute between the diverse nations there present, every one being earnest to have him for their own, as the one drawing him one way, the other an other way, instead of receiving the honour which was prepared for him, he was torn and dismembered even by those that strove who should honour him most. So happenes it to the Church: All those that bear the name of Christians avow that to her only appertains the victory over hell, and that whosoever will have part in the prize and glory of this Triumph, must serve under her ensign; But when they come to debate of the true body of this society, than every sect desirous to draw her to themselves, they rend and tear her in pieces; and in steed of embracing the Church which consists in unity, they embrace schism and division, which is the death and ruin of the Church. The cause, or rather the pretext of this evil, comes from two faults, that the adversaries of the Church commit in the distinction of the word Ecclesia, or Church, which makes the possession uncertain and disputable: The one is the fraudulent restriction of the term of the Church to the only invisible number of the predestinate, by which (when they feel themselves pressed to represent the succession of their Church) they save themselves like Homer's Aeneas, or Virgil's Cacus, in obscurity and darkness. The other is the equivocal and captious extension of the same word, Church, to all Sects, which profess the name of Christ, by which (when they see themselves excluded from the refuge of their invissble Church) they have recourse from darkness to confusion, and confess that there hath been always a visible Church, but sometimes pure in faith, and sometimes impure, that is to say now a Church, and now no Church. And therefore I attribute it to a singular care of the providence of God, that his Majesty saying he believes the catholic Church, hath added as to prevent all theses shifts, without colour or fraud. For to believe the catholic church without colour or fraud, is to believe her in the sense that the Fathers have believed and understood her the Fathers I say which have lest us these sentences pronunced sometimes, as in the hypothesis against the Manichees and Donatists; but as in the thesis against all kinds of heretics or schismatics in general that out of the Catholic Church there is no salvation; that whosoever is separate from the Catholic Church cannot have life, and other such like, which his Majesty protested to approve. Now first by the word Catholic Church, these Fathers have believed and intended such a Church, as these words of Esay 〈◊〉. In the last days, the Mountain of the Lord, shall be on the top of all the Mountains, 
Esai 2.  and all the hills shall flow to her. The people shall walk in thy light, and the 
〈◊〉. 60.  
〈◊〉. 61.  kings in the brightness of thy Orient. Their seed shall be known amongst the 
Matth. 5.  people, and their king in the midst of the nations. And these of our Lord; The 
Matth. 18.  City built upon the mountain cannot be hid. Tell it to the Church., and if he hear 
〈◊〉. de 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  not the Church, let him be to thee as a heathen or publican: that is to say, a Church visible, manifest, and eminent, and not a Church either perpetually invisible, or (as if she had Gyges' ring) now visible and now invisible. The Church (saith Saint CYPRIAN) clothed with the light of our Lord, sheds her beams through the whole world. And S. chrysostome g It is more easy 
Chris in Esai. hom. 4.  to extinguish the Sun, then to obscure the Church. And again; h The Sun 〈◊〉 not so manifest, nor the light thereof, as the actions of the Church. And Saint 
idem in Esai c. 2.  AUGUSTINE. a The Church is not hidden, for she is not put under a bushel, but in a Candlestick, that she may give light to all those which are in the house. And 
Aug. de unit. Eccles c. 14.  of her our Lord hath said, The City built upon the Mountain cannot be hid. And in an other place ᵇ It is a condition common to all heretics, not to 
Aug. cont. Parm. l. 2. cap 3.  see the thing that is in the world the most manifest, and built in the light of all the Nations, out of the unity whereof, all that they do (though they seem to do it very exactly) can no more warrant them against the wrath of God, than the Spider's web against the rigour of the cold. And again; he hath this most certain 
Cont. lit. Petil lib. 1. cap. 104.  mark, that she cannot be hidden; she is then known to all nations. The sect of Donatus is unknown to many Nations, then that cannot be she. And in deed how could it be that the Fathers had not had need to be purged with Hellebore, who employed these sentences against the here tickes and schismatics of their ages, to press them to return to the Church. That he shall never come to the rewards of jesus Christ, that hath 
Cypr. de unit. Eccles.  abandoned the Church of Christ: ᵈ that he shall not have God sor his Father, that 
Ibid.  hath not the Church for his Mother: ᵉ That he cannot live, that withdraws himself 
Ibidem.  from the Church, and builds to himself other seats and other dwellings; 
Ibidem.  
Ibid. & Hier. cont.  f That Christ is not with those who assemble themselves out of the Church: g That he who shall not be in the ark, shall perish at the coming of the flood: ʰ that 
Lucifèr.  he which eats the lamb out of his house, is profane: ⁱ That out of the Catholic 
Hler. cont. Lucif.  Church none can be saved: k whosoever is separate from the Catholic 
1. 〈◊〉.  Church cannot have life: ˡ That the Catholic Church alone is the body 
Carth. 4. c. 1.  of Christ: ᵐ That out of this body, the holy Ghost quickens none: n That whosoever 
Aug. ep. 152.  then will have the holy Ghost, should take heed of being separated from her, and likewise take heed of entering into her feignedly, if they had believed that 
Idem ep. 50  
Ibidem.  the Catholic Church had been an invisible flock of predestinate 
Ibidem.  persons, known only to God, and into whose roll as appointed from all eternity none could enter or be added thereu unto?  
SECONDLY by the word Catholic Church the Fathers did not intend the Chaos and general Mass of all Christian Sects & Societies, as well pure as impure, as well heretics as schismatics; as our adversaries do when they feel themselves excluded from their refuge of an invisible Church: but by the word Cacholicke Church the Fathers intended a Society, such both for doctrine and Communion, as these prophetical Oracles painted her forth: ᵒ Thou art wholly fair, and there is no 
Cant. 4.  spot in thee. p Thou shalt be called the city of justice, the faithful city. 
Esai. 1.  
Esai. 52.  q Through thee shall no more pass any that is uncircumcised or unclean. 
Ose. 2.  ʳ. I will espouse thee in faith, and thou shalt know that I am the Lord. 
Matth. 16.  
Tim 3.  And these evangelical decrees; s The gates of Hell shall not prevail 
2. Corinth. 6.  against her. t The Church is the pillar and soundation of truth. ᵘ There is no communion of Christ with Belial, nor of light with darkness. x If any 
2. joan.  one bring not this doctrine, say not to him so much, as well be it with thee; for whosoever shall say to him, well be it with thee, communicates in his wicked works: that is to say they understood by that term, society of Christians, extracted and contracted by the just and sufficient means of external vocation to salvation; and distinct and purified, from the impurity and contagion of all the heretical & schismatical sects. y If thou hearest in any part 
Hier. cont. Lucifer,  (saith saint JEROM) of men denominated from any but from Christ, as Marcionites, 〈◊〉, Montayners or Campites, know that it is not the Church of Christ, but the Synagogue of Antichrist. & OPTATUS Milevitanus z besides the only, Church which is truly Catholic, the others amongst the heretics, are 
〈◊〉. l. 1.  esteemed to be, but are not so indeed. And again, The Church is one, which cannot 
Idem l. 2.  be amongst us, and amongst you; it remains then that it be in one only place; And 
De 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. c. 7.  Saint AUGUSTINE to Honoratus; Although there be many heresies of Christians, and that all would be called Catholics, yet there is always one Church, if you cast your eyes upon the extent of the whole world, more abundant in multitude, and also as those that know themselves to be of it, more sincere in truth, than all the rest: but of the truth, that is an other Dispute. That which sufficeth for the question, is, that there is one Church, to which different heresies impose different names, whereas they are all called by there particular names that they dare not disavow; from whence it appears in the indgment of any not preoccupate with favour, to whom the name of Catholic, whereof they 
De vera relig. cap. 6.  are all ambitions, aught to be attributed. And in the book of the true Religion: We must hold the Christian Religion, and the Communion of that Church, that is called Catholic both by her own, and by strangers: for whether heretics and schismatics will or will not, when they speak not with theirs, but with stranges they call the Catholics noe otherwise than Catholics. And in the Commentary upon the 149. Psalm; The Church of the Saints is the Catholic Church: The Church of the Saints is not the Church of heretics; she hath been marked out before she was seen, and she hath been exhibited to the end she should be seen. And 
De side & symb. c. 10.  in the book of Faith and of the Creed; We believe one Church, and that, the Catholic; for the heretics and schismatics, call also their congregations Churches; but the heretic believing of God false things violate the Faith; And schismatics by unjust dissensions separate themselves from brotherly Charity, although they believe the same things that we believe and therefore neither the heretics do appertain to the Catholic Church because she loves God; nor the schismatics because she loves her neighbour. And certainly how could the Fathers without making themselves ridiculous te their auditors; beat down the heretics and schismatics with these sentences, 
a Concil. Carth 4. 〈◊〉 1.  That out of the Catholic Church there is no Salvation; that 
b Aug. ep. 15 2.  whosoever is not in the Catholic Church, cannot have life: 
c De 〈◊〉. ad 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 4  that he shall not have God for his, father, who will not have the Church for his mother: 
d Cyp de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  That Christ is not with those that assemble out of the Church: 
e 〈◊〉.  That although they should be slain for the confession of Christ, this spot is not washed away even with blood: 
f 〈◊〉.  That he cannot be à martyr, that is not in the Church: 
g Aug de gest. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  That out of the Catholic Church, one may have Faith, Sacraments, Orders, and in sum, every thing, except salvation: 
h Prosp promis. & 〈◊〉.  That he that communicates not with the Catholic Church, is an heretic and Antichrist: 
i 〈◊〉. de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. c. 19  That no heretic nor Schismatic, that is not restored to the Catholic church before the end of this life, can be saved: if they had believed, that all the Sects that profess the name of Christ both heretics and schismatics, had been in the Catholic Church. THIRDLY by the word Catholic Church; they did not intend a Church interrupted and intermitting, as that of the protestants, which is borne 
〈◊〉. 4. 〈◊〉 5  and dies by fits, like the Tyndarides, but such a Church, as these words of the prophet describe; 
a 〈◊〉. 54.  As in in the days of No, I swore that I would no more bring the waters of the flood upon the earth; so have I sworn I will no more be angry against thee: 
b 〈◊〉. 92  Thou shalt no more be called the forsaken: 
c 〈◊〉. 37  I will place my sanctification in the midst of them for ever. 
d 〈◊〉. 8.  I will no more do to the rest of this people as in times past. And these of our Lord: 
e 〈◊〉. 16.  The gates of hell shall not prevail against her. 
f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  I am with you until the consummation of all ages. 
g 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  The Spirit of truth shall dwell with you eternally. 
h 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  Let the one grow with the other, until the harvest; that is to say, a Church permanent eternal, and not capable of ruin. 
i Alex. ep. ad Alex. Theodoret 〈◊〉.  We acknowledge (said that great ALEXANDER Bishop of Alexandria) one only Catholic and Apostolic Church which 
k E Eulex  as she can never be rooted out though all the world should undertake to oppose her, so she outhrowes disperseth all the wicked assaulth of heretics. And Saint ATHANASIUS; 
l 1. cap. 4. l. Athan. orat.  The Church is invincible though hell itself should arise with all the power thereof, against her. And THEOPHILUS; 
n Theof. ad Epiph apud Hierom.  God in all times grants oneself grace to his Church, to wit; that that Body should be kept entire, and that the venom of the Doctrine of heretics shall have no power over her. And Saint AUGUSTINE. in the commentary upon the 47. psalm; 
Ep. 67.  God (saith he) hath founded her eternally, let not heretics divided into factions boast; let them not lift themselves up, that say here is Christ and there is Christ. And again; But perchance this City, that hath possessed the whole world, shall be one day ruined; never may it happen: God hath founded her eternally: If then God hath founded her eternally, wherefore fearest thou that 
Ang. Psal. 101.  her foundation should fall? And in the Commentary upon the 101. psalm; But his Church, which hath been of all nations, is no more, she is perished; so say they that are not in her; O impudent voice! And a little after; this voice so abominable, so detestable, so full of presumption and falsehood, which is sustained with no truth, illuminated with no wisdom, seasoned with no salt, vain, rash, heady, pernicious, the holy Ghost hath foreseen it. And in the treaty of the Christian combat: They say the whole Church is perished, and 
Ang. de agone. Christ c. 29.  the relics remain only on Donatus his side. O proud and impious tongue! And in the work of Baptism against the Donatists: If the Church vere perished in Cyprians time, from whence did Donatus appear? from what earth is he sprung up? from what Sea is he come forth? from what heaven is he fallen? And in the third book against Parmenian; How can they vaunt to have any Church, if she have ceased from those times? And in the explication 
1. De bap. cont Dol 3. c. 2.  of the Creed to the Cathecumenistes: The Catholic Church is she, that sighting with all heresies may be opposed, but cannot be overthrown. 
Cont. Parm. l. 3. capt. 3.  All heresies are come out from her, as unprofitable branches, cut from the vine: but she stays in her vine, in her root, in her Charity; And the gates of hell 
De Symbol. ad, Catech. l. 〈◊〉. c. 5.  shall never overthrow her. Behold without colour or fraud, what the Fathers understood by the word Catholic Church to wit; a Church visible and eminent, above all other Christian societies; A Church pure from all contagion of schism and heresy; A Church perpetual, and which had never suffered nor never could suffer any interruption, neither in her faith, in her Communion, nor in her visibility; This Church if the most excellent King have, let him give her to us; if not, let him receive 
Anguso. de unit. Eul. c. 6.  her from us: Aut det, (as saint AUSTIN said, to the Donatists,) aut accipiat.    

Of the proceeding of the Father, for the preservation of the unity of the Church. CHAP. III.  

The pursuit of the King's Answer,  
THe King commends also the prudence of the religious Bishops, who in the 4 Council of Carthage, (as it is here truly observed,) added to the form of the examination of Bishops, a particular interrogatory upon this point, And his Majesty is not ignorant, that the Fathers of the ancient Church have oftentimes done many things by form of accommodation for the good of peace, and to the end to prevent the breach of unity and mutual Communion, whose example he protesteth he is 〈◊〉 to imitate, and to follow the steps of those that procure peace even to the Altars, that is to say: as much as in the present estate of the Church the integrity of his Conscience will permit him. For he will give place to none; either in extreme grief, he suffers for the separation of the members of the Churdh, which the good Fathers have so much detested; or in his dosire, to communicate, if it were possible for him, with all the members of the mystical body of our Lord jesus-christ.   

THE REPLY.  
IT was not by way of prudence, as prudence signifies a human virtue, that the Fathers pronounced this decree, that out of the Catholic Church salvation could not be obtained; but by way of decision, and as an article of faith. For this cause (saith saint AUGUSTINE upon the Creed,) 
Aug. de Symb ad Cathech. l. 4. c. 10.  The Conclusion of this Sacrament is determined by the holy Church, for as much as if any one be found on't of it he shall be excluded from the number of the Children: And he shall not have God for his Father, that will not have the Church for his Mother; and it shall serve him for nothing to have believed or done so many, and so many good works, without the true end or butt of the sooner aigne good. And saint FULGENTIUS in his book of the 
Fulg. de sid ad 〈◊〉.  Faith, Hold this firmly, and doubt it not, that every heretic and Schismatic haptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost, if before the end 
〈◊〉. c. 39  of this life he be not reunited to the Church Catholic, whatsoever alms he distribute, yea though he should shed his blood for the name of Christ, cannot be saved And that which the Fathers have done to hinder the breach of peace, and of mutual communion, hath passed no further then either to tolerate some local and particular customs, which brought more burden than profit, as the custom some Africans had, not to touch the ground with their naked feet in the Octaves of their Baptism; or to endure the manners and conversation of some vicious men, without applying the iron & corrosive of excommunication, for fear of dividing the Church, instead of purging it from wicked persons; From whence proceeded that famous sentence of saint AUGUSTINE: They tolerate for the good of 
A 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  unity that, which they hate for the good of equity. As for that which they have done for the reestablishment of peace, it hath beme extended to the yielding something, in the severity of discipline. For when Arrian or Donatist Bishops came back to the Church, the Church in favour of the people which followed them, received them by a form of general rehabilitation with faculty to exercise their Episcopal power; Now this was against the ordinary rigour of the Canons. And therefore saint AUGUSTINE 
Aug 〈◊〉. 50.  hath from thence taken occasion to say, Thas as the trees, that are inoculated, receive a wound in their bark, to give way to those branches that should be graffed in; so the Church receives a wound in her discipline, to the end to take in, and reincorporate heretical people which were converted, and return together with their Bishops; but not that the love of peace, hath ever transported the Fathers so far, as to yield never so little in matters of Faith. Contrariwise saint BASILE witnesseth; ᵃ That they 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. 〈◊〉.  have always rather chosen to suffer a thousand deaths then to ᵇ betray one syllable thereof. And saint EPIPHANIUS recited by saint JEROM saith: c That for one word, or two contrary to faith, many heresies have been cast forth of the Church. And S. AUGUSTINE; 
d 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  That the things contrary unto faith and good manners, the Church doth neither approve them, conceal them, nor do 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  them. Therefore his Majesty ought not to have feared to imitate wholly the zeal of the Fathers for the good of peace, and to do for the restoring the unity of the Church all things that the ancient Catholic church hath approved practised, & taught. Neither ought he to have added to his offer the exception of that proverb; even to the Altars; since our of the true Church (such as was that of the Fathers to whose only Conditions we exact his Majesty's communion with ours) there are no true Altars, but only Altars against Altars; that is to say profane and Schismatical Altars, as those of jeroboam were, and the high places in the time of the law. Nor finally should he limit the desire he hath to communicate with all the true members of the mystical body of Christ, within this Condition, if it were possible, for it is so possible to communicate with all the actual members of the mystical body of Christ, that con trariwise it is impossible, (except in case of error of fact) to communicate with any one of them, but you must communicate either immediately or mediately with all the rest; for the Church is that Society 
Psal. 122.  whereof DAVID said; jerusalem which is built as a City, whose participation is in unity. And saint CYPRIAN; The Catholic Church, 
〈◊〉 epist ad Pupp.  which is one, is not dismembered nor divided, but keeps herself united, and is glued together by the cement of the Prelates adheringe the one to the other. And saint AUGUSTINE; Those, whose Communion is not with all; or that 
Aug de 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. cap. 4.  do spread themselves but yet find themselves in some part divided; it is manifest, they are not in the Catholic Church. And again; Whosoever defendeth one 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 3 c. 101.  part separate from the rest, let him not usurp the title of Catholic. And in an other place; It may be, will some one say, that there are other 〈◊〉 of 
De Pastor. c. 13.  God, I know not where, whereof God hath care, but I know them not: But he is too absurd, even in Common sense, that imagines such things.    

Of the necessity of communicating with the Catholic Church. CHAP. IU.  

The pursuit of the kings Answer.  
THese things being so, the king nevertheless esteems that he hath very just cause to descent from them who without any distinction and exception 〈◊〉 press this Communion.   

THE REPLY.  

a Cont. Parm. l. 2 cap 11  THere is saith saint AUGUSTINE no just necessity to divide unity; 
b Cont. Parm. l 3. cap. 4.  and there is (saith again the same Doctor) no assurance of unity but in the Church, which built according to God's promise upon the mountain cannot be hidden. For besides that the examination of the Church is so easy and so certain as saint AUSTIN saith: 
c De unit. Eccl c. 10 c De unit. Eccl c. 〈◊〉.  I have the most manifest voice of my pastor who expresses to me, and points me out the Church without any ambiguity: And again, 
d Ibid. c 20  this is no obscure question, wherein they may deceive you, of whom the lord hath foretold, that they shall come and say here is Christ: And that the particular examination of Faith chose is so dangerous and difficult as yet most learned have deceived themselves in it; And as saint jerom cryeth out; There is great danger in 
e Hieron. in ep. ad 〈◊〉. l. 1.  speaking in the Church, for fear least by a wrong interpretation, the Gospel of Christ may be made the Gospel of a man, or which is worse, the Gospel of the devil. There is further this difference, which is, that he who hath the Church, is sure to adhere to the true Faith though he know not distinctly all the articles thereof, and that he is in the way of Salvation; where he, that hath Faith, and is not in the Church, hath no hope of Salvation. If I have all Faith saith Saint PAUL and 〈◊〉 
1. Cor. 13.  not Charity, I am nothing. And Saint AUGUSTIN, He that hath Charity is secure, 
a Aug in Psal. 21.  and none can transport charity out of the Catholic Church. And elsewhere 
b De serm. Dom in mont. c. 5.  If schismatics had Charity, they would not rend the body of Christ, which is the Church. By means whereof, as much as Charity is more excellent than Faith, (following that oracle of the Apostle, 
c 1. Cor. 13.  but the greater of the three is Charity,) so much the instance of the Church is more necessary, then that of Faith. 
d 〈◊〉. 10.  Above all these things, saith saint PAUL, hold Charity, which is the bond of perfection; and let the peace of Christ, whereby you have been called into one body, hold the principal place in your hearts. And again, let us not for sake our Congregation as some have accustomed to do. And saint jude, Woe be to those, that perish, in the Contradiction of Core. And a while after, people that separate themselves, sensual men not having the Spirit. And it is a thing so acknowledged by the Fathers, that they affirm, that faith itself turns to increase of damnation to those, that possess it out of the Church; yea they hold the crime of Schism to be worse than that of infidelity and Idolatry. 
e De bapt. cont Donat. l. 1. c. 8.  Those, saith Saint AUSTIN, whom the Donatists do heal from the wound of infidelity and Idolatry, they hurt them more greevously with the wound of Schism. And for a proof of his saying, he allegeth the example of Core, Dathan, and Abiron, and other schismatics of the old Testament, who were all sent quick into hell, and punished more greevouslie, than the Idolators. 
f Ibid. l 2. 〈◊〉. 6.  Who doubts, saith he, but that was committed most criminally that was punist most severely? And therefore, as the ancient heretics have always against the unity of the Church pressed and Cried out, the Faith, the Faith; so the ancient Fathers against the divisions of heretics and schismatics, have always pressed and cried out, the Church the Church. 
g Iren. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 4. c. 62.  He shall judge, saith S. IRENEUS those that make Schisms in the Church, ambitions men, not having the honour of God before their eyes; but rather embracing their own interests, than the unity of the Church, and for little and light causes dividing the great and glorious body of Christ. And a little after, For in the end they cannot make any so important a reformation, as the evil of the Schism is pernicious. And saint DENIS of Alexandria, writing to Novatian 
h Apud 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l 6.  Certainly all things should rather be endured, then to consent to the division of the Church of God; those martyrs being no less glorious, that expose themselves to hinder the dismembringe of the Church, than those that suffer rather than they will offer Sacrifice to Idols. And saint CYPRIAN; 
i Cyp. de 〈◊〉. Eccl.  Do those, that assemble themselves without the Church of Christ, suppose Christ to be with them in their assembly? Although they should be dragged to death, for the confession of the name of Christ, yet this spot is not washed away from them with blood: the inexpiable and inexcusable crime of discord is not purged with death? t self; he cannot be a martyr that is not in the Church. And saint PACIAN; 
k Ad Sympr epist. 〈◊〉.  Although (saith he) Novatian hath been put to death, yet hath he not been crowned: Wherefore not? because it was out of the peace of the Church, out of concord, out of this mother, whereof 
l 〈◊〉 in cp. 〈◊〉 Ephes. hom. 11.  whosever will be a martyr must be a portion. And Saint chrysostom; nothing stirs (saith he) so sharply the wrath of god, as the division of the Church; so as when we have done all other kinds of good works, we shall deserve no less cruel punishment dividing the unity and fullness of the Church, than those that pierced and divided his own blessed body. And S. AUGUSTINE: 
m De 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Out of the Catholic Church all things may be had except Salvation etc. They may have and preach the faith in the name of the Father, the son and the holy ghost; but they can no where have Salvation, but in the Catholic Church. And a little after: I say more, if a man 
Ibidem.  out of the Church suffer the enemy, of Christ, I say not his Catholic brother that desires his Salvation, but the enemy of Christ; if he suffer him without, and that he being out of the Church, the enemy of Christ say to him, offer incense to Idols, adore my Gods, and for not adoring them he be put to death by the enemy of Christ; he may well shed his blood, but he cannot obtain the Crown. And in an other place: 
Aug. 〈◊〉. 204.  Being constituted out of the Church, and separated from the heap of unity, and the bond of Charity, thou shouldest be punished with eternal death, though thou shouldest have been burnt alive for the name of Christ. And again: I go not to worship 
In 〈◊〉 88  the devils, I serve not stocks and stones, but I am of Donatus his party. What will it serve thy turn, that the Father is not offended, since he will revenge the Mother's 〈◊〉? And in his work against the Adversary of the law, and the Prophets: 
n Contra advers. leg. & proph. l. 1. c. 17.  If he hear not the Church, let him be to thee as a heathen or publican; which is more grievons, then if he were stricken by the sword, consumed with flames, exposed to wild beasts. And in the book of Pastors: 
o Lib. de past. c. 12.  The devil doth not say, let them be Donatists, and not Arrians; be they here, be they there, they appartaine to him, that gathers without any distinction. Let him, saith the devil, adore Idols, he his mine; let him remain in jewish superstition, he is mine: let him abandon unity, and enter into such or such an heresy, he is mine. And in the profession to be made by the Donatists returning to the Church: 
p Epist. 48  We thought it had not imported in which part we had held the Faith of Christ; but thanks be to our Lord, that hath taken us in from the division, and taught us, that it belonhgs to God who is one, to be served in unity. And FULGENTIUS the second Saint AUGUSTINE, and the Phoenix borne a new out of his ashes: 
q Fulg. de remiss. pec. c. 22.  Out of this Church neither doth the title of Christian warrant any body, nether doth baptism confer Salvation, nor can they offer a Sacrifice acceptable to God, nor receive remission of Sins, nor obtain life eternal: For there is one only Church, one only dove, one only well beloved, one only sponse. And again 
r De fide ad Petr. 〈◊〉. c. 39  Believe this steadfastly without doubting, that every heretic or schismatic baptised in the name of the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost, if before the end of his life, he be not reconciled to the Catholikke Church, what alms so ever he giveth, yea though he should shed his blood for the name of Christ, he cannot obtain salvation. Fair, but fearful lessons for those, who think, that in what communion soever they be, so they believe in Christ, they may be saved.    

Of the marks of the Church. CHAPTER V.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
AMongst the proper marks of the Church, the King confesseth, that that is greatly necessary; but his Majesty is not of opinion, that it is the true form of the Church: and as the philosopher terms it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that wherein it consisteth.   

THE REPLY.  
Neither is it necessary, that a condition, for to be the mark of any thing, should be the essential form of the thing: for than we should have no mark of any substantial thing. For we know not the essential form of any one of them, except only of man, and for more than three thousand years, the true essential form of man was unknown; witness the jest of Diogenes, upon the definition of a man given by Plato. And therefore Saint BASILE reproacheth it to Eunomius, 
Cont Eun. 〈◊〉. 1.  (who had boasted that he knew the essence of the Father,) that he knew not so much as the essence of the ground whereupon he walked every day; and that what comes to the knowledge of men, are but accidents. Neither on the other side is it necessary, that the essential form of a thing should be the mark of the same thing. Nay contrariwise, to be the essential form of any thing, and to be the mark of the same thing; are commonly repugnant, and incompatible conditions. For the mark doth demonstrate the thing to the sense; and the essential form doth show it to the understanding; the mark designs the thing in the existence, the essential form designs it in the offence: The mark teacheth where the thing is; and the essential form teacheth what it is; the mark is sooner known, than the thing; and contrariwise the thing is sooner known, than the essential form of the thing: for the thing defined (as Aristotle saith) 
1. Phys. c. 1.  precedes in knowledge the definition; that is to say; the whole is known before the resolution of the thing into his essential parts. And therefore to say, that the eminency of the Communion is not the essential form of the Church, hinders it not from being a mark of the Church: and a mark likewise not only greatly necessary, but absolutely necessary: 
a Aug 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  She hath (saith Saint AUGUSTINE) this most certain mark, that she cannot be hidden; she is then known to all nations, the Sect of Donatus is unknown to many nations, therefore that is not she. Again, on the other side, to say that the doctrine is the essential form, or belongeth to the essential form of the Church, makes not, that 〈◊〉 it should be a mark of the Church: for a mark must have three conditions: The first is, to be more known than the thing, since it is it that makes the thing known: the second; that the thing never be found without it; And the third, as we have said elsewhere, 
b In the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  that it be never found, either alone, if it be a total mark, or with its fellows, if it be a mark in part, without the thing. Now the truth of doctrine in all instances thereof is much harder to be known, than the society of the Church, I said in all instances thereof; because to know the right of the cause of the Church in one particular question, with one or other Sect, sufficeth not to know the Church by the doctrine, but it is necessary to know the truth of the doctrine of the Church, in all her particularities, contested by heresies, as well past as present; before we can 〈◊〉 by virtue of the examination of the doctrine, where the true Church is. For there needs no more, but that she go wrong in any one controversy, to make her fall from the title of the true Church. Now who is he that can vaunt to know the integrity of the doctrine of the Church in all her instances, and to have made the examination against every one of the other societies, by infallible and insoluble proofs to all their answers, and by invincible and irrefutable answers to all their objections? And if any could do this, who knows not, that the simple people, and ignorant and rustical persons, (of whose Salvation nevertheless God hath the same care, that he hath of the learned, and to whom the marks of the Church should be equally common, since they are equally obliged to obey her;) are not capable of this examination? 
a August cont. 〈◊〉. Fund. c. 4.  For the rest of the people (saith Saint AUGUSTINE) it is not the quickness of understanding, but the simplicity of belief, that secures them. And by consequent, who seeth not, that they must have other marks to know the Church by, then that of her doctrine; to wit, marks proportionable to their capacity, that is to say, external and sensible marks, as 〈◊〉, antiquity, perpetuity, and such like; even as children and ignorant persons must have external and sensible marks, and other than the essential form of a man, to know and discern a man from other living creatures: 
b August. cont Faust, lib. 13 c. 〈◊〉.  By what manifest mark (cries out Saint AUGUSTINE, speaking in the person of a Catechumenist) by what demonstration shall I (that am yet little and weak, and cannot discern the pure truth, from the many errors) know the Church of Christ, to which I am constrained to believe by the event of so many things heretofore presaged? for these causes (saith he) the Prophet goes forward, and as it were collecting methodically the motions of that spirit, saith, that she is foretold to be that Church, which is eminent and apparent to all. And a little after; and also because of the motions of these little ones, who may be seduced and diverted by men from the brightness of of the Church, our Lord goes before them saying; The City 
Matth. 5.  built upon the Mountain cannot be hid. And indeed how is it that Esaie should prophesy, that 
c Esai. 2.  In the last days the Mountain of the Lord should be on the top of all the Mountains, and that all the hills should flow to her, and that the Nations should come and say; let us go up into the Mountain of our Lord, and into the house of the God of jacob, and he will 〈◊〉 us his ways; if the only mark to know assuredly the house of the Lord, that is to say, the Church, were the especial knowledge of his ways? And how should Saint PAUL say 
d Ephes. 〈◊〉  God hath placed in the Church Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, and Doctors, etc. to the end we should be no more little children, blown about with every wind of doctrine; if he had not given us other marks to know the Church, than the purity of doctrine.  
Besides, suppose the doctrine to be the mark of the Church; it must be either the doctrine contested between the parties that pretend the title of the Church; or the doctrine not contested: now it cannot be the doctrine not contested, because both sides have it; And less yet the doctrine contested; for while the truth of the doctrine is contested, it remains undecided of which side it is; and the certain and assured decision, cannot be made but by the Church: by which means it is necessary, that, during the contestation of the doctrine, there must be other marks to know the Church by, which being acknowledged, the question of the doctrine may be decided. And you cannot say, that the contested doctrine can be decided by Scripture only, for besides, that there are matters of Religion which are not any way touched by the Scripture, (ans that whereof Saint AUGUST speaketh, 
e Cont. Do.  The Apostles in truth have prescribed nothing of that, but this custom (which was opposite to Cyprian,) ought to be believed to have taken its original 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 23.  from their tradition. Saint JEROME protests, 
f jer. cont. 〈◊〉.  that the Scriptures consist not in the reading, but in the understanding; and, 
g 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 3.  that by a wrong interpretation, the Gospel of God may be made the Gospel of a man, nay (which is worse) the Gospel of the devil. Wherefore to judge surely of the doctrine by the Scripture, it is necessary, to be first assured of the interpretation of the Scripture; and that by an infallible means. For all the conclusions of Faith, which are not found in terms express, and incapable of ambiguity, in the Scripture, but are drawn by interpretations to make them conclusions of Faith and decisions infallible and equal to the authority of their principles, must be drawn from it by an infallible means. Now there are but three ways whereby we may pretend to be assured, that a conclusion drawn from the Scripture should be infallible, and necessarily agreeable to its principle; to wit, either human discourse, or private inspiration, or the authority of an external mean interposed from God, between the Scripture and us; as the magistrate between the law of the Prince and the people: to interpret to us the words, to gather the sense, and to form and propound the conclusions. For to say that one passage of Scripture should be interpreted by an other, (besides that there be diverse singular texts wherein this pretention can have no place;) this is still to return to the same difficulty: because one will have the controverted place interpreted by one passage; and the other, will have it interpreted by an other; and the very sense of the passage, which shall be brought to clear the controverted places, will again be brought into dispute, and cannot be infallibly decided, but by an infallible means, which must necessarily be one of these three, to wit either humane discourse, or private inspiration, or the authority of an external judge. And from this the verse of NEHEMIAS' derogateth not, which is according to the impression of Geneva, and they interpreted the law by the Scripture: for it must be read with Saint JEROME, They whilst it was reading, understood it the word Mikra never having bone employed in the Scripture to signify scripture; but only in the Rabines, 
a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  as Rabbi Elias and 
b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Munster, 
c In the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  and we after them, have other where demonstrated. Now as for humane discourse, if in the conclusions drawn from principles, which are known and understood naturally, (as are the principles of natural Philosophy and metaphysic) it be subject to commit so many errors; what shall it do in that, whose principles are not known and understood, but by a supernatural light? DAVID said to God 
d 〈◊〉 118.  Enlighten mine eyes, and I will consider the marvels of thy law: And thereupon Saint JEROME cries out, 
e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  If so great a Prophet confess the darkness of his ignorance, what shall become of us little babes? And the Scripture teacheth us, that the principles of Faith ought to be understood by the very same authority, either mediate or immediate, of him that revealed them. 
f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  jesus, (saith saint Luke,) opened the sense of the scriptures to the disciples. And saint JOHN, 
g Apoc. 〈◊〉  the Lamb was found worthy to open the book sealed with seven seals. And the Eunuch of the Queen of Ethiopia being demanded by S. PHILIP, whether he understood what he read; 
h Act. 8  how should I understand (said he) here being none to 〈◊〉 it to me? And Saint PETER, 
i 〈◊〉 Pet. 1  The Scripture is not of private interpretation. And again 
k 〈◊〉 Pet. 3  There are in the Epistles of our brother Paul things hard to be understood, that ignorant and light-minded men 〈◊〉 as the rest of the Scriptures, (mark, as the rest of the Scriptures) to their own perdition. And not only ignorant and light-minded men too (glorious Peter) but even the learned and most learned. For who where ever more learned than those, whose falls S. VINCENTIUS Lyrinensis doth propound for examples of the temptation of the faithful? What Tertullian, of whom he saith 
l Vincent. Lyrin c. 24  as many words, so many Sentences; as many Sentence so many victories? What origen's? of whom he writes 
m Idem c. 23.  What Christian did not honour him as a Prophet? philosopher did not reverence him as a Master? What Apollinarius? of whom he cries out: 
n Idem c. 16.  What spirit did ever surmount him in subtility, excercise, and doctrine? If so many great and admirable personages, eminent in piety; and incomparable in all kind of Science, Tertulians, origen's, Appollinares as soon as they have withdrawn the raynes of their Spirit from the guide of the Church, to put them to the guidance of their particular discourse are fallen into so deep and fearful precipices, and pits of heresies; who shall dare to assure himself upon his own particular sense concerning the true and infallible under standing of the Scripture, and that in all the controversies of Faith; in any one of which to 〈◊〉, and make a Sect, is to fall from the title of the Church, and to loose Salvation in all?  
But why should we have recourse to arguments where experience speaketh? for as naturally all men agree in confessing the conclusions of the Mathematics, because in that kind of Science, humane discourse is infallible; so if in the consequences, which are drawn by interpretation from Scripture, humane discourse were an infallible means, all men would naturally agree in the conclusions of Scripture. Now how far they are from that, the only state of the controversies of this age doth manifest; wherein the Lutherans, the Caluinistes, the Simple Ana baptists, the Seruetians or new Arrians, (which all profess to tie themselves to the Scripture,) cannot by the Scripture, agree in any one of their questions; and do no more accord one with an other, then if they had borne away the laurel from the tomb of Bibrias.  
And as for the inspiration of the particular Spirit, (besides the danger of those strong imaginations, that saint AUGUST calleth 
o Aug. de Doctore Christ. in prol.  proud and perilous temptations, which may be mistaken for inspirations; And besides that it is necessary, that the means, whereby the contentions about the interpretation of scripture are to be decided, should be common, either in deed, or in right to both parties contesting (where as the private inspiration, that one of the parties pretends is no common means neither in deed nor in right to the other) the Scripture advertiseth us, that 
p 2. Cor 11.  the angel of Satan transforms himself into the angel of light, and commands us 
q 1. joan. 4.  to examine the Spirits and discern whether they be of God. Now by what shall the Spirits be examined, to try whether they be of God? If by the Church; then we must first know the Church: if by the Scripture; we must first be assured of the true interpretation of the Scripture: for to examine them by the Scripture, is to examine them by the true sense, and by the true interpretation of Scripture; And therefore it is not from the particular inspiration of the Spirit of God that we must learn what the true interpretation of te Scripture is: since contrariwise it is from the Scripture truly interpreted, that we ought to learn whether the Spirit that inspires us be the true Spirit of God. And then these advertisements of saint PETER: 
r 2. Pet. 1.  The Scripture is not of private interpretation; 
t. August. confess. l. 〈◊〉. c. 25.  And of saint AUGUSRINE, Hold not privates truths, lest you be deprived of the truth; exclude as well the refuge of particular inspirations, as the certainty of humane discourse. Now if neither humane discourse, nor private inspiration be infallible means to assure a particular man of the true interpretation of Scripture in every point of Faith, but that he must have recourse to an external means interposed from God between the Scripture and us, as the authority of the magistrate between the law of the Prince, and the people, to draw out, to form, and to propound the decisions for us: What can this means be, but that where of God saith by the mouth of Esay: 
t Esa. 54.  Thou shalt judge every tongue that shall resist thee in judgement? And by his own; 
u Matth. 18  The gates of Hell thall not prevail against her. And again 
w Ibid.  Let him that hears not the Church be unto thee as a heathen or a publica. And by that of S. PAUL: 
x Ephes. 4.  God hath placed in the Church, Apostles, Prophets, Pastors and Doctors etc. that we may no longer 〈◊〉 little Children, wavering with every wind of doctrine; And again, The Church 
y. 1. Tim. 2.  is the Pillar and foundation of trutb? doth not 
z Ruff. hist 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 9  RUFFINUS write, that Saint Basile and Saint GREGORY Nazianzen took the interpretation of the Scriptures, not from their own sense, but from the tradition of the Fathers? And doth not Saint AUGUSTINE cry out; 
a 〈◊〉 Psal. 57  within the womb of the Church is the dwelling of truth. And again; 
b Ep. cb.  All the fullness of authority, and all the light of reason for reparation of human kind, consists in the only healthful name of Christ, and in his only Church: And doth not VINCENTIUS Lirinensis say, 
c Vinc. Lir. c. 〈◊〉.  because all understand not the holy Scripture, (by reason of the depth thereof) in one sense; But one interprets it in one fashion, an other in an other; so that it seems, there may be as many sever all opinions drawn out of it, as there are sever all men, for Novatian expounds it one way, Photinus another way: Sabellius an other, Donatus an other, Arrius, Eunomius, Macedonius an other, Apollinaris, Priscillianus an other, jovinian, Pelagius, Caelestius, and finally Nestorius an other: for these causes it is very necessary, to avoid the peril as so many great Labyrinths of so diverse errors, that the line of the prophetical and apostolical interpretation, should be drawn according to the rule of the Ecclesiastical and Catholic sense. And háue not the ministers of Geneva themselves, noted this in the margin of their last Bibles? 
d In 2: Tim. c. 2.  The doctrine of Faith requires a domestical and particular instruction, namely in those that are ordained to deliver it into the Church, lest they should take it in their own particular sense, under colour of the Scripture. And this is it, that was anciently called TRADITION in the Church. Now if the certainty of the interpretation of the Church ought to be také, (according to the exposition of the very Geneva Bibles) not from the sense of every particular man, but from the tradition of the Church: how can it be that the truth of the under standing of the Scripture should be the only certain and infallible mark to discern and know the Church?  
But against these proofs, the adversaries of the Church propound objections which we had best confute before we proceed to an other article. The first objection is, that Saint AUSTIN in his writing against the Manichees, after he hath made a long list of the marks of the Church, adds this; 
e Aug. count. ep. fundam. cap. 4.  Among you, where no such thing is found as holds and ties me, there sounds only a promise of the truth; which, if it be so manifestly demonstrated, as none can call it in question, aught to be preferred before all those things, whereby I am retained in the Catholic Church. And from hence they conclude, that S. AUGUSTINE held not the other marks for necessary and infallible, but only for probable and conjectural: since he offered to depart from them if they could demonstrate to him undoubtedly, that the truth was of the other side,  
To this I make two answers, one that the truth, whereof Saint AUGUSTINE speaks, makes nothing for their purpose that allege it. For Saint AUGUSTINE speaketh not there of the truth demonstrated by scripture, which is that whereof the Protestants vaunt: but of the truth demonstrated by the light of natural reason, which was that, that the Manichees promised: as it appears by what he said three lines below; 
f Ibid. c. 5.  I would not believe the Gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not move me to it. And a little after: 
g ibid.  And therefore, if thou must yield me a reason set aside the Gospel; if thou wilt tie thy-self to the Gospel, I will tie myself to those, by whom I have believed in the Gospel. And again; 
h Ibid.  The authority of the Catholics being destroyed, I could not believe the Gospel, because it is by them that I have believed it. And in an other place; 
i Cont. Faust. l. 13. c. 6.  That which remains for you, is, to say, that you will produce areason so certain and invincible, as the truth thereof being manifested by itself, it shall have no need of the authority of any witness, nor of the verity, (virtue you must read) of any miracle. The other answer is that Saint AUGUSTINE did not propound this in the form of a possible condition, (for contrariwise he disputes of deliberate purpose against the Manichees, that the natural light of reason could not be the way to come to the knowledge of the truth of salvation;) but in the form of an impossible condition: and which consequently diminisheth nothing from the efficacy of the marks of the Church, as it appears by what he adds immediately after; 
k Cont. ep fundam. c. 4.  But if it be only promised, and not exhibited, none shall separate me from this Faith which by so many and so great bonds (so calls he the external and sensible marks of the Church) binds my Spirit to the Christian Religion.  
The second objection, that the adversaries of the Church oppose, is, that the external and sensible marks, that the Fathers assign to the Church, as antiquity, perpetuity, eminency and succession, belong not to the Church only; for as much as many other things may claim antiquity, as the Sun, the Sea, the mountains, and many other; succession, as the Springs, the brooks, the rivers, and many other; universality, as the air the earth and the other Elements: and even amougst Religions, that of the pagans, hath heretofore had eminency and universality; and that of the jews, hath still antiquity and perpetuity. Certainly a childish and ridiculous objection; for first the marks that God hath given to his Church, have not been imposed upon her, to distinguish her from all kinds of things, but to distinguish her only from those things that are contained, though equivocally, under the same next kind, and may be supposed and taken for Churches, that is to say, from other Christian societies; to wit, from heretical and Schismatical Sects, which challenge and pretend by false marks the title of the Church: no more than the marks that Golodmithes given to gold that it will not evaporate in the fire, and that it will resist the coupelle and the water of separation, are not give it, to discern it from all kind of bodies; for there are other bodies, to which these conditions arc common, as glass and diamonds; but to discern it from false gold, that is from metals made and sophisticated, that may be supposed and made to pass for gold. And this alsoe Saint AUGUSTINE esteems the Church would insinuate in the Canticle, where after she hath demanded of her spouse marks of the place, where he dwells; she saith, Lest I be as hidden amougst the flocks of thy competitors, 
Aug. de unit. Eccl. c. 14.  that is to say (saith saint AUGUSTINE) of those, that being in the beginning with thee, would assemble without, not thy flock, but their stocks. For what is this but to say, that the Church demands marks of her spouse, not to be discerned from all kind of things, but to be discerned only from the society of heretics, which bear by false marks the name of Christ, and the title of Churches? And secondly, it is not necessary, that the marks in part, (that is to say, those, that taken separatlie, have not the entire office of marks,) may not be found every one a part, without the thing marked; but that the thing may not be found without every one of them, nor they, taken jointly and altogether, without the thing whose mark they are. And therefore the argument of the marks in part separated, is good to argue negatively, and to say with saint Austin against the Donatists; 
l Cont. lit. Pet l. 2. c. 104.  The Church hath this most certain mark, that she cannot be hidden, she is then known to all nations; the sect of Donatus is unknown to many nations; then that is not she. Or with saint JEROM against the Luciferians, 
m Hier. 〈◊〉. Lucif.  Hilarius being dead a deacon, he could ordain no Priest after him, now that is no Church that hath no Priests; or with the same saint AUGUSTINE against all heresies in general; 
n De Sym. 〈◊〉 Cathech l. 4.  every heresy. that sits in corners, is a concubine, and no matron. But the argument of the marks in part, taken jointly is good to argue both negatively and affirmatively; and to conclude with saint AUGUSTINE; 
o Cont ep. fun. ●. c 4.  Suppose then, that I omit this wisdom, that you deny to be in the Catholic Church, there are many other things, that retain me most justly in her lap: The consent of people and nations retains me: The authority begun by miracles, nourished by hope, increased by charity, confirmed by antiquity, retains me: The Succession of Prelates since the sea of Peter (to whom or Lord consigned the feeding of his sheep after his resurrection) to the present Bishop's Sea retains me: and finally the very name of Catholic retains me, which not without cause this Church alone amongst so many and so great heresies, hath so maintained, as when a stranger asks where they assemble to communicate in the Catholic Church, there is no heretic, than dare show him his own temple, or his own house.    

From what places of the voice of the shepherd the marks of the Church ought to be taken. CHAPTER VI.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
The king hath learned from the reading of the holy Scripture (and all the Fathers heretofore none excepted held no otherwise) that the true and essential form of the Church is; that the sheep of Christ do hear the voice of their pastor:   

THE REPLY.  
To hear the voice of the Pastor, is the office of the sheep, but not the essential form, either of the Church, or of the sheep. For the essential form of the Church, (I mean essential form analogically, as that of the supposts constituted by aggregation) is unity in the means of vocation to salvation, and the essential form of the flock, is the communion and participation to this unity. 
a 1 Cor. hom. ●.  The name of Church (saith saint CHRISOSTOM) is a name of agreement and union. And saint AUGUSTINE: 
b In Psal. 100  God is one, the Church is unity, nothing agreeth with this one, ' but unity. But if the essential form of the flock, were to hear the voice of the Pastor, doth not he hear the voice of the Pastor, that hears her voice, of whom the Pastor said by the mouth of Esay, 
c Psa 14.  Thou shalt judge every tongue that resisteth thee in judgement; And by his own mouth; 
d Matth. 16.  The gates of Hell shall not prevail against her? And, 
e Matth. 18  whosoever hears her not, shall be held as a heathen and a Publican? And by the mouth of saint PAUL: 
f 1 Ephe●. 4.  He hath placed in the Church, Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, and Doctors, etc. that we may no more be little children, fleeting and wavering with every wind of Doctrine? And doth not saint AUGUSTINE cry out; 
g Conf. 〈◊〉. l. 1. c. 〈◊〉.  The truth of Scripture is held by us, when we do that which pleaseth the universal Church, whom the authority of the same scriptures recommends? And again; 
h De bapt. cont. Don. l. 5. c. 23.  There are many things that the universal Church observeth, and which therefore are lawfully believed to have been delivered by tradition of the Apostles, although we find them not written? And then again, to hear the voice of the Pastor, is it not to hear it according to true understanding? for doth not TERTULLIAN pronounce 
i Tert. de press.  An adulterate gloss doth as much outrage to the truth, as a false pen? And doth not Saint Hilary say; 
k Hil. de Trin. l. 2.  The heresy is in the understanding, and not in the Scripture; the sense, and not the word becomes the crime? And doth not saint Jerome write; 
l In ep. ad galat. c. 1.  The Gospel is not in the words but in the sense? And doth not saint AUGUSTINE cty out; 
m Epist. 222.  All the heretics which receive the scriptures, think to follow them, when they follow their own errors? And in an other place; 
n De Gen. ad lit. l. 7. c. 9  Heretics were no heretics, but that misunderstanding the Scripture they defend obstinately their own false opinions against the truth thereof? And again, 
o De fid. & Sym. c. 9  Many things are spoken by Christ in the Scriptures in such a manner, as the impions Spirits of heretics, who will needs teach before they are taught, are thereby lead into error? And upon saint john; 
p In joan. Tr. 18.  The heresies and perverse doctrines, which entangle Souls and cast them headlong into hell, have their birth no where, but from good Scriptures evilly understood? And so is not the question still, to whom it belongs to judge infallibly of the true sense of the Scripture? Moreover the first voice of the shepherd, that the Fathers summoned the sheep to hear, is it not that, whereby he designs the marks of his sheepfold, that is of his Church? 
q De. unit. Eccl. c. 10.  I have (said saint AUGUSTINE) the most manifest voice of my pastor, who recommends and expresses to me his Church without any ambigiutie. I must blame myself, if for the words of men I stray from his floke, which is the Church, since principally he admonishes me, saying, My sheep hear my voice. Now which is this voice of the pastor, wherein Saint AUGUSTINE will have us seek for the marks of the Church, but that which expresses, not the doctrine contested between him and his adversaries, which was that of the truth of the baptism, given by heretics; but the prerogatives of eminency, perpetuity, universality, and other external and sensible marks, and conditions promised to the Church? 
r Ibid. c. 4  If the holy Scriptures (saith saint AUGUSTINE) have designed the 〈◊〉 only in Africa, and in a little medley of men dwelling in the rocks and Mountains near Rome, and in the house and territory of a spanish Lady: though whatsoever other pamphlets may be produced; there are none but the Donatists that have the Church; if the Scripture have bounded her to a little number of Moors of the Cesarian province, than we must go to the Rogatists; if to a little company of Tripolitans, Byzacenians, and provincials, the Maximianists have gotten her. If only to those of the East, we must seek her amongst the Arrians, Macedonians, Eunomians and others, if there be others to be found; for who can number the particular heresies of every nation? But if by the divine and most certain testimony of the holy Scriptures she is designed to be in all Nations; whatsoever is alleged to us, or from whence soever it is alleged, by those that say, here is Christ, there is Christ; if we be sheep, let us rather hear the voice of our shepherd, who saith, believe them not: for these are not tobe found in many places where she is, and she who is every where, is also wheresoever they are. And again, 
s Ibid. c. 20  My sheep hear my voice and follow me. You have heard his most manifest voice recommendinge his future Church, not only in the psalms, and in the prophets, but by his own mouth alsoe. And a little after, 
t Ibidem.  This is no obscure question, and wherein they may deceive you, of whom our Lord hath foretold, that they should come and say, lo here is Christ, behold he is tbere; lo he is in the desert, that is to say, out of the frequeneie of the multitude; behold him here in the secret places; that is, in hidden traditions and dark Doctrines. You hear that the Church must be spread over all, and grow to the harvest; you have the city, of which himself; that built it, said, the City built upon a hill cannot be hidden; it is then she that is not in any single part of the earth, but is well known every where. Behold the marks of the Church, that saint AUGUSTINE affirms to be designed by the voice of the pastor; and so clearly designed, as they need no interpreter, to the end, that the Church being known by them, we may after by the Church be informed of the sense of the other voices of the pastor, which need interpretarion. 
u 〈◊〉. 16.  Produce to us (said he) something for your cause, which cannot be interpreted more truly against you; nay which at all needs no interpreter; as these words, In thy seed all nations shall be blessed, need no interpreter: 
〈◊〉. 26.  
Luc. 22.  As these words, It behoved that Christ should suffer and rise again the third day, and that in his name there should be preached penance and remission of Sins through all nations, beginning from jerusalem; have no need of an interpreter, etc. 
Mat. 24.  As these words, And this Gospel of the kingdom shall, be preached through the whole world in testimony to all people, and then the end shall come, have no 
Mat. 13.  need of an interpreter. As these words, Let both grow together till harvest, have no need of an interpreter: For when they had need of an interpreter, our Lord himself ineerpreted them. for even as when a testator ordains some one to interpret the difficulties of his testament, and that the name oh this interpreter being common and equivocal to many, the testator assigns marks in his 〈◊〉 to make him, known; the clause, whereby he designs the marks to know him must be so clear, as they shall need no interpreter, since it is by them that he should be known, to whom it is necessary they should address themselves, to make them understand those thing that shall need interpretation: So God having promised in his testament, to give the interpretation of his testament to the Church, the words, whereby the marks of the Church are there designed, must be so clear, that they shall need no interpreter; so that by them the Church being known, we may after by the Church learn the understanding of those things that need an interpreter. And therefore the order and course of S. AUGUSTINE was, to verify by places of Scripture, which had not need of an interpreter, the external and sensible marks ' of the Church; by the external and sensible marks of the Church, the Church itself; and by the Church, the understanding of those places of Scripture, which had need of interpretation. n This point, said he, we read it not plainly 
〈◊〉. Ibid. 〈◊〉. 16.  and evidently neither I nor thou: but if there were beer some man endued with wisdom, to whom our Lord himself had given testimony; and that he were consulted with by us about this question: I believe we would nothing doubt to do as he would 〈◊〉 us, for fear of being judged repugnant, not so much to him, as to our Lord jesus Christ by whom he was recommended. Now he gives testimony to his Church: And elsewhere; 
x Cont. Crest l. c 〈◊〉  Whosoever then feareth to be deceived through the obscurity of this question let him consult with that Church, which the holy Scripture bathe designed without 〈◊〉 ambiguity. But this was, when he disputed, with the Donatists, who agreed with the Catholics concerning the truth of the Scripture: for when he disputed with the Manichees, or with the Infidels which denied or questioned it: then he changed his method, and did not prove to them the Church by the Scripture, but the Scripture by the Church, and to that end he used two kinds of proceeding 
y 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉.  The one was, to put it for a ground, that if god have care of the Salvation of man, (as without this principle all discourse of Religion is in vain;) there can be no doubt, but he hath appointed a means, how they might attain it; and that this means not consisting in things known by natural reason, for as much as then naturally all men would agree in it: it is then of necessity that it should consist in authority; and then, this ground benig laid, to verify, that among all the Societies of Religion, that be in the world, the only Catholic Church hath the true marks of authority. 
z Cont. Faust. l. 13. & alib.  The other proceeding was, to propose to them the accomplishment of profecies, touching the extirpation of Idols, and the ruin of the false Gods of the pagans, and touching the abolishment of the jewish Ceremonies, and the dispersinge of the people of the jews, and touching the comeinge of a new law maker, and of a new Religion; and to represent to them, that these prophecies were written before the birth of our Lord, and kept by the enemies of the Church, and were couched in terms so clear, that it was a wonder, that the jews, which kept them, were not persuaded by them; but that within the same books it was foretold, that theyshould be stricken with blindness, and that in seeing they should not see; And by this means to prove to them, that these were sacred and inspired from God; and then this obtained, to show them in the same prophecies the marks, whereby, amongst so many Societies which should usurp the title of Christian Societies, she was to be discerned, to who appertained the right of being the true Common wealth of Christ. And she being finally acknowledged, to address them to learn from her what the true laws of the Christian Religion are, and what ought to be their true sense and understanding.    

Of the Examples which we have from the practice of the Apostles. CHAP. VII.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
And that the Sacraments are duly and lawfully administered, that is to say; as the Apostles have showed the example, and those who have next succeeded them.   

THE REPLY.  
It is true: the due and lawfúll administration of the Sacraments, is, that they be administered as the Apostles have showed the example, and those which have next succeeded them; but that the examples, that the Apostles have tracked to us for patterns and myrrors to imitate, are not all contained in their writings, Saint AUGUSTINE teacheth us, when he saith: There are many things, which are believed by good right to have been received 
a. De bapt. cont. Donat. l. 5. c. 32.  by tradition from the Apostles, though we find them not written. And Saint CHRISOSTOME when he proclaimed, 
b Chrisost. 2. Thess. hom. 4.  The Apostles have not given us all things by writing, 
c 〈…〉  but many things also unwritten. And Saint Basile when he protests. 
d Basil. de S. Spirit. c. 27.  We have somethings in written doctrine, and other some we have received in mystery, (that is to say, ritual, and unwritten observations) efrom the tradition of the Apostles. And Saint Epiphanius when he faith: 
f Epiph. haer, 61.  All things cannot be taken from the Scriptures, and therefore the holy Apostles of God have given us somethings 
g 〈…〉  by writing, and other some by tradition. And his majesty himself, when he answers, 
h The answer to the 4. obseru.  that he is far from the opinion of those, that would shut up all the history of the primitive Church into the sacred indeed, but yet one only book of the Acts of the Apostles.  
And as for the Authors, which have followed next after the first persecution of the pagan Emperors, under whom they lived, which gave them much less leisure to write, than those had, that flourished after the tempest, and in the time of the first peace of the Church; and then the very state of the most part of the controversies of their ages employed either against the pagans, or against the jews, or against heresies, much differing from those, which are since risen up; and thirdly the shipwreck of their works, which the flood of the same persecution hath so swallowed up, as the least part of them is come to our hands: And finally the care, that the authors, which succeeded them, have had, to reduce into writing the things, which they have received from them, by unwritten tradition: And by succession of custom time out of mind; witness enough how much we must want, of being able to perceive by the relics of their writings, that followed next after the age of the Apostles, 〈◊〉 the tracts and lineaments of the face of the ancient Church.  
And therefore equity wills, and the most excellent King, who is equity itself, consents to it, that not only the monuments, which remain to us from the first or second age after the Apostles, shall be received as testimonies of the state of the primitive Church; but also the writings of the Fathers of the third and fourth age, after that of the Apostles; and principally, when they speak of the customs of the Church of their times, not as of things of a new institution, but as of things come to them from the universal and immemorial practice of fore-goeinge ages. For behold his Maiestiés answer upon this article; 
i The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the 4. 〈◊〉.  this demand will seem to 〈◊〉 little equity, to those, that would that all the history of the primitive Church should be contained within the divine indeed but yet only one book, and that a little one, of the Acts of the Apostles. From their opinion the most just and wise king is very far: who in his monitory epistle hath ingenuously declared, how much he esteemeth the Fathers of the fourth, nay even of the fifth age.    

Of the definition of the Church, and in what union it consists.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
THe Churches, that are instituted in this manner, it is necessary, that they should be united amongst themselves, 〈◊〉 diverse kinds of communion.   

THE REPLY.  
THose that observe the proprieties ofliving creatures affirm, that the 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 amor. 〈◊〉.  nest of the Haltion is woven, and built in such a symmetry, that is to say, the entry of it is so fitted and equalled to the measure of the bird's body, that it can serve for no other bird either greater or less. A definition must be justly so, it must comprehend exactly the thing thereby defined, without stretching itself to any thing more, or restraining itself to any thing less, it must be fit, it must agree only with the subject thereof: And therefore ARISTOTLE writes, that to frame a definition, is very difficult, and to destroy one, is chose very easy; for to establish a good definition, all the conditions, that limit and enclose the nature of the subject, must meet together; and to confute it, it is sufficient that any one be wanting. And for this cause Plato saith that if he could have found a man, that knew how to define, and divide well, he would have cast himself at his feet to adore him. For definition is an Epitome and abridgement of the entire knowledge of every thing, which is reduced and epitomised from the more ample consideracon of the 〈◊〉, and accidents, which accompany it, to that which is precisely of the essence there of: just in such sort, as in the constitution of the numbers, (which the philosophers propound for types and patterns of essential forms) every addition or substraction, (be it never so little) varies the being, and the character, and destroys, the precise species or kind of the number; so in the just turn of words, and in the lawful revolution of language, whereby the essence of every thing should be bounded, as in an horizon; or bourning line, all addition or omission of words, ruineth and destroyeth the definition. 
† 〈◊〉. dsal. c. 8.  For when the definition abounds, (saith DAMASCENF) in the excess of words; it wants in the conception of things: and when it wants in sufficiency of words, it is superfluous in the extent and comprehension of things. Wherein, as he adds, nature hath invented a marvellous art, to wit, a plentiful poverty, and an indigent and defective plenty. Now (as Aristotle notes) those are the worst servants, that steal the corn, not out of the garner, but from thence, where it is kept for seed, because this theft is measured, not by the quantity of the thing stolen, but by the usury and multiplication of the return or income depending thereon; so the errors, which are committed in principles, (which are as the seed corn of conclusios) are more pernicious and hurtful, than those, that are committed in any other part of doctrine. For in other parts the faults may be particular: but the vices in principles, (amongst which the definition holds the Sceptre and Empire,) are necessarily communicated to all the body of the disputation. And therefore Clemens 
Strom. l. 8.  Alex. cries out, that the ignorance of the definition is a spring of errors and deceits.  
Now if this be granted in other controversies, experience teacheth us, it must principally be granted in that of the Church: from the false definitions of which are bred all the sophisms and paralogismes, which fall out in the rest of the disputation. For from the too strict definition, that the protestants give to the Church, when they restrain her to the only number of the predestinate, proceed the illusions of the obscurity and invisibility of this society, by which all the marks, promises, and prerogatives, that God hath appropriated to his Church (
a Esa. 54.  to have power to judge all tongues that shall resist her in judgement: 
b Matt. 16.  not to be overthrown by the powers of hell: 
c Matt. 18.  to be heard under pain of anathema: 
d 1. Tim. 3  to be the pillar and 〈◊〉 of truth:) are turned into smoke, for to have them in this manner, that is invisibly, is to have them without use, or rather not to have them at all. And from the definition too vast and indeterminate, which they give her, when they say, she is the multitude of those that live under the profession of serving God in Christ, without adding, by lawful and sufficient means, there ariseth in steed of the Church a medley and chaos of all kind of heresies: Now this they do (as hath been said) to delude the questions of the perpetuity and succession of their Church: for when you demand of them, where that Church hath been these: 1000 or 1200. years, whereof God had said, 
e Psa. 47.  That he would build her for perpetuity; 
f Ose. 1.  that he would espouse her for ever: 
g jerem. 〈◊〉 & Amos 9  that he would never root her out of the earth: 
h Esa. 60.  that she should no more be called the for saken; 
i Esa. 54.  that 〈◊〉 engine addressed against her, should be without effect: 
k Esa. 33.  that she should be a plentiful 〈◊〉 ation: a tabernacle that can never be carried away, and whose nails 〈◊〉 never be unsastned, nor her cords broken in any time to come: 
l Matt. 16.  that the gates of hell shall never prevail against her: 
m 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  that he would be with her to the and of the world. They fly to the obscurity and darkness of the first definition and say, that the Church is the compagnie of the predestinate, and consequently that they are not bound to prove her succession, because she hath been invisible. Then when they 〈◊〉 themselves excluded from this refuge, and that it is demonstrated to them, that the same contracts of God, which promised perpetuity to the Christian Church, have also promised her brightness and eminency, that it is declared, that in the days of the new alliance, 
n 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the mountain of the Lord shall be upon the top of all the mountainos, and all the hills shall flow to her, and shall say; let us go up into the mountain of the Lord, and into the house of the the God of jacob, and he will teach us his ways. That it is written: 
o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  That the 〈◊〉 should walk in her light, and the people in the splendour of her Orient: 
p 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  That her seed should be known among the people, and her posterity in the midst of the generations: That all that should see her, should know she was the seed blessed by the Lord. And 
q 〈◊〉. 37.  that the nations should know, that God is the sanctifier of Israel, when his sanctification should be in the midst of her for perpetuity. Then they have recourse to the medley and confusion of the second, and answer, that the Church is the multitude of those, that make profession to serve God in jesus Chr. and by consequence, that to maintain the perpetuity thereof, it sufficeth, that there hath always been a multitude of men making profession to serve God in Christ, be it pure or impure  
Now this shift is one of the shifts, that Saint AUGUST. witnesseth 
〈◊〉. 80.  to be common, to foxes and heretics; For as foxes (saith S. AUG.) have two holes in their terriers, to save themselves by one, when they are driven from the other: so heretics, (whom the Scripture figures out by foxes when the spouse doth sing: Let us take the young foxes that destroy 
〈◊〉. 2.  the vines) have a double issue in their solutions, to scape by one, when they are pressed and assaulted in the other; so as who will catch them must set their nets before both issues, and must besiege both their passages. To the end than we may take them, and hinder the excellent king from being taken by them, we will set the nets before both the breaches of this definition, and will examine first, the 4. invisible unions, wherein his Majesty conceives the essential form of the Church may consist; and we will show, that that unity, which constitutes the formal being of the Church, is that of external vocation; and not that, either of predestination, or of internal faith, or of the conjunction of spirits by the offices of charity and mutual prayer, or of the participation of one same hope: & secondly, we will make it appear that this vocation, in the unity of which, the essential form of the Church consists, is not the simple profession of the name of Christ, but it is the vocation to salvation by just and sufficient, means, which are the profession of the true faith, the sincere administration of the Sacraments, and the adherence to lawful pastors. So as the definition of the Church shall be, the Society of those, that God hath called to salvation, by the procession of the true saith, the sincere administration of Sacraments, and the 〈◊〉 to lawful pastors. Now of this definition, the first part, to wit that the 〈◊〉 of the Church consists in the unity of external vocation, and not in the unity of any invisible condition, we will treat of in the examination of the three articles following, where his Majesty propounds the internal unions, in the which he pretends that the essence of the Church may be conserved. And the 2. to wit, that the vocation wherein the essential form of the Church consists, is not the simple profession of the name of Chr. but it is the vocation by just and sufficient means; we will reserve to the article of false external unions 
† 〈◊〉 in the 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  where his Majesty esteems; that the heretical societies (as the Egyptians & Ethiopians, which deny the distinction of two natures in Christ and by this means destroy the foundation of the faith,) are nevertheless members and parts of the Catholic Church.    

Of the union of the predestinate, and (byway of adiunction) of the visibility or invisibility of the Church. CHAP. IX.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
THEY are united in Christ their head, who is the fountain of life; in the which all those live, that the Father hath elected, to redeem them by the precious blood of his Son, and freely to give them life eternal.   

THE REPLY.  
THE union that the predestinate have in God, as they are only predestinate, doth not constitute any actual Church amongst them: but only the union they have one with an other as they are called. For first, the word Ecclesia, Church, is derived from a verb, which signifies, to call, and not to predestinate: from whence S. Paul, (confirming the use of this 
1. Cor. 1.  etymology) inscribes his first to the Corinthians, To the Saints called: And in 
Ephes. 4.  the epistle to the Ephes. he saith; One body and one Spirit, as you are called in 
Coloss. 3.  one hope of your vocation. And in the epist. to the Coloss. Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, by which you are called in one-selfe body.  
And secondly, the Church is a Society, and there is this difference between a simple multitude, and a society; that the society adds to the parts of the multitude a condition, and a certain character as it were, in virtue whereof, they may communicate together. Now predestination as it is simple predestination, puts nothing into the persons of the predestinate, and is not made in them, but in God only, and by consequent doth not make them actually parts of the Church. Our predestination (saith S. 
In psa. 150.  AUGUST.) is not made in us, but in God; the three other things are made in us, 
2. Tim. 2.  vocation, justification, and glorification. For that, that is alleged out of saint Paul, that God knows those that are his, and hath marked them with his signet; must be understood, that he hath marked the predestinate in himself, that is to say in his eternal determination; and not in them: as an Architect, who designs in his spirit certain stones, that he will employ in his building, marks then not by this mental designation in them, but in himself, and makes them not by this simple determination actual parts of his building. I mean (to be brief) that the union, that constitutes men in the Church is in them: now the union that the predestinate have in God, as they are simply predestinate, is not in them, but in God alone. And so it is not the union of predestination, but that of vocation, that constitutes men in the Church. 
Ephes. 1.   
Thirdly S. Paul teacheth us, that the Church is the body of Christ, and that by analogy to an organical body. God (saith he) constituted him head 
Coloss. 1.  over all the Church, which is his body. And again; I accomplish that, which wants of the passions of Christ, in my flesh, for his body, which is the Church. Now it is of the essence of an organical body, as it is organical, to be composed of 
1. Cor. 12.  diverse offices, members, and parts. If all the members (saith S. Paul) were one member, where should the body be? And by this reason the schoolmen prove, that the heavens are not animated or living bodies, because they are not organical bodies; and they prove they are not organical bodies, because they are not made up of heterogeneal and different parts in composition and complexion. And therefore it is of the essence of the Church to have distinction of members organs, and offices is the Church, doth not arise from the hidden and eternal predestination; for then the not predestinate, could not be ministers and pastors of the Church: but from external and temporal vocation, And by consequent, it is in the external, visible and temporal vocation, and not in predestination (which is internal to God, hidden, and eternal) that the being and essential form of the Church consists.  
fourth the same Saint Paul saith that God hath tempered the honour of the 
1. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  members that there might be no schism in the body. Now the predestinate are not capable of schism, as they are predestinate, but as they are called: so it is not predestination, but vocation, that frames the body of the Church.  
Fiftly he affirms the Church to be our mother; the superior jerusalem saith 
〈◊〉. 4.  he, (that is 〈◊〉 say, jerusalem, taken not according to the lowliness of the legal 〈◊〉 but according to the height of the evangelical sense) is free, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4.  which is our mother. And he adds; that it is of her that 〈◊〉 writes Rejoice thou barren woman that bringst not forth children. Now the Church doth not engender us by predestination; (for God alone is the author of predestination, and not the Church;) but by vocation: and consequently it is vocation, and not predestination, that constitutes the Church in the state of a Church & mother of the faithful. Moreover the knowledge of being Children to the mother, is before the knowledge of being Children to the father, by the 
August de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 12.  interposition of the mother's authority (saith saint AUG) we are persuaded of the true Father. For that that Aristotle writes, 
a Polit. 2.  That in certain parts of the upper 〈◊〉, where women were common they discerned the children by the resemblance they had to their fathers, was good for those people, where that similitude had place; but we, in whose nature the image of God is so defaced by the spot of original sin as we can no more be known to be his children by virtue of natural similitude only; there is no other means for us to pretend to this quality, but that we are regenerated by him in our spiritual mother, which is the Church his only spouse And for this cause the Ancients are so careful to say, that 
b Cyp. de unit. 〈◊〉.  he shall not have God for his Father, that denies the Church for his mother. 
c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 54 & 〈◊〉.  and that if any be out of the Church, he shall be excluded out of the number of the children, and to exhort the Christians to do like the 
d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Xanthians in taking the Surname of their mother, that is to say the title of Catholic. 
e In joann. 〈◊〉. 32.  We receive the holy Ghost, saith Saint AUGUSTINE, if we lo the Church, if we be knit in one body by charity, if we rejoice in the Catholic name and faith. Now the certainty of being Children to the Church, cannot serve us for a means and path way to come to the persuasion of being the children of God, if the definition of the Church consist in the hidden and invisible secret of predestination. For by this definition contrariwise we must be assured to be Children of God, and comprehended in the roll of the predestinate, before we can be assured, that we are the Children of the Church. So the definition of the Church ought to consist, not in the hidden and invisibly condition of predestination, but in the external and visible condition of vocation.  
Also we see that our Lord, who was the Godfather of this Society, and gave it the name of the Church, in that sense that she ought to bear it, hath never used that name, neither he nor his Apostles, but to design a visible Society, constituted by external and temporal vocation. 
Matth. 16.  For when he saith: Upon this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against her. And I will give thee the keys of the the kingdom of heaven: this word in the future tense, I will build, shows he speaks of a Church constituted not by prestination, which was established from all eternity, but by external and temporal vocation. And the word keys which signifies the authority of the ministry confirms it. And when he saith: Tell it to the Church, and if he hear not the Church, let him be to thee as a heathen, or a publican: And again, the 
Math. 18.  City set upon a mountain, cannot be hid: And in an other place; I will pray 
Matt. 5.  not only for these here present, but for all those that by their word shall believe in 
Ioann. 17.  me; that they may be all one, because the world may know, that thou hast sent me: Even a blind man may see, that he speaks of an external and visible Church. And when he expresseth the Church by the parable of the barn, where the corn is mingled with the straw; and by the parable of the 
Matth. 3.  field, where the corn and the tares should grow together till harvest; 
Matt. 13.  
Ibidem.  And by the parable of the net cast into the Sea, where the evil fishes were enclosed with the good: And by the parable of the wedding, where 
Matt. 22.  the hall was full of guests aswell good as bad; and by the parable of the wise and foolish virgins, which stayed for the Spouse in one house: 
Matt. 25.  there needs no Oedipus, to understand, that he speaks of a visible Church, constituted by external and temporal vocation. And when S. Paul saith to Timothee; I write these things to thee, that thou mayst know how thou oughtest to converse in the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, 
1. Tim. 3.  the pillar and foundation of truth: And again: In a great house, there are not only vessels of gold and silver, but also of wood and earth. This word (to converse) which cannot have relation to an invisible Society; and this word foundation, which is not relative to truth, which hath no need of foundation; but to men, to whom the Church serves for a foundation of truth: And these words, of wood and earth; do visibly show, that he speaketh of an external and visible Church. And when he saith in the 6. Chapter of the first to she Corinthians; What have I to do to judge 
1. Cor. 11  those that are without? And in the 11. We have not this custom, neither the Church of God. And in the 12. God had placed in the Church, first Apostles, secondly Prophets, thirdly Doctors; And in the Epistle to the Ephesians: The truth 
Ephes. 3.  of the wisdom of God, is manifested to the principalities and powers in the heavenly places by the Church: And again, Christ cleanseth his Church by the waching of 
Act. 2.  water in the word. And in the exhortation of the Priests of Ephesus; Take heed to yourselves and to all the flock over which the holy Ghost hath made you Bishops, to rule the Church of God: And when Saint james saith is his Catholic 
jacob. 5.  epistle, If any one of you be sick, let him call the Priests of the Church, and let them anoint him with oil: It is more clear than the sun, that they spoke of an external and visible 〈◊〉.  
And in truth how could it be, that these prophecies already so often repeated: 
a Esa. 2.  (In the last days the mountain of the Lord shall be above all the mountains: The Nations shall come to her, and say, let us go up to the Mountain of the Lord, and into the house of the God of jacob, and he will teach us his ways: 
b Esa. 60.  The people shall walk in her light, and kings in the brightness of her Orient: 
c Esa. 33.  Thine eyes shall see jerusalem a plentiful habitation and a tabernacle, that cannot be removed: 
d Esa. 61.  Their seed shall be known among the people, and thire posterity amongst the generations: All those that shall see them, shall know that they are the seed blessed by the Lord; 
e Ezec. 37.  the nations shall know that I am the holy one of Israel, when my sanctification shall be in the middle of them for ever,) had not been iliusions and oracles of the Spirit of lies; if the Church should have consisted only in the hidden and invisible number of the predestinate, into whose knowledge, neither men nor angels can penetrate? And our Lord himself (who is the eternal wisdom of the Father) had not he been the most imprudent of all lawemakers, to have left his law exposed to so many suppositions, depravations, and false expositions, whereto the malice of the heretics of all ages hath subjected it, without leaving a depositary to keep it, and a judge to interpret it; or to have left it an invisible depositary, and an invisible interpreter?  
But against this invincible truth there do arise five principal objections. The first is that our Lord said: The gates of hell shall not prevail against my 
〈◊〉. 16.  Church; from whence it seems to follow; that the reprobate are no parts of the Church because the gates of hell do prevail against them. The Second, that saint PAUL writheth; you are arrived to the heavenly jerusalem; 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  to the Church of the primitives (or first borne) which are enrolled in heaven; from whence it seems to follow, that the Church is only of the predestinate The third, that we protest in the Creed, I believe the Church; from whence it is inferred; that the Church is invisible, because faith is of invisible things. The fourth that Saint AUGUSTINE saith in some place, that 
De 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  only predestinate Catholics are true parts of the Church, and the true members of 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. cont. Don. & 〈◊〉.  the body of Christ; and puts a distinction between those, which are in the house, and those that are of the house, and between the people known in the eyes of God, and the people known in the eyes of men: And the fifth That Saint JEROME writes, He that is a Sinner, and soiled with any spot, 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  cannot be said to be of the Church of Christ.  
To the first then of these objections, which is that the gates of hell shall not be victorious over the Church, we say; That the victories which the gates of hell obtain against particular persons by the vices of their manners, prevail but against those particular persons that are spotted there with; and not against the body of the Church: for as much as the vices of manners are but in the persons that commit or approve them, and not in the Communion of the Church. Those, (saith saint AUGUST.) whom the wicked please in their unity, communicate with the wicked; but those that are therewith 
Epist. 162.  displeased, communicate not with the wicked, in their actions, but with the altar of Christ. For the Church exacts from none of her membres, the condition of being vicious, to receive him into her Communion; as she exacts from them, the profession of the Faith, and of the universal ceremonies that she prescribeth to them, the participation of her Sacraments, and the adherence to her pastors. By means whereof, there is nothing but heresy and profession of error, or infidelity, that can be pretended to make the gates of hell victorious over the body of the Church; because those only cortupt the conditions, under which the congregation is contracted or gathered, and infect the body and mass of the society; for none can enter into any heretical society, without obliging himself to the doctrine, whereof it makes profession. And therefore saint EPIPHAN. interprete judicially these gates of hell, that shall not prevail against 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the Church, to be heresies: the gates of hell (said he) are heresies, and heresieMasters.  
To the second, which is, that saint PAUL writes; you are arrived to heavenly 
〈◊〉 12.  jerusalem, to the Church, of the firstborn, which are enrolled in heaven, We answer, he speaketh of the Church triumphant, to which he writes that we are arrived, in the same sort, as he writes, our converfation is in heaven; that is 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  to say, in hope; as when a ship hath cast his anchor on land, which is (saith saint AUGUSTINE,) the symbol of hope, it is said to be arrived to 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  land, though it be yet in the sea; and let us add, that the word firstborn signifies there even by Caluins own confession, the holy Fathers and 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 2  of the old testament: Or, if saint PAUL speak there of the Church militant, and that by the firstborn he intends the predestinate, we 〈◊〉, he calls it the Church of the firstborn, not because it contains only the elect, but because the elect are no where else; I mean the elect invested in the temporal grace of their election, as we call the parliament of Paris, the Court of the Peers, not because it contains none but Peers, but because there is no place else, wherein the Peers are invested in their quality of Peers.  
To the third, which is taken from this article of the Creed, I believe in the Catholic Church, we say, it sufficeth, that faith be either of invisible things, or of things apprehended under invisible conditions; as those are, under which we consider the Church, when we believe her to be the spouse of Christ, the temple of God, the mansion of the holy Ghost, the gate of heaven, the treasuresse of spiritual graces. Otherwise to believe in Christ, had not been an article of faith, while our lord was in this world: And nevertheless he saith, Who believes not in the son, is already 
Ioann. 3.  judged. And when the Council of Constantinople puts this confession of Faith amongst the articles of the Creed of the Church, I believe one baptism in remission of sins, they must conclude baptism to be invisible, against the universal condition of Sacraments, which is, to be visible signs of invisible graces.  
To the fourth objection, to wit that saint AUGUSTINF writeth, that only predestinate Catholics are true parts of the Church, and true members of the body of Christ: and distinguisheth between them which are in the house, and them which are of the house; and between the people known in the eyes of God, and known in the eyes of man: we have three solutions. The first solution is, that saint AUGUSTINE intended not, that only Catholics predestinate were true parts of the Church, according to the formal being of the Church, which is common to all that are called; but according to the final being of the Church, that is, to the end, and in the fruits, for which the Church is instituted. I mean, saint AUGUSTINE did not intend in those places to define the Church formally, and by what she is in this world, but finally, and by what she shall be in the other. Even as he that saith, only good Citizens are true parts of a common wealth, doth not define a common wealth formally, and by what it is in itself; but finally, and by what it is in the intention of the lawmaker: And he that saith, a true harvest is only the corn, that is gathered from the straw, and not the straw wherewth it is mingled; defines not a harvest formally, and by what it is in the field, or in the barn: but finally, and by what it will be in the garner. We confess 
In joann. tract. 6.  (saith saint AUGUST.) that whicked men are together with the good in the Catholic Church, but as Corn and straw. And again, Wicked men may be 
In psa. 119.  with us in the barn, but they cannot be with us in the garner. For, that saint AUGUST. doth not esteem, that the formal and precise condition that constitutes men in the Church, is that of predestination internal to God, and eternal; but that of external and temporal vocation; he shows it, 
In joann. tract. 45.  when he saith upon saint JOHN; None can enter by the gates, that is by Christ, to life eternal, which is in vision, if by the same gate, that is to say, by the same Christ, he be not first entered into his Church, which is his sheepfold to the temporal life which is in faith: And in the place already alleged upon the 
In psa. 150.  psalms; Our predestination is made, not in us, but in God: the other three things are wrought in us, vocation, justification, and glorification: And in his writings 
Cont. Faust. l. 19 c. 12.  against Faustus: Men can be inserted into no name of Religion, whether true or false, but they must be tied by the common participation of some signs or visible Sacraments. Contrariwise the very same saint AUGUST. which distinguisheth between those in the house, and those of the house; teacheth us, that all Catholics, both predestinate and reprobate, are in the house, that is to say, in the Church, Those (saith he) we cannot deny but 
De bapt. cont. Don. l. 7. c. 51.  that they are likewise in the house; and than that the formal condition which 〈◊〉 the Church is vocation and not predestination; but that there are none but the predestinate Catholics which are of the house, that is to 〈◊〉, that are final pieces inalienable and inseparable from the house; or to speak in terms of law, that are goods, that the father of the family vouchsafes to put into the Inventory of his house, the other being there but for a time and as by way of loan and not to dwell there 〈◊〉 ever. For when the Church shall pass from earth to heaven, and from the state of mortality to immortality, only predestinate Catholics, shall remain there and not the others. The Church (saith he) is the 
〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 the servant is the Sinner; now many sinners enter into the Church? and therefore 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  our Lord did not say, the Servant enters not into the house, but, he dwells not for ever in the house. And again; None can blot from heaven the constitution 
〈◊〉. 162.  of God; nor can any blot from the earth the Church of God etc. She contains good and evil, but she looseth none on earth but the evil, and admits none into heaven but the good.  
The second solution is, that this distinction of parts of the Church true and not true, and of vessels which are in the house, and not of the house, and of people known in the eyes of God, and known in the eyes of men; is not a distinction of Religion, but a simple distinction of manners, which puts difference between the one and the other, in regard of the formal being of the Church, and of the external means of vocation which are the profession of the true faith, the sincere administration of the Sacraments, and the adherence to lawful Pastors; but only in regard of internal and final correspondency to these external conditions; that is to say, in regard of the conformity of manners, with the 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 7. 〈◊〉. 52.  vocation, and of the perseverance in his conformity of manners: They are (saith Saint Au:) so in the house by the Communion of the Sacraments as they are out of it by the diversity of manners. And Fulgent. after him: The good ought not 
〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  to be separated from the wicked in the Catholic Church, but by the dissimilitude of manners. From whence it follows, that when there is question of representing the perpetuity of the Church for matter, of Religion, that is, for matter of doctrine and Sacrament, and of the Communion of Pastors, it is an unprofitable refuge to have recourse to this distinction of 〈◊〉, and of people known in the eyes of God, and in the eyes of men, and of 〈◊〉 which are in the house, and are not of the house, since this distinction puts no bar between the one and the other people, for what concerns Religion, but only for what concerns manners. For although the list of the chosen is unknown to us in respect of the secret 〈◊〉, and the certainty of election: nevertheless, for what concerns protestation of faith, participation of Sacraments, and adherence to lawful Pastors, it is always visible; if not distinctly yet at least jointly with the rest of the called, with which in these three cases it constitutes always, one and the same Church; it not being possible for the elect to be installed in the temporal effect of thiere election, and in the estate of salvation, unless they make profession to communicate, and to be 〈◊〉 united in all these things with the visible body of the Chnrch. 
〈◊〉. 10 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  For our Lord cries out: He that shall confess me before men, I will confess him before God my father: And Saint Paul; Were believe in our hearts to justice, but 
〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with our mouths to Salvation: And Saint August. We cannot be saved unless (labouring also for the Salvation of others,) we protest with our mouths the same faith we bear in our hearts. by which means so far is it of, that the Church should be less visible in regard of Religion in the persons of the predestinate, then in the persons of others; as contrary wise, 〈◊〉 it could be either by error, or by infirmity, and fear of persecution, that the external and visible profession of the true faith, the Sincere administration of the Sacraments, and the adherence to lawful pastors, should fail in the person of all others, it would be conserved in those of the predestinate, following Saint Paul's maxim; There must be heresies, that the approved 
1. Cor. 11.  may be made manifest: And this testimony of Saint AUGTSTIN The 
Epist. 46.  Church is sometimes obscured, and as it were dimmed by the multitude of scandal: (that is to say, of persecutions) but yet even then she is eminent in her steadfast Champions. Only there is this difference, that as the vocation, which is the condition that sets men in the Church, may be possessed in two sorts; the one worthily when it is answered by conformity of manners, and inward devotion: from whence it is, that Saint Paul prays for the 
2. Thess. 1.  Thessalonians, that God would make them worthy of his holy wocation; that is to say, make them answer and persever to answer by their inward disposition the external vocation, wherewith he hath honoured them: The other unworthily; which is, when it is not answered by conformity of manners and life; so there are two ways of being in the Church; the one worthy and meritorious, when their manners answer their vocation; and the other unworthy and without merit, when they correspond not. Which hath given ground to the school distintion of being in the Church in number, and not in merit; and therefore in the place where Saint AUGUSTIN introduceth more expressly the distinction of those that are in the house, but are not of the house, nor are the house, which is in the 7. book of Baptism against the Donatists, even there to take away all occasion of suspicion, that this house could be invisible, he adds the keys and the power of binding and losing are given to her, that is the propriety and practice of the ministry; and that all are commanded to hear her, and consequently to hold her visible upon pain of being reputed heathens and publicans. This house (said he) hath received 
De bapt. cont.  the keys and the power to bind and lose; and from thence when she censures or 
Donat. l. 7. c. 51.  corrects; if any one despise her, it is said that he should be to thee, as a heathen or a publican. And in the book of the unity of the Church, where he repeats 
De unit. Eccles. c. 14.  in every period the same distinction: The Church (saith he) is not hidden, because she is not under the bushel, but upon the candlestick, that she may give light to all that are in the house; and of her it was said: the City set on the Mountain 
De Cathechis. true c. 7.  cannot be hid. And in the book of the way to Cathecise; We must (said he) intrust and encourage the infirmity of man against temptations and scandal, whether without or within the Church itself; without against Gentiles or jews, 
Ibid c. 26.  or heretics, and within against the chaff of the barn of the Lord. And again, Let not the enemy seduce thee not only by those that are out of the Church, be they pagans, jews, or heretics; but also by those that thou shalt see in the Church, evil livers. And in the comentary upon the Epistle of Saint john, How can I 
In 1. jown tract. 2.  call those other then blind, that see not so great a Mountain, and shut their eyes against the lamp set upon the Candlestick? And not only in those places, but in all his other works, he declares, that the Church is perpetually visible; yea he pronounces that it is an heretical position or rather the common foundation of all heretics, to suppose, that she is invisible. The 
In Psalm. 147,  Church of the Saints (saith he) is the Catholic Church: the Church of the Saints is not the Church of heretics: the Church of the Saints, is that which God hath predesigned, 
Cont. Parm. l. 2. c. 3.  before she was seen, and exhibited that she might be seen. And in an other place; It is a common condition of all heretics, not to see the thing in the world that is most clear, contituted in the light of all nations, out of the unity whereof all that they do, can no more warrant them from the wrath of God, than the Spiders, 
Cont. Petil. l. 2. c. 104.  web from the extremity of cold. And again; She hath this most certain mark, that she cannot be hid, she is then known to all nations: the sect of Donatus is unknown to many nations, then that cannot be she.  
The third solution is, that besides, even the use of the final definition of the Church, is a forced use, and where with Saint AUG. was constrained in the beginning to serve his turn, to withstand the fraud of the Donatists: but afterward he so corrected, or explained it both in the conference, that he had with them in Carthage, and in his retractations, as there remains no more colour to abuse it. For Saint AUGUSTINE in his first disputations against the Donatists, finding himself pressed with the arguments, that they brought, to prove that baptism could not be given by heretics, because heretics were out of the Church; advised himself, and particularly in the work of the seven books of baptism (from whence this distinction of people known in the eyes of God, and in the eyes of men, is principally taken) to help himself against them, not with the formal definition of the Church, by which only infidels, and heretical and Schismatical Christians are excluded; but by the final definition of the Church, that is to say, by the definition of the Church considered according to the final and future number of those, of whom she should be constituted in the other world, from which wicked Catholics are also excluded; to the end to infer from thence against the Donatists, that as evil Catholics, though they were out of the Church defined according to her future permanent and principal being, did truly baptise: so heretics and schismatics, though they were out of the Church defined according to her present and passant being, yet might administer true baptism. And for a foundation of his definition he made use of Epithets of Solomon, and S. Paul, having no spot nor wrinkle, and 
〈◊〉. 4.  〈◊〉 her such like eulogies of the Church, which appertained either to the 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  state of the other world, or to the purity of doctrine. But after that the Donatists abused both this definition and the testimonies from whence it was taken, to infer from thence, that the Catholic Communion, which was mingled with wicked men, was not the Church; he changed his proceeding in the conference that he had with them at Carthage, and declared that this definition belonged not to the Church, considered according to the present and formal being, which she hath in this world, but according to the future and final being, which she shall have in the 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 3.  next. The Catholics (saith he) made it appear by many testimonies and examples of holy Scriptures that wicked men are now so mingled in the Church, that although Ecclesiastical discipline ought to be watchful to correct them both in words and by excommunications, and degradations; nevertheless not only being hidden, they are unknown, but even being known, they are often tolerated for the unity of peace; and showed that the testimonies of scriptures did in that manner well agree together: to wit, that the places whereby the Church is represented with the medley of the wicked, signify the present time of the Church, as she is in this world; and the places whereby she is designed to have no wicked persons mixed with her, signify the future state of the Church, such as she shall eternally have in the world to come. And a little after: so the Catholics refuted the calumny of the two Churches, declaring expressly and instantly, what they intended to say, to wit, that they had not pretended, that that Church which is now mingled with wicked men, should be an other Church than the kingdom of God, that shall have no wicked pesons in it; but that the same one and holy Church, is now in one sort, and shall be then in an other; now she is compounded of good and wicked men, and then she shall not be so. And in the work of the City 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 20. c. 9  of God, made by him after the Conference of Carthage; there, where the one and other kind are found, (that is good & evil,) there the Church is as 〈◊〉 is at this present; but where the one only shallbe, there is the Church such as she is to 〈◊〉, when there shallbe no wicked men in her. And in the answer to the second 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Epistle of Gaudentias', written also after the said Conference: You see that the Church according to Cyprian is called Catholic, by the name of all, and it is not without manifestly-wicked men. And in the second book of his retractations, 
〈◊〉 l. 〈◊〉 ca 18.  I wrote (said he) 7. books of Baptism against the Donatists, attempting to defend themselves by the authority of the most happy Bishop and Martyr 〈◊〉; in all those books, where I have described the Church without wrinkle or spot, it must not be taken, of the Church, as she in her present being but as being 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 such, when she shall appear in glory. And again: In my writings to an unknown Donatist, 
Ibid. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  speaking of the multitude of cockle, I said; by which are understood all heretics; there wants a Conjunction, which is necessary; for I should have said, by which are also understood all beretickes etc. whereas I spoke, as if there were only cockle out of the Church, and none in the Church: And nevertheless, the Church is the Kingdom of Christ, from whence the Angels in the harvest time will pluck up all Scandals; which caused the Martyr Cyprian to say; Although we see tares in the Church, yet ought neither our faith nor our charity to be so diverted, as because we see tares in the Church, we should therefore separate ourselves from the Church: Which sense we have also followed else where, and principally against the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 present in the act of the Conference. From whence it appears, how much it is to abuse Saint AUGUSTINE'S words against the sense, whereto himself intends they should be either corrected, or explained; to transferr, as the protestants do, that that he spoke of the Church, considered according to her future and final being in the other world, and apply it to the Church considered according to her actual being here; and to infer from thence, that she may consist in this world formally in the only number of the predestinate, and remain hidden and visible.  
To the fifth objection, which is that Saint jerom writes upon the Epistle to the Ephesians: The Church is glorions without spot or wrinkle, or any such 
In Ep. ap Eph. c. 5.  like thing: he then, which is a sinner, and soiled with any spot, cannot be called of the Church of Christ, neither subject to Christ, We answer, that he means not to say, that wicked men are not of the Church which is the body, of Christ, which fights here below; but that they are not of the number of the Church which is the body of Christ, which shall reign in heaven. For so far of is it from Saint JEROM to believe, that the promise, to be without wrinkle or spot of manners, appertains to the Church, considered as she is in this world: that he cries out quite contrarily against the Pelagians, That what the Apostle writes, that our Lord will make his Church 
Cont. Pelag. l. 3.  holy and without spot or wrinkle, shall be accomplished at the end of the world and in the consummation of virtues. And again. True perfection, and without soil is reserved for heaven, when the bridegroom shall say to the bride; Thou art wholly saire, 
In ler c. 31  my love, and there is no spot in thee. And in the exposition of jeremy; Thou seest how many places the Church hath, and that this sentence of the Apostle, that she maiebe without spot or wrinkle, is reserved for the time to come, and for the celestial places. And in the same Commentary upon the Epistle to the Ephesians; Our Lord jesus accountethe for his members all that are assembled in the Church both Saints and Sinners; but the Saints are his 〈◊〉 voluntarily, and the Sinners by necessity. And therefore to the consequence, that the Protctestates gather from this place of Saint JEROM. when they infer from hence, that the Church consists only in the number of the good: we oppose these express words of the fame Saint JEROM; As in the Ark of 
Cont. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  No there were living creatures of all kinds: so in the Church there are men of all nations & of all manners: as there where together the Leopard, and the Goats, the wolf and the lambs: so here are together the just and Sinner, to wit the vessels of gold, and the vessels of wood and earth, And again, if the Church be already purified, what do we reserve for our Lord? And to the consequence, that they 
Ibid.  gather thence, that the Church is invisible; we oppose these following; That is no Church which hath no priests And again; I could dry up all the rivers 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  of thy arguments, with the only Sunshine of the Church. And a little after, We must remain in that Church which, having been founded by the Apostles, endureth till this present. And in an other place, I am joined in communion with thy blessedness, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 1.  that is to say, with the Chair of Peter, I know the Cburch it built upon that rock, whosoever eats the lamb out of that house, is profane    

Of the unity of internal faith. CHAPT. X.  

The continuance of the Kings Answer.  
THey are united in unity of Faith, at least in those points, which are necessary for salvation.   

THE REPLY.  
THere are seven batailles to be given upon this article, but against a King that will glory in suffering himself to be overcome by truth, and in saying with Darius his Chamberlains, 
a 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  that kings are very strong, but truth is yet more strong; And therefore I fear not to incur Homer's sentence: When a great king is angry with his servant.  
The first battle is, that an unity in things necessary for the Salvation of every particular man, is not sufficient for the constitution of the Church For there are points of faith, which are necessary, even with an inevitable necessity, for the body of the Church which are not necessary with the like necessity in regard of every particular man; as we have showed in our sirst Epistle: and those, which are sufficient for a man 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 3.  by death, and in case of impossibility of better instruction; are not sufficient for him, that can have commodity to be more throughly 〈◊〉: and those that may suffice for a simple handy crafts man, or a labourer, cannot suftize for the body of the Pastors, and the universal Society of the Church.  
The second battle is, that besides the things, which particular men are bound to believe with a distinct and explicit faith, there are many other, which they are obliged to believe with a faith of adherency and non- 〈◊〉, which Schoolmen call implicit faith. As, all the articles, that Counsels ordain to be believed, or forbid to be believed; upon pain of anathema. A vine dresser, a labourer, an artificer, is not bound to believe them by retail, and with a distinct and explicit faith: but it sufficeth that they believe them in the faith of the Church, to wit that they adhere and consent with the Church which believeth, them. For making profession to believe all that the Church, (where-into they are in corporared believes: faith embraceth in general by the merit of their obedience, all that the same Church believes distinctly, though their knowledge 〈◊〉 it not. And therefore even as while children are in their mother's womb, or sucking at her breasts, they live by the food and nourishment of their mother; but when they are parted from her, they can no longer live with that communicated nourishment, or that infused food: so while simple persons remain within the bosom and Communion of the Church, they live, in those things, which are above their capacity, by the faith of the Church, which is imputed and applied to them by the adherence that they have with her. Such, saith Saint AUGUSTINE, 
Epist 57  if before they arrive to the spiritual age of the Soul (where they shall no more be nourished with milk, but with solid meat;) the last day of their life surprise them: he that dwells in them shall supply what they want in their 〈◊〉, because they have not separated themselves from the unity of the body of Christ, which bade been made the way to us, and have not withdrawn themselves from the society of the Temple of God. And therefore it is necessary, that the Church, to whom they ought to adhere to obtain this supply, should be first known, and visible to them; and more over that she not only live with the doctrine, which is answerable to milk, (as is the profession of the articles, which simple persons are bound to believe with a distinct and 
Ibidem.  explicit faith, which Saint AUGUSTINE calls the rule of Faith, common to little and great;) but with that, which is answerable to solid meat.  
The third battle is, that it is not sufficient to say in form of an 〈◊〉 proposition; they are united in points necessary for salvation; but it must be said in form of an universal proposition, They are united in all points necessary for salvation. For as it will not serve a man to live, that he hath all his other parts sound, if he be deadly wounded in any member necessary to life; so it will nothing avail to these societies we talk of to be united in other things necessary to salvation, if they be wanting in 
De Bapt: cont. Donat. l. 1. c. 8.  any one. If a man be brought, saith saint AUGUSTINE, to a Physician grievonsly wounded in some necessary part of his body, and the Physician say, if he be not dressed, he will dye; I think, they which present him, will not be so senseless, as to answer the Physician, after they have considered and reckoned his other sound parts; what, shall not so many sound parts have power to 〈◊〉 him alive? and shall one wounded part have power to bring him to his death? Now amongst things necessary to salvation, the principal and most necessary, 
Ibid.  is the knowledge and acknowledgement of the Catholic Church. What profitts it a man, (saith saint AUGUSTINE) either sound faith, or it may be the only Sacrament of sound faith; when the soundness of Charity is wounded with the wound of schism, the only destruction whereof, drawhes all the other parts to death? And in an other place: We had both one baptism, in that they were with me; we both read the Scriptures, in that they were with me; we both celebrated the martyrs feasts, in that they were with me; we both frequented the solemnity of Easter, in that they were with me; but they were not with me in all things; in schism they were divided from me, in heresy they were divided from me: in many things with me, and in few divided from me; but because of these few things, wherein they were divided from me, the many things, wherein they were with me, profited them nothing. And so it is unprofitable to those societies, whereof his Majesty speaketh, to obtain the name of Churches, that they be united in most points necessary for salvation; if they be not united in all: and particularly in the knowledge and acknowledgement of the true Catholic Church; and consequently, not supposing her to be visible.  
The fourth battle is, that the universal distinction of things necessary or not necessary to salvation, cannot be assuredly made by the judgement of every particular person; but it depends of the judgement of the Church. For there is no Sect, but believes, that those things which they hold, 
De piece. orig cont. Pel. l. 2. c. 22.  are only necessary to salvation; and that all which others hold over and above, are either pernicious, or superfluous. Pelagius and Celestius, (saith Saint AUG.) desiring fraudulently to avoid the hateful name of 
De 〈◊〉. orig. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 22.  heresies, affirm that the question of original sin may be disputed without danger of saith; And Saint AUGUSTINE contrariwise cries out, that it belongs to the foundation of faith: We may, (said he) endure a disputant which 〈◊〉 in other questions, not yet diligently examined, not yet established by the whole authority of the Church, their errors may be borne with: but it must not pass so far, as to attempt to shake the foundation of the Church. And Luther, 
Luther tp. 7. in defen. verb. 〈◊〉.  speaking of the controversies of the Real presence under both kinds, and of the oral manducation of the body of Christ in the Eucharist: Zuinglius and Oecolampadius, said he, allege, that the question between them and us, is a light matter, and a little difference, not worthy, that by occasion thereof 
Ibid. paulo 〈◊〉.  Christian charity should be broken. But LUTHER contrariwise cries out; Eternally cursed be this concord and this charity, because it doth not only miserable 
Ibid. paulo 〈◊〉.  rend the Church, but after the devil's fashion, mocks her. And again; I take to witness God and man, that I agree not with the Sacramentaries; that is, with the zwinglians and Caluinists; nor ever did agree with them; nor, by the help of God, 〈◊〉 will agree with them; and that I desire my hands may be clean from the blood, of all those, whose souls by this poison they have turned from Christ, and 
Ibid. paulo 〈◊〉.  slain. And a little after; We will avoid them, we will resist, and condemn them, to the last breath, as Idolators, corrupters of God's word, blasphemers, and seducers. So that before we can be assured of entire unity in things necessary to salvation, we must hear the judgement of the Church, and consequently, suppose her to be visible.  
The fifth battle is, that it is not evough for the constitution of a Church, that the persons, where of it consists, should be united among themselves in matters necessary to salvation; if they be not also divided from the external communion of all other societies, which hold things repugnant to salvation. For it sufficeth that we be united with any Congregation, which believeth any one point repugnant to Salvation, although we be well persuaded in all the rest, nay, and even in that alsoe; to be excluded from the participation of the Church; for whosoever communicates in matter of Religion with any Society, is answerable for all the points, under the obligation whereof he receiveth men to his communion. From whence it ariseth, that a multitude of men of diverse external communions, such as his Majesty hereafter propounds, (as, a number of men of the Roman Communion, a number of men of the Greek communion, and a number of men of the Ethiopian Communion;) cannot constitute a common Church: for as much as, though they are united in the belief of most things necessary to salvation; nevertheless there are things repugnant to salvation, wherein some of them are united by the bond of their external Communions with the body of their Sects; which external union, though the internal went not with it, is sufficient to deprive them from the participation of the Church.  
The sixth battle is, that the unity of faith, which enters into the essential definition of the Church, is not simply the unity of internal faith; but the unity of external faith. For the unity of faith, which concurs to the formal constitution of the Church, is that, which serves for a foundation to the commerce of Ecclesiastical Charity, that is to say, by means whereof the members of the mystical body of Christ, may acknowledge and embrace one an other as brothers and members of one and the same body. Now this is the unity of exteruall and professed faith, and not that of hidden and internal, which serves for nothing, neither for 〈◊〉, nor for salvation, if it be not made manifest and external. For our Lord cries out: He that will confess me before men, I will confess him 
Matt. 10.  before God my Father. And saint PAUL; We make confession with our mouths to 
Rom. 10  salvation. And saint AGUST. We cannot be saved, unless labouring also for 
De fide &. Symb. c. 1.  the salvation of others, we profess with our mouths the same faith which we be are in our heartens. And again, Peradventure, (said he) some one may say, there are 
Deo vib. c 1.  other sheep, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which I am not acquainted with, but God hath care of them; But he is too absurd in human sense, that can imagine such things.  
And finally the seventh battle is, that the unity of faith, even external and professed, 〈◊〉 not for the constitution of the Church, if the unity of the visible and Sacramental Communion with the original body of the Church, and the universal society of the true pastors, be not added to it. You are with us (〈◊〉 Saint AUGUSTINE to the Donatists) 
Epist. 48.  in baptism, in 〈◊〉 Creed in the other Sacraments of our Lord but in the spirit of unity, in the bond of peace, and finally in the Catholic Church, you are not with us. 
Inepist. ad Tit. c. 3.  And Saint JEROM; There is this difference between schism and heresy, that heresy holds a false doctrine; and schism, for Episcopal dissension, equally separates men from the Church.    

Of other invisible unions. CHAP. XI.  

The continuance of the King's answer  
THey are united by the conjunction of spirits, and by the offices of true Charity, and above all by that of mutual prayers. They are finally joined by the communion of one selfsame hope, and by the expectation of one promised inheritance.   

THE REPLY.  
NEITHER can there be a true Communion of Spirits, where the visible and sacramental Communion of bodies is excluded; that is to 〈◊〉, where the parties do no admit one an other to the Communion and participation os the same Sacraments; If we be in unity (saith S. AUGUSTINE) what have two altars to do in this City? 
In ep. 〈◊〉. tract. 3.   
Neither can the office of mutual prayers, that is to say, prayers made one for an other, constitute an Ecclesiastical unity and Communion; 
Prosp ad calcem. ep. Caeles.  For Catholics, namely upon good friday, pray for heretics, and heretics for Catholics; although indeed the exercise of prayers, either made jointly, or exacted one from the other, be an office of communion, though an unperfect one. And therefore the Council of Laodicea, forbids Catholics to pray with heretics. And the first 
〈◊〉. Laod. can. 33.  Council of Nicaea ordains, that those penitentes, that had in peril of death received the Eucharist, their health being recovered should 
Conc. Nic.  remain with those, that communicate by prayer only. And the 
1. can. 13.  Council of Ancyra admits a Communion without Obligation. And 
Communio. Concil.  the religious of Egypt, driven away by Theophilius, being come to 
Ancyr.  Constantinople, were not deprived by Saint CHRISOSTOM of the Communion of prayer. He thirst them not, (saith Socrates) out of the 
Soc. 〈◊〉. call. l. 6. c. 9  participation of prayer; but he judged it not convenient to admit them to the Communion of the Sacraments, before the knowledge of the cause.  
Neither is true Charity to be found out of the Church; but only an humane affection, which can no otherwise be called charity but equivocally. None (saith saint AUGUST.) can transport charity forth of the Catholic 
In Psam. 21 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. cum 〈◊〉.  Church. And again, Thou hast proved to me that thou hast faith; prove to me like wise that thou hast charity; Keep unity.  
Neither can the simple conjunction of hope, constitute any Ecclesiastical communion; for all heretics and schismatics agree in this point, that they hope eternal life, and the promised inheritance. We (saith Petilian the Donatist) having nothing, yet possessing all things, believe that our 
Aug. cont. 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 99  souls are our revenue, and with out labour and blood, we purohasse the eternal riches of heaven.  
Neither finally, can the conjunction in one just hope, have any place, but amongst those, that are called and inserted into the body of the Catholic 
Ephes. 4.  Church: following this sentence of saint Paul, One body and one spirit, as you are called in one hope of your vocation.    

Of the knowledge, that the predestinate have, of their predestination. CHAP. XII.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
KNowing, (I speak of the elect,) that they are predestinate from before the foundation of the world to be coheires, united in body, and copartners of the promises of God in the Gospel, a; the divine Apostle saith.   

THE REPLY.  
Here the most excellent King behaves himself like Hippomanes, who running with Atalanta for mastery, cast out golden apples in her way, to delay her with taking them up: so his Majesty puts rubs in this discourse, to stay the course of my pen, and to stop me to examine them. But I hope to remove them so quickly, that I shall be time enough at the end of my carrere.  
To this than I will succinctly say four things. The first that philosophers teach us that the moral passion, which we call hope from whence theological hope hath by analogy borrowed her name is always mingled and tempered with fear: By means whereof, those things, that fall under the object of hope, as are the goods of future life in respect of every particular man, cannot be apprehended with a certainty of Theological faith (that is to say, infaillible, & not to be doubted of) otherwise hope should no more be a virtue distinct from faith, against this oracle of saint PAUL, now remains, faith, hope, and Charity; and these things are three: but aught to be embraced with an expectation mingled & tempered with fear, as David exhortes us in these words: serve the Lordin fear, and rejoice in him with trembling. And S. PAUL in these, Thou subsistest by faith be not pussed up, but fear. He that thinks he stands, let him take heed lest he 〈◊〉. And again, work your salvation with fear and trembling. And speaking of himself, I chastise my body and bring it under, lest when I have preached to others, myself become a reprobate.  
The second, that faith cannot be but of things revealed by the word of God: for faith (saith saint PAUL) is by hearing, and hearing by the word of God, Now it is not revealed to any one in the word, which God hath consigned to his Church, either by writing or tradition; that he is absolutely of the number of the predestinate, and therefore if he have not express and particular revelation from God, as Saint Paul had, (who upon this occasion speaks sometimes of himself, according to his common condition as simply one of the faithful; and sometimes according to his extraordinary revelation of a predestinate person;) he can not have any certainty of Faith in this respect. For to say that it is revealed to us in scripture that whosoever trusts in our Lord, shall not be confounded: And that 
Psa. 124.  our Lord himself saith who believes in me hath life eternal; all these pro 
Ioann. 6.  mises, (not to speak of other modifications, which the scripture puts to them,) ought to be understood with the condition, wherewith our Lord will have them understood, when he saith; who persevers to the end, shall be 
Matt. 24.  saved And Saint Paul when he writes, See the goodness of God in thee, if thou 
Rom. 11.  persevere in goodness, otherwise thou shalt be also cut of. Now where is it that this final perseverance is particularly promised to any one in the word of 
Marc. 11.  God? for if you answer that our Lord saith, all that you ask for when you pray, believe you shall receive it, and it shall be done to you: And consequently if we demand perseverance, we shall obtain it: I answer that he means, all that you demand, as you should demand it. Now the principal condition required to demand perseverance as you should demand it, is to persevere in demanding it, and not to content ourselves with demanding it once, but to demand it petpetually, following this preeept os Saint Paul; Pray without ceasing. And again 
1. Thess. 5.  watch and pray with all perseverance. Far Solomon demanded wisdom and 
Ephes. 6.  begged it in faith without staggering, which is the condition wherewith 
jacob. 1.  saint JAMES saith we should beg it, but because he did not persevere to ask it, he lost it. Now this perseverance to ask perseverance, where is it promised to any one in the scripture?  
The third, that this belief is pernicious, both to religion as an enemy to humility and good works, and to States and commonwealth, as an enemy to good manners. For imprinting in the spirit of every particular man, yea which is worse, as well of those that are wicked and reprobate as of others, (because what is proposed in a Religion for a doctrine necessary to salvation, all do think themselves obliged to hold it;) that he is assuredly predestinate, and that whatsoever sins he commit, he shall infallibly have leisure and grace to repent him before his death, this I say doth puff up men with arrogance and presumption above their fellows of whose predestination they have not the like certainty, and makes them less diligent to stand upon their guard and to practise this commandment of our Lord; watch and pray, for fear lest 
Matt. 26. & Luc. 21:  you enter into temptation. And therefore as the prince of the Roman harp sings,  

God by his wisdom, from wans nature frail 
Horat. car min l. 3. ad 29.   
The whole success of future things doth veil.   
The fourth, that S. AUGUST. (the greatest doctor in the point of predestination, that hath been since the Apostles, yea the organ and the voice 
13.  of the primitive Church, in this questiom,) teacheth us, that this belief is 
〈◊〉. De il. 11. c. 12  full of presumption and prejudicial to salvation. Although, (saith he) that the just are assured of thereward os 〈◊〉 perseverance, yet they are incertain of their perseverance; for who is he 〈◊〉 men, that knows he shall persevere in the works and progress of justice to the end, if he be not made certain thereof by some revelation from him, who by a just and secret judgement instructs not all, 
De correpi & great. 13  but deceives none? And in an other place, Who is he among the faithful, that will presume during this mortal life, to be of the number of the predestinate? for it is needful that that be concealed in this world. And a little after, Many like things are said for the profit of this secret, lest peradventure some might be puffed up: and that even those that run well might fear, while it is uncertain, whither they shall arrive. And again, Such presumption is not profitable in this place of temptations, where the infirmity is so great, as assurance might beget pride. And thus much is said in regard of 〈◊〉.  
It rests now to solve the objections of the places of Scripture, that the adversary's of the Church allege against this doctrine; They say then 
Rom. 8.  that Saint Paul, writes; the spirit of God gives testimony to our Spirit (or according to the greeks, helps our Spirit to testify to us) that we are the children of God: and if children, heirs. It is true, but they tell us not, that he adds presently after, this conditional clause; if we go forward in our sufferings.  
They say he writes, I am certain (or according to the greek, I am persuaded) 
〈◊〉.  that neither death nor life etc. can separate us from the charity of Christ. It is true; but they tell us not, that he speaks there of all the predestinate in general, into whose number he puts himself, and those to whom he writes, by a figure which the grammarians call syllepsis; and according to the rule, not of Faith, but of Charity, which wills, that in all things concealed from us, we should judge in the better part.  
They say, he writes, The vocation, and the gifts of God are without repentance. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  It is true, but there he speaks of the general calling of the people of the jews, made in the old Testament, were of he saith; God hath not 〈◊〉, because yet one day he will recall their nation into the bosom of the Church. And even those, that stretch this passage by analogy to the calling of particular persons, either explicate it of vocation according to predestination, which is as much unknown, as predestination itself; or they intent, that the gifts and vocation of god, are without tepentance on his part, that is to say, that God never withdraws himself from us, unless we withdraw ourselves from him: And therefore, as Saint Paul saith 
2. 〈◊〉. 1.  the vocation and the jousts of god are without repentance; so Saint Peter saith take pains to secure your vocation and election by good works. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 1.   
They say he writes, we have the pledge of the holy Ghost in our hearts; It is true; but it is not sufficient for our assurance to obtain the inheritance of life eternal that we have this pledge, if we be not as well assured not to lose it; a thing that Saint Paul is so far from assuring us that contrarily he cries out, quench not the spirit.  
They say, Saint john writes: perfect charity drives awaieseare. It is true, 
2. Thest. 1.  
1. 〈◊〉 4.  but, besides that Saint john speaks there of perfect Charity, which every particular man ought to desire but not presume he hath it for fear of 
〈◊〉.  loosing it, in loosing humility;) the fear that saint john pretends 
〈◊〉.  to be excluded by this excellent Charity, is (as Sanit AUGUSTINE 
〈◊〉 9  saith) 〈◊〉 fear; that is the fear of loosing the grace of God, for fear of the pain of eternal fire; and not the filial fear which is the fear of looseinge the grace of God for the love of God himself, and for fear of being deprived and separated from his presence. And therefore as S. 
Apoc. 2.  john saith in the place cited by them; perfect charity casts out fear: So he saith in an other place, Thou hast lost thy first charity, remember from whence 〈◊〉 art salien, and do thy first works. And again. Hold that thou hast least thy 〈◊〉 be taken from thee.  
And from this is nothing derogatory, that which they object, that the 〈◊〉 of this certainty, makes men despair of their salvation: For between the certainty of salvation, and despair, there is a middle way, which is hope that, while it lasts, (as it ought always to last in a Christian man,) is incompatible with despair, and sussizeth to comfort us, and hinder us, if we persever in it, from being confounded; And although it imprint not in us an infallible certainty of our salvation, (for then it were theological saith, and no more hope;) yet it causeth in us moral faith which we call confidence, by the means of likelihoods & conjectures that the good motions, wherewith god inspires us, give us of our 
De don. pursue. l. 2. c. 22.  predestination. Learn in part, saith Saint AUGUSTINE (condiscite as S. PAUL 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) from the goodness and straightness of your course, that you belong 
Ibid.  to the predestination of divine grace. And again, you then alsoe ought to hope from the father of lights (from whom descends every excellent gift, and every perfect present,) the perseverance to obey, and ask it of him with daily prayers, and doing so, confide not to be excluded from the predestination of his people, since it 
Ibid.  is himself that gives us grace to do it. And a little after: Of life eternal (saith he) which God, who is no liar, hath 〈◊〉 before all times to the Children of promise, none can be assured till this life be finished, but he will make us persever in him, to whom we say every day, lead us not into temptation, that is to say, as it ariseth from the protestation, of the preceding period) but we ought to hope that he will make us persever in him, to whom we say every day: lead us not into temptation.    

Of the inequality of these two phrases, to communicate with the Catholic Church, and to communicate with some member of the Church, departing from the rule of faith. CHAP. XIII.  

The continuance of the King's answer  
BUT the king adds, that this very Church. if any of her members depart from the rule of faith, will prefer the love of truth, before the love of unity. She knows that the supreme 
1. Tim. 3.  law in the house of God, is the sincerity of heauélie doctrine, which if any one forsake, 
1. Cor. 6.  he forsakes Christ, who is truth itself, he forsakes the Church which is the 〈◊〉 & foundation of truth. With such separatistes, a man truly Catholic, neither will, nor maic communicate: Far what agreement is there between Christ and 〈◊〉.   

THE REPLY.  
HERE his Majesty must give me leave to say, that he changeth the way of his disputation, and goes out of the lists, quite from the state of the question. For the question is not whether, to obtain the name of Catholic, & to attain to salvation, it be necessary to be united with any one of the members of the Church, when it comes to be separated from truth; but whether to obtain the name of Catholic, & attain to salvation, it be necessatie to be united with the whole mass & universal Body of this Church, which the Fathers have called Catholic. Neither is it the question, whether there may be any external and visible society, wherewith it is unlawful to commwicate: but whether such a time can be wherein there is no external and visible Society, wherewith it is necessary to communicate. For to saic, that all Communion are not to be desired, and that there are Congregations wherewith it is not lawful to Communicate, whieh, of us ever doubted it? Nay contrarily, do we not daily pronounce anathema against those that Communicate with heretics or schismatics? and, in that we 〈◊〉 his majesty, to return to the Communion, of the Catholic Church from that of the Caluinists; doth it not prove sufficiently, that we hold not, that there should be Comm union held with all kind of sects? The state them of the question to overthrow our Thesis and conclude some thing against us, requires not to prove, that there may be Societies, wherewith we ought to have no Communion: for who denies that? but to prove, that there may come a time, wherein there can be found no external and visible Society, wherewith it is lawful to communicate and that this time being come, (as Luther supposed it to be, when he began to pitch his ensigns in the field:) it is necessary to go forth from all the Religions, that are then to be found visible in the world, and to make a new Communion, and a congregation a part. See here what is needful to be proved; and in steed of this, the excellent king allegeth, that if any member of the Church depart from the rule of Faith, the Church must preserr the love of verity before the love of unity.  
To this answer of his 〈◊〉 we will answer two things: the first that there is no incompatibility beweene this thesis; we must be united with the universal body of the Catholic Church; And this antithesis, if any member depart from the rule of faith we must not be united with it. For the one speaks of the body of the Church; and the other speaks of some one of the members of the Church; and the special mention os some one of the Church departing from the true faith supposes the stay and perseverance of the rest of the body of the Church in the faith. Now it is with that body from whence that part that forsakes the faith, divides itself; that we say we must have Communion and unity: and not with the part, that separates itself from the body; for it is not a means to maintain unity to have unity with those that divide themselves from unity.  
The second that there is great difference between the rights and 〈◊〉 of the Catholic Church; & the previledges of particular Churches. For the infallible assistance of the holy Ghost was never promised to every particular Church but to the body of the Catholic Church. And therefore as the elements are corruptible in their parts but incorruptible in their all; so the Church is corruptible in her parts, but incorruptible in her all; in such sort that though some particular Churches may err in faith and consequently cease from being Churches, nevertheless, there always remains one mass of a Church exempt 〈◊〉 corruption so great and eminent, that she representes, and conserves in herself, the being, rights and prerogatives of all the whole. And so the obligation that we have to Communicate with the Catholic Church, is one thing; and an other the obligation that we have to Communicate with particular Churches. For with her we are bound to Communicate necessarily and absolutely under pain of anathema and damnation, because out of her Communion, none can be saved: and with others only whiles they Communicate with her.  
And the pretence of truth cannot be alleged to make this obligation 
〈◊〉.  conditional, since Saint Paul saith the Church is the fowdation of truth. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  And Saint AUGUSTINE within the womb of the Church, truth hath her dwelling. Nor can it be objected, that the supreme law in the house of God is the sincerity of heavenly Doctrine. For, besides that this law 
2. Thess. 2  hath her Statutes written, and unwritten: (following this precept of S. PAUL: follow the traditions that you have received from us, whether by words, or by Epistles And this testimony of Eusebius: The Apostles have given some 
Dedemonst. l. 1. c 8.  things by writing, and others by unwritten laws? And this observation of saint chrysostom From whence it appears, that the Apostles have not 
In 1. Thess. 2.  delivered all things by writings, but many things alsoe without writing:) it is not 
Sup. c. 5.  only necessary in matters contested, to have a law, but it is needful besides the law, to have a judge (with authority able to oblige, and subdue the sense of particular persons) to interpret the words of the law; which judge, as we have already demonstrated; can be no other but the Church.    

How to understand these words of saint Gregory Nazianzen; There is a sacred war, CHAP. XIV.  

The continuance of the Kings Answer.  
THE Church then must fly the communion of those, and say with saint Gregory Nazianzen, 
De pac. ar. 1. Orand.  that, a 〈◊〉 for 〈◊〉, is better, than an infected unity? And will not doubt to pronounce with the same blessed Father: that there is a sacred wary. 
150. Episc.    

THE REPLY.  
THERE is no doubt of proving, that there may be some society, whose communion must be avoided; for none denies it; but of proving that there may come such a time, wherein there is no external and visible society, wherewith we are bound to communicate. Now the places, that his Majesty citeth out of S. GREGORY Nazianzen, are so far from insinuatinge any such thing; as they affirm the quite contrary. For S. GREGORY saith not these 
Depac. or. 1.  words, against the external and visible Communion of the Church of his time: but against the crafty practices of the Arrians, which demanded, under pretence of peace, to be received into the communion of the Church with Confessions of the faith ambiguous and deceitful; that is to say, he spoke not this language, to show, that, when he writ it, there was then no external and visible Church, which must be communicated with under pain of anathema: but contrariwise, to show, that they must continue to conserve the external and visible communion of that Church impolluted and undefiled, from the contagion of the Arrians.  
And therefore in the second place alleged by his Majesty he representes 
Orat. ad 150. Episc.  two Combats, that the good Catholic Pastors had in their charges, some within the Church against the jealousy, & emulation of evil Catholics: others without the Church, against heretics & schismatics: And which heretics, and not against the Church entitled Catholic, he calleth the war, sacred war, in imitation of the Phocensian war which was called sacred.    

Of the pretended precepts, to go forth from the visible communion of the Church. CHAP. XV.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
NOW, that in the Church it was once necessary to make such a separation, we lerrne it clearly, as well out of other places of the Scripture, as from that, which is openly declared to us, by this admonition of the holy Ghost, made to the Church, certainly, not without cause, Go out of Babylon my people, lest you communicate in her sins. Now what this Babylon 
〈◊〉. 18.  is, from whence the people of God are commanded to go forth: the king searcheth not into it nor decides nothing in that respect. This certainly at least the thing itself shows manifestly, that (whether in that place by the word Babylon be meant a particular Church, or the greater part of the universal Church,) it must be she hath heretofore been a lawful Church, wherewith Religious men communicated 〈◊〉: and then from whom, after her depravation had yet past further, the faithful received commandment to go forth and to break the communion they had with her: So as it is easy to be understood from thence, that the faithful ought not to desire all kind of communion with those which are called under the title of Christ, but only that, which is made retaining still the 〈◊〉 of the doctrine revealed from heaven.   

THE REPLY.  
IT was not without cause the first Grecians called their allegorical sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; be it that this word intent hidden & conealed 
〈◊〉 de and poet.  senses, or whether it intent suspicions. For all senses, purely allegorical are but suspicions & conjectures, & have no firm & solid foundation. And it is not without cause, that the hebrew Doctors call the literal sense of the scripture, the little word, & the allegorical sense the great word: For the literal sense is restrained by the square & strait measure of that, which is contained in the text: where as the allegorical sense hath no bound but is multiplied infinitely, & goes as far as humane imaginatio can be stretched. And therefore this axiom is passed for a proverb in divinity, that allegories prove nothing. Now if there be a book in the world 
And Paulin  written in an allegorical stile, what one can be equalled in that kind to the Revelation? which, as Saint JEROM saith, contains as many Sacraments 
Aug. cp. 48  that is to say sacred riddles, as words? And if Saint AUGUSTINE cried out against the Donatists, who would have found a prediction of their Church in an allegorical verse of the Canticles, and said to them, who is it that dares, without a most unbridled licence, produce for himself that, that is 〈◊〉 in an allegory: if he have not places more clear by whose light to illustrate that which is obscure? What would he say in this age, not against his Majesty but against the proceedings of those, that have built the vocation of their Church, upon these alegoricall words of the Revelation, go forth of Babylon my people?? who knows not, that it is a solution sufficient for arguments drawn out of allegorical expositions, to answer, I deny it, and principally, when there may be an other sense given to the allegorical words, then that, according to which they are alleged? If I could not (saith Saint AUGUSTINE, answering an allegorical objection, ) prove this sense, by any more certain argument, yet it ought to satisfy every judicious bearer that I have found an issue for these words; by means whereof it appears that they have alleged nothing for themselues that is certain, but what may de doubted of And not only may there be found an other way of understanding this passage, then that which his Majesty supposes: but antiquity hath found two others, and both celebrated by excellent and authentical Authors; and those which have come after, have yet added a third.  
The first way of understanding it, is to interpret Babylon described by the Revelation, to be the Society of all the wicked in general, as S. AUGUSTINE and many others often expound it in that sense; and to expound jerusalem, described in the same book, to be the Society of all the Good; which are the two Cities whereof Saint AUGUSTINE hath composed a work, of the City of the devil which began in Cain, and the City of God, which began in Abel. For as there is the same reason in things contrary and opposite: so must the interpretatio of that jerusalem painted out in the Revelation; and that of that Babylon, which is opposed to it, be a like. Mark, said Saint AUGUSTINE, the names of these two Cities, Babylon 
In Psalm. 64.  and jerusalem. Babylon signifies confusion, and jerusalem the view of peace etc. They are mingled from the beginning of humane kind, and shall continue so to the end of the world. Jerusalem took her beginning from Abel, and Babylon from Cain. And a little after; From whence can we now show them, that is, discern them? Our Lord will show to us, when he placeth them, the one on his right hand, the other on his left. jerusalem shall hear, come you blessed of my father, take possession of the kingdom which is prepared for you from the beginminge of the world; and Babylon shall hear; go you cursed into eternal fire, which is prepared for the devil and his Angels. Yet we may also bring some mark according to the capacity that it pleases God to give us, by which the faithful and godly Citizens of jerusalem may be distinguished from the Citizens of Babylon. Two loves, make these two Cities, the love of God makes jerusalem, the love of the world, makes Babylon: let every one then examine himself what he loves, and he shall find of which he is a Citizen. And in an 
In psalm. 86.  other place; all the wicked belong to Babylon; as all the Saints do to jerusalem. And in the volume of the City of God: And what shall we gather from this, 
De cinit. Deil. 18. c. 18.  but that we must fly out of the middle of Babylon? which prophetical precept ought spiritually to be understood in this sense: that out of the City of this world, which is without doubt the society of evil Angels, and wicked men, we should fly with the steps of faith, which works by love, and advancing towards the living God. And 
In Psalm. 61.  in the volume upon the psalms; all those who perferr earthly felicity before God all those which seek themselves, and not jesus Christ, belong to that only City, which is mystically called Babylon, and hath the devil for her king. And to this it is no impediment, that she is described to be clad in purple; fore there, purple, signifies not the colour of purple; but temporal powers dignities, and authority, which are for the most part in the hands of the wicked, rather than of the good: the white and shining linen, wherewith the bride is clothed, signifieth not the stuff and colour of linen, but the justification 
Apoc. 19  of the saints. As little is it repugnant to this, that she is described to be set upon 7. Mountains; for that which follows immediately after, and those are 7. kings; shows that the word Mountains, ought not in that place to be literally taken, but allegorically; whether for the seven sins, that we call mortal, or for any other septenary number ruling over the society of the wicked.  
The second interpretation celebrated by the Fathers, is, to expound the destruction of Babylon, described in the Revelation, to be destruction of Paganism, and of the honour of the false Gods: and the descent of heavenly jerusalem, to be the propagation of Christian Religion; for as much as in the time of the prophets, from whose words this verse of the Revelation, go out of Babylon my people is taken, Babylon was as it were, the head of Pagan superstition, and also that the word Babylon signifying Confusion, is more proper than any other, to design the Religion of the Pagans, which was a Confusion of Religions; because Rome, which in the age of the Apostles was become the head of Paganism, had received into her Commonwealth and Religion, the worship and Religion of all the Provinces that she had overcome. From whence it is that Saint AUGUSTINE attributes by a particular title the word confusion to the Religion of the Pagans, when he saith; We must seek for Religion, neither 
De vera Religione c. 5.  in the confusion of the pagans, nor in the refuse of heretics, nor in the languishing of schismatics, nor in the blindness of the jews. And it is no contradiction to this, that the Angel cries, go out of Babylon my people. And a little after, 
Apoc. 18.  and recompense her double for what she hath done to you. For this cry is addressed to the elect, which were not yet the people of God in act and vocation, but in power and in predestination, whom God so calls, to draw them from paganism, and to make them actually his people, and Commands them to repay or return what she hath done to them; that is, not what she hath done in their persons, for they could not be persecuted by her for the faith, if they were not yet separated from her in faith; but in the persons of their predecessors. And therefore Saint AUGUSVINE saith; Mark how the people of Babylon are put to death, the double of what she 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 149  hath done, is rendered unto her: for so it is written of her; recompense her the double of what she hath done, etc. And how is the double recompensed upon her? when she might persecute the christians, she slew their bodies, but she broke not their God: Now she is recompensed double, for we root out the pagans, and break their Idols. And how, sayest thou, are the pagans put to death? how else but in being made Christians?  
For if some ancient Fathers have interpreted the word Babylon, to be the City of Rome, because of this epithet, drunk with the blood of the 
Apoc. 17.  Saints, and the martyrs of jesus; whose sufferings were so; frequent at Rome in the first ages of the Church, that it hath been justly said, that Rome was not so much a city of men, as a Churchyard of martyrs; It was the pagan Rome that they intended, as the Capital Seat of the heathen Religion, and of the Empire of the Gentiles; and not of any Church, neither particular, nor universal; as it appears by these words of Saint JEROME: I address my speech to thee, o most puissant town, which hast wiped out 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 l. 2.  the blasphemies written in thy forehead, by the confession of Christ: Which shows us, that whilst Rome was pagan, she was the same to the Christians, as Babylon was in the time of the old Testament, to the jews; but that, becomeinge Christian, she had ceased to be so, and was transformed from Babylon into jerusalem. If any reply, that in his epistle to Marcelia, the same Saint JEROM hath gone so far, as to apply the name of Babylon to 
Ad 〈◊〉 ep. 17.  Rome, after she was Christian: it was not to Rome, as the Seat of Religion, but to Rome as the seat of the Empire; not to the Ecclesiastical communion of Rome, but to the politic State of Rome; not to the Church of Rome, but to the Imperial Court, to the Senate, to the Palace, and to the troop of Courtiers, Solicitors and Negotiators of Rome, and not in matter of Faith but in matter of manners; and not in regard of Secular Christians, but in regard of the monks to whom Rome was a kind of Babylon, because of the diversions, that the noise, the confusion, the tumult of men and affairs in so great a City brought to monastical devotion as it appears by what 
〈◊〉.  he adds presently after: It is true that in that City there is the holy Church; it is true that there are the trophies of the Apostles and of the martyrs: it is true there is the true confession of Christ, it is true there is the faith celebrated by the Apostle, and the Christian name every day exalted by the depression of paganism trodden under foot: but the ambition, the power, and greatness of this City, to visit and to be visited, to salute and to be saluted, to flatter and detract, to hear, and speak, nay to see, though unwillingly, so great a multitude of men, are things far from the purpose and quiet of those, that would follow a monastical life. And again, noting 
Ad Paulin de instit. Monach. ep 13.  the same discomodities in the dwelling in jerusalem; If (said he) the places of the Cross and Resurrection were not in a famous town, where there is a Court, where there is is a garrison of Soldiers, where there are common women, players, jesters, and all things which use to be in other Cities, etc. it would certainly be a dwelling much to be desired by Monks. Now if sometimes he have chanced to make use of this word in his writings, against certain Priests and Deacons of the Clergy of Rome, who, jealous of his favour with Pope Damasus, persecuted him with slanders, reproaching to him, 
a Praefat. in Didim. de  that he had translated the treaties of Didymus an heretical author; 
b Ad Asell. ep. 99  that he had conversed too familiarly with the devout ladies of Rome, and persuaded them to quit their country, children, and kindred, that is, the confusion and tumult of the world, to go as recluses into the Monasteries of Palestina: These were all complaints, which still remained within the limits of their manners; and neither touched the faith of the Roman Church; nor the succession of saint Peter; nor the communion of the Apostolical Sea; nor the very person of the Pope. And indeed, how could saint JEROME apply these words of the Revelation, Go out of Babylon, to the City of Rome, for any thing concerning faith and Religion? He that cries out in his apology against RUFFINUS: 
Apol. adver Ruffin. l. 1  Which faith is it, that he calls his? that, that the Roman Church holds? or that, that is contained in origen's books? if he answer that that the Roman Church holds, than we are Catholics. And in the Epistle to THEOPHILUS patriarch 
Epist. 68  of Alexandria. Know that we have nothing in greater recommendation, then to conserve the statutes of Christ, and not to transgress the bounds of our fathers, and always to remember the Roman faith praised by the mouth of the Apostle, whereof the Alexandrian Church doth glory to partake. And in the Epistle to DEMETRIAS. When thou wert little, and that the Bishop Anastasius of 
Epist. 8.  〈◊〉 and happy memory, gowerned the Roman Church, a cruel tempest of 〈◊〉 risen out of the Eastern parts, attempted to pollute and corrupt the 〈◊〉 of that faith, which had been commended by the mouth of the Apostle: but this 〈◊〉 (Pope Anastasius) rich in a most plentiful poverty, and in an Apostolical care, broke the pestilent head, and stopped the hissing mouths of 〈◊〉 Hydra. And because I fear, yea I have heard say, that the buds of this venomous plant do still live, and springe up in some, I thought it my 〈◊〉 to admonish thee in a devout zeal of charity, that thou keep fast the faith of Saint INNOCENT his son and Successor in the Apostolical Chair. And in the Epistle to Pope DAMASUS, I am chained in communion with 
Ad Damos. epist. 57  thy blessedness; that is with Peter's Chair; I know the Church is built upon that rock, if any eat the lamb out of that house, he is profane. And a little after; I know not Vitalis, I reject Meletius, I am ignorant of Paulinus; whosoever gathers not with thee scatters; that is to say, whosoever is not of Christ, is of Antichrist. Far then was he from holding the Church of Rome for Babylon, and the Pope for Antichrist: since he held, whosoever did not communicate with the Pope for Antichrist.  
The third exposition is of them, who interpret the allegorical Babylon, to be the Monarchy of the Turks, who with its false Prophet Mahomet, have possessed all the cities, and particularly those of the seven Churches of Asia, to which S. john addressed his revelation, and which hath given up her soul to the perished beast; that is to say, hath again taken the office and rank of the pagan Emperors, blasphmers and persecutors of the name of Christ; and hath usurped the Seat, whither their succession had been transferred; to wit Constantinople; and who is clothed with purple, that is, hath the Imperial power and authority, whose symbol in Saint john's time was purple; and which is seated, be it literally, upon seven Mountains for Constantinople hath seven Mountains as old Rome had, (for modern Rome hath nine;) Or be it according to the allegorical interpretation of Saint john, upon seven kings, that is to say, upon the seven Empires, that follow the impiety of Mahomett. And in brief which hath so many other affinities with the Babylon in the Revelation, as OECOLAMP. and BULLINGER, are constrained to give her two seats, and con●●●●u●e two Antichrists, one in the west and an other in the East Now 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  which of these expositions answers the precise intention of the Author; or 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  whether the perfect accomplishment of these things be yet to come, (and should be understood of a Society, which shall not arise, till after the Gospel have been actually preached to all the nations of the world, as all ancient writers are agreed, that the Monarchy of Antichrist, which the protestāns esteene to be one thing with the Babylon of the Revelation, shall not come till after that time,) it is not here our purpose to examine.  
But in sum, that that Babylon where of the revelation speaketh, can be seriously taken for the city of Rome, the antithesis that saint JOHN makes of Babylon and jerusalem (which teacheth us, that as the jerusalem described by the same Revelation, is not a local city; so Babylon described by the same Revelation, is not a local and corporal city;) takes from us all colour to believe it. And therefore ARETHAS (who being a graecian, 
ar in Apo●. ●. 18.  and a schismatic, as he is held to be, had had more interest, to interpret this passage of Rome;) resolves in the end, that it cannot be understood, neither of Rome nor of Constantinople, but of the state of this corruptible world. It appears (says he) undoubtlie by this place, that the things which are here foretold, should neither be understood of Babylon, nor of old nor new Rome, that is Constantinople, nor of any other city, but of all this corruptible world.  
And that she may be taken for a Church, which in the beginning was a true Church of Christ, and since grown false and adulterate, bearing nevertheless still the title of a Church; the figure of Babylon, (which was from the beginning founded by Nimrod a pagan, and infidel, and after always persevered in paganism, and in the open profession of infidelity, till the fall of her Empire;) cannot bear it. Contrariwise, that which saint JOHN saith, 
b Apo●. 13  that, all those whose names are not written in the book of life, have worshipped the beast, upon which the harlot sits; seems to insinuate, that he speaks of the society of all the reprobate, of what soever Sect, Religion, and profession they have been; as well Jews, Gentiles, Heretics schismatics: as evil Catholics, and not of any determinate Communion.  
Yet we avow nevertheless, that the Fathers have sometimes turned the words of Isay and jeremy (from whence those words of the Revelation are taken,) to make use of them against the particular Sect of the Arrians: 
Epist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  As when OSIUS, and after him S. ATHANAS. say, the Scripture cries out, depart, depart; go out from her, and touch not her uncleanness: Withdraw you from the midst of them; separate yourselves from them, you that carry the vessels of our Lord. But besides, that they have never pretended, that this precept should be extended to all the multitude of Christians; and, that there might come a time, wherein there were no external Communion visible and eminent, out of which it should be unlawful to go forth; (which is that which is in question;) There is great difference between the conceits, & allusions, that the Fathers made upon the allegorical expositions of the passages of the Scripture: and the proper and direct understanding of the same passages, which is that only, from whence we may argue seriously. And therefore when the Donatists in the conference of Carthage, would have made use of the same words, against the Catholic Church: Saint AUGUST. and the other Bishops of Africa, answered them, that the separation intended by that passage, was the moral separation of faith and breach of Communion. It was (saith S. AUGUST.) represented, what ought to be the 
In brevic. coll. coll. 3.  separation of the good from the bad in this world; that they might not communicate in their sins; to wit, separation of hart, by dissimilitude of life and manners: and that otherwise ought not to be understood, that which is written, go out from the middle of them, and withdraw from them, and touch not their uncle annesse; that is to say, be distinguished in living in an other sort, and consent not to their uncleanness.  
But the excellent king saith, that there are other places of scripture, whereby is proved, that which he pretends to gather from the allegorical words of the revelation; to wit, that the visible Church should become so corrupt, as the faithful should be obliged to leave her communion. Now the objections that his Majesty reserves for us in this regard, are either taken from this interrogatory of our Lord, In your opinion the 
Luc. 18. Matt. 24. Aug. ep 80 2. Thess. 2. Apoc. 12.  son of man, when he comes, shall he find faith upon the earth? or from these words; the moon shall not give us her light: Which S. AUGUST. interprete of the Church; or from this prophecy of Saint Paul; the Son of perdition shall be seated in the temple of God. Or out of these words of the same book of the revelation; two wings of a great Eagle were given to the woman, that she might fly into the wilderness; Or from the examples of the pretended eclipses 
In the chap of the comparison of the Christian Church with the jews.  and sincopes of the jewish Church. And therefore, (setting aside the objection of the symptoms of the jewish Church, which we remit to treat of hereafter;) it is fit, that we solve all the rest presently.  
To the first objection then, which is to the interrogatory, that our Lord made to his disciples, when he asketh them; In your opinion, when the Son of man comes, shall he find faith on the earth? We say saint JEROM and S. AUG. have answered it long ago; the one against the Luciferians, and the other against the Donatists: And have showed, that this passage is intended, not of confessed and doctrinal faith; but of iustifiing faith, working by charity; and yet not of the extinction, but of the diminution of this iustifiing faith. The Donatists (saith saint AUG.) allege, that this, 
De unit. Eccl. c. 13.  that our Lord asketh, in your opinion the Son of man uhen he comes, shall he find faith upon the earth? is to be expounded of the revolt of all the earth: which we understand to be said, either in regard of the perfection of faith, which is so oifficult to men, that in the very Saints who where to be admired, as in Moses, there was found some thing wherein they have staggered or might stagger; or for the abundance of the wicked, and the small number of the good. And saint JEROM, speaking 
jeron. cont. Lucifer.  of the Luciferians; If they flatter themselves, (said he,) with this sentence written in the Gospel; in your opinion when the Son of man comes, shall he find faith upon the earth? let them know, that the faith there mentioned, is that, whereof the same Lord said; Thy faith hath saved thee: And agaive of the Centurion: I have not found so great faith in Israel. And a little after: it is this faith, that our Lord hath foretell shall be rarely found: it is this faith that even in those that believe well, is hardly found perfect: Let it be done to thee (said he) according to thy faith. I would not have that word pronounced to me; for if it be done to me according to my faith, I shall perish: and yet I believe in God the father; I believe in God the Son; and I believe in God the holy Ghost.  
To the second objection, which is, that saint AUGUSTINE interprete allegorically these other words of the Gospel: then the moon 
Matt. 24.  shall 〈◊〉 more give her light; to be meant of the Church, which in time of persecutions, whereof he speaks, shall not appear; we answer saint AUGUSTIN means, that she should not appear in her carnal and weak members; but not that she shall not appear in her strong and spiritual Champions; that she shall not appear, or less appear, in her 〈◊〉 part, in her straw, in her dross; because that part will yield to persecutions; but not that she shall not appear in her more excellent part, in her corn, in her gold; which contrariwise will then shine more than before. This appears by what he writes in his Epistle to 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 48.  〈◊〉: It is she (said he) that is sometimes obscured, and as it were shadowed with 〈◊〉, by the multitude of scandals, that is to say persecutions: when the Sinners 〈◊〉 their bow, to wound it the obscurity of the moon, the laws of their heart: but even then she is eminent in her most firm champions. And a little after; It is not in vain that it was said of the seed of Abraham, that is should be as the stars of heaven; and as the sand upon the Seashore; that by the stars of heaven might be meant the faithful, less in number, more steady, and more clear; and by the sand which is on the Seashore, the multitude of weak and carnal men, who sometimes in calm weather appear free and quiet, and sometimes are covered and troubled with the waves of tribulations and temptations. And therefore after he hath said, she shall not appear, he adds; for as much as many, which seemed to shine in 
Epist. 80.  grace, shall yield to persecutions, and fall away; and some faithful persons very firm, shall be troubled. And again; persecution shall so precede, as that defection of some shall follow: that he might show that he means not to say, that the Church shall not appear in her whole body; (otherwise how could he 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 2. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  cry out in an other place: she hath this most certain mark, that she cannot be hidden) but that she shall not appear in some of those that had been her parts. Which nevertheless in matter of application of allegories, where it is permitted to bow the sense of the words, to accommodate it to the grace of the application: and where interpreters content themselves, if the thing signified, answer in any part to that signifiyinge; it sufficeth to make him say. to the end to appropriate the 〈◊〉 of the moon to the Church, that the Church then shall not appear, that is; shall not appear in some of her parts.  
The third objection follows, which is, that saint Paul writes, that the day 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 2.  of the Lord shall not come, till the revolt be first made, and till the man of sin be revealed, and the son of perdition, who shall oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God, or esteemed an object worthy of whorship, even to sit in the temple of God, show himself as if he where God. Now I will not here stand to dispute, what saint Paul means, by this revolt or apostasy, to wit, whether he mean the revolt of the people from the Roman Empire, or the revolt of 〈◊〉 Christians from the Religion of Christ to that of Mahomet; or the revolt of the jews, from under all the temporal principalities, within whose estates they are dispersed, to reunite themselves in a new monarchy under their pretended Messias, that is to say; under Antichrist. As little will I stand to examine, whether this temple of God, wherein the son of perdition shall sit, be to be understood by the material temple of jerusalem, when Antichrist shall have caused it to be re-edified (as Saint IRENEUS cont. haeres. lib. 5. cap. 30. protests in these words: When Antichrist shall have laid desolate all things here in this world, and shall have reigned three years and a half, and shall be set in the temple at jerusalem, than the Lord shall come from Heaven: And as it seems to be gathered from the relation of the speech of Saint PAUL to those words of DANIEL spoken of the jewish temple and cited by our Lord upon the speech of the local temple of jerusalem; the abomination 
Matth. 24  of desolation shall be in the temple; from whence it is that ancient writers 
Greg. 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  note, that julian the Apostata, one of the figures of Antichrist, would have attempted to re-edify it;) Or whether it be to be understood by the jewish nation, whom God had first chosen for his living temple, in which 
〈◊〉. 2  Antichrist shall place his throne, following this prophecy of our Lord to 
joann 15.  the jews; I am come in the name of my father, and you have not received me; if an other come in his own name, you will receive him. Or whether it be to be understood of nations heretofore Christian, in who temples now turned into mosqueas, now there Mahomet the forerunner of Antichrist sits, and that one day shall join with the jews to receive Antichrist. It is sufficinet that all the fathers are agreed upon two things; the one that Antichrist 
In 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  shall be the pretended Christ and Messias of the jews. Antichrist (saith Saint HILARY) shall be received by the jews. And Saint CYRILL of 
Catech 15.  jerusalem saith: he shall deceive the jews, as being the Christ expected by them. And Saint JEROM, We know that Antichrist shall be the Christ of the jews. And S. 
In 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 16.  chrysostom: Christ argues the imposture of the jews, by the expectation of Antichrist, in that they not received him that qualified himself, as sent from God: 
In 〈◊〉. hom. 44.  and him that shall not acknowledge God, but glorify himself to be the sovereign God, they will adore. And Saint AUGUSTINE; Christ by these words, if an 
In joann. tract 29.  other come in his own name, you will receive him; signifies, that the jews shall receive 
In 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 105.  Antichrist. And again: The jews shall fall into his net, of whom our Lord hath said; I am come in my father's name, and you have not received me; an other shall come in his own name, and you shall receive him; And of whom the Apostle writes; that the man of sin and the Son of perdition shall be revealed, who shall 
Cyrill. Alex. in joann l. 3.  oppose and exalt himself above all that shall be called God. And S. CYRILL of Alexandria, speaking to the jews in the person of our Lord: you shall receive (for as God, I know all things,) him that shall come under a self 
Theod. in in ep. diu. decret. c. de Antich.  title. And THEODORET: The jews which have crucified our Lord because he called himself the Son of God, shall give credit to Antichrist, that shall call himself, h the great God. From whence it appears, that neither Antichrist shall take the title of a Christian; nor his faction the title of a Church; although they possess many peoples and nations, which have before possessed the name of a Church: since all the Fathers agree, that he shall be receined by the jews. The other thing wherein the Fathers agree is, that this apostasy shall bring no interruption to the course and visible succession, of the Catholic Church; that is to say: it shall not hinder, but that there shall be always a Christian Society illustrious and eminent above all false and pretended Churches, from 
In psalm. 70.  whose communion it shall be forbidden to depart; as Saint AUGUSTINE declares in these words: If the Church should not be here till the end of the world: why did Christ say, I am with you to the end of the world? And in an other place, speaking of the very comeinge of Antichrist, whose reign he deemed should be but three years and a half: Let none imagine, (saith he) that that little while that the Devil 
De civet. dei l. 20. c. 8.  shall be unbounded, there shall be no Church upon the earth. And shortly after, disputing whether, while that short space of time lasted, the devil should be so unbound, as that he should hinder any from entering into the Church, either Children by baptism, or men by Conversion, but 
Ibidem.  said he: We should rather believe, that even then there will not want people, both to go out of the Church, and to come into the Church; for certainly both fathers will be so courageous as to give baptism to their children; and those that then begin first to believe, will be so constant, as they will conquer this strong one, even although he be unbound. Whereby he shows plainly, that he speaks not of a Church hidden and unknown, but of a Church visible, and exposed to the eyes and knowledge of men.  
The sowrth objection is, that the woman, that had brought forth him, that aught to rule the nations, fled into the wilderness. And again, that two wings of a 
Apoc. 12.  great Eagle, were given to the woman to fly into the wilderness. For these two retreats into the wilderness, are but one retreat, repeated by two several descriptions; between the which is inserted the fall of the devil, to show the the cause of the revenge, that he would have exercised upon the woman. From this retreat than they conclude, that the Church shall then be invisible. But besides, that the same answers already propounded against the arguments, which are drawn from the allegorical expositions of the revelation, are alsoe of force against this allegation; what shall hinder us from interpreting this passage with Saint AUGV. 
De 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 4.  of the blessed virgin, who brought forth him, that aught to rule the nations; and who is described crowned with stars, because she was descended 
Genes. 37.  from the race of the twelve patriarchs, who in joseph's dream were sigured by ste stars: and who is represented environed by the Sun; because according to the translation of the seventy, (which is that the Apostles have followed) the Psalmist singeth; He hath pitched his tabernacle 
Psal. 18.  in the Sun? And who shall hinder us from saying the wilderness, whither she flew, was heaven, into which she was assumed after her death, which the Grecians call wilderness; because it is exempt from all generation, wherefore Pindarus calleth the heaven a desert or wilderness, in these verses:  

If thou of combats honour meanest to sing,  
Seek not, when day on the horizon stays,  
A light more splendid than the Sun, whose rays  
From the ethereal desert, first do springe.   
And that the rest of the seed of the woman were those, of whom our Lord said, showing his disciples; See here my mother and my brethren? For 
Matt. 13.  though Saint john make mention of the pains of childbirth; nevertheless those words may be understood to be spoken according to the ordinary custom of the childbirth of women, as it is written, that the days 
Luc. 3.  of the purification of the childbirth of the virgin, were accomplished, and that she 
Ibid.  presented our Lord in the temple to observe the law, that commanded that every male that opens the womb shall be holy to the Lord. Now if the mention of the pains of childbirth keep us from expounding this passage of the virgin, and obligeth us to transferr it to the Church; what shall hinder us from interpreting still the wilderness to be heaven? and from saying, that the wilderness whither the woman fled, was heaven, into which the first of the faithful persecuted and martyred fled every day by their death; and the Church in their persons; from before the face of the serpent, and were delivered from his Snares, persecutions, and temptations, followeinge this exclamation of Saint JOHN; Blessed are those that die for the 
Apoc. 14:  cause for the Lord, for they shall rest from thence forward from their labours? Or, if we will not by the word Wilderness, understand heaven; who shall hinder us from saying, that this woman was the Church? who having been once amongst the jews, after she had brought forth Christ by the preaching of the Gospel; was persecuted by the jews, that is to say, the people of the Gentiles, which is often understood by the wilderness from whence 
In Psal. 67  it is, that S. AUG. interpreting these words of the Psalmist, When I passed through the wilderness, the earth trembled, writes, the wilderness were the nations, that 〈◊〉 ignorant of God, the wilderness was there, where there was no law given from God, where no Prophets had dwelled, which had foretold, that the Lord should come. And who can hinder us, from Supposeinge, that the relics of the seed of the woman were the jews, who were converred to the Christian Religion, and whose general reunion with the Church shall be made before the end of the world? or who can forbid us to interpret this wilderness to be the exclusion from civil and politic charges, from which the Church was so banished under the pagan Emperors, that the Christians were not admitted to any part of the administration of the Common wealth? For our adversaries will not have, that the number of three years and a half, to which this flight is limited, should be taken according to the ordinary and literal account. Or finally (if it permitted to the last comers, to hope to find the divination of the passages of the Revelation in their conjectures, as the cup of prophecy in Benjamins' Sack;) Who shall hinder us from applying this allegory to the Conversion of the Countries newly discovered, and to in terpret the wilderness to be the India's, and the other hemisphere, which had been so long time left waste and desert from the knowledge of the true God? and from saying, that the two wings are the two navigation of the East and west, by which the Church (that the devil under the ensigns of Mahomet strives to drive from our hemisphere) is gone to visit those regions, conformable to the stile of the Grecians, which call the sails of ships wings, and say wing a ship in steed of setting to the sails? and who shall hinder us from interpreting the Eagle from whence these two wings precede, to be the western part of the Roman Empire, whereof these two navigations are parts? and from expounding the relics of the woman to be the Catholics, that remain under the tyranny of Mahomet? For to expound the woman, to be the secret number of the predestinate: and the wilderness to be invisibility and obscurity, how can it agree with that, that our Lord Cries: If they tell you here is Christ, behold him in the desert, 
Matth. 24.  go not forth: behold him in the secret places, believe them not. And S. AUGUSTINE 
De unit eules. ca 20  after him: It is not an obscure question, and wherein they can deceive you. of whom our Lord foretold, that they should come and say; see here is Christ, behold he is there: see here he is in the wilderness, that is out of the frequency of the multitude: And a while after, that is then the Church that is not in any one part of the earth, but which is well known over all? And how can it be, that, the woman being retired into the wilderness, that is to say, the Society of the predestinate, being shadowed, hidden and obscured from before the face of the Dragon, shall quit the pursuit of the woman, to go make war with the relics of the seed of the woman? for if the woman be invisible, how can the relics of the woman be visible? And if from that, that is said, that the woman flied into the desert, it be permitted to conclude, that the Church shall be invisible: wherefore shall we not by the same reason conclude, that the Babylon of the Revelation shall be invisible? seeing Saint JOHN writes, And he carried me in the spirit into the desert, 
Apoc. 17.  and I saw the woman sit upon the beast? And this we say, not that we pretend to warrant this interpretation more than the rest, but to show, how weak foundation such allegorical allegations are, to build a revolt, and an alteration of Religion upon, and to overthrow so many evident and literal promises of perpetual being, visibility eminency, and purity, as God hath made to his Church.    

Of the consequence of the places alleged by the fathers, for the authority of the Catholic Church. CHAPT XVI.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
NOw to come nearer the point, the king denies that this exact collection of places out of Saint AUGUSTINE, doth in any sort touch him.   

THE REPLY.  
IN truth, if the most excellent King, can prove, that the Church, to which he adheares, hath been perpetually visible, and eminent above all other Christian Societies; (as Saint AUGUSTINE puts this condition 
Cont 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 4.  for one of the necessary marks of the Church, when he saith: she hath this most certain mark, that she cannot be hidden, she is then known to all nations: the sect of Donatus is unknown to many nation, then that cannot be she:) And if he can show, that she hath been not only perpetually visible and eminent, but also perpetually pure from all contagion of Schism and heresy, (as Saint AUGUSTINE protests, that to be of the essence 
De 〈◊〉 & Sym.  of the Catholic Church, when he writes, no heretic belongs to the Catholic Church, because she loves God; nor no Schismatic, because she loves her neighbour. And again, The Church of the Saints, is the Catholic Church; the Church of the Saints, is not the Church of the heretic; she was predesigned, that she might be discerned, and hath been exbibited, that she might be seen. And if he can prove, that she never went forth from the Communion of any other, but that all other went forth from her, and she always remained in her root, visible, eminent, perpetual, immutable, and exempt from all interruption, which is a mark which Saint AUGUSTINE testifies to be inseparable 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  from the Church, when he writes: The Catholic Church, fighting with all heresies, may be opposed, but she cannot be overthrown; All heresies are come out from her, as unprofitable branches out from the vine, but she remains in her vine, in her root in her Charity. In truth I say, if the excellent king can show 
Cont. Cor. 〈◊〉.  these 3. things, I confess freely that this Collection of passages (that out of the Catholic Church none can be saved; that whosoever is separate from the Catholic 
Aug. cp. 152  Cburch, how laudable soever he presumes his life to be: for this only Crime, that he is separated from the unity of Christ, he shall not have life, but the wrath of God shall remain upon him; that he shall not have God for his Father, that will not have 
Aug. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. c.  the Church for his mother; and that it shall nothing avail him to have 〈◊〉 or done such and so many good works, without the end of the sovereign good; that out of the Catholic Church all things may be had but salvation; that he that Communicates 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  with the the general Church, is a Christian and a Catholic, and he that communicates not therewith is an heretic and Antichriste; that it must be 〈◊〉 and undoubtedly held, that every heretic or Schismatic baptised, in the name of the father, the Sonn and the holy Ghost, if before the end of his life he do not 〈◊〉 himself to the Catholic Church, what almsdeeds soever he do yea though he should 〈◊〉 his blood for the name of Christ, can in no sort be saved,) makes not against his Majesty. But if contrarily the excellent king cannot prove, that the Church, to which he adheres, hath taken the original of her visible Communion, continued, and not interrupted, from above 60. or 80. years; and that between the time of the Fathers, from whom that collection of passages hath been extracted, and the time of Calvin's pretended reformation. there hath never been any Church any communion, any Society, any person, that hath held jointly, universally those things, for which England hath divided herself from the visible Communion of that Church wherein she was before; then I had need be instructed to apprehend how these passages make not against his majesty.    

Of the distinction of heretics, and Schis. matickes. CHAPT. XVI.  

The continuance of the king's answer.  
FOr from all these testimonies there follows only this consequently, that there remains no hope of salvation, for those, who are separated from the faith of the Catholic Church, or from the Communion of the same Catholic Church, which the king (as we have said before) grants himself.   

THE REPLY.  
THe Collection of the passages, that I have produced, do not put this alternatively, that amongst those, that are separated, either from the faith of the Catholic Church, or from her Communion; there is no salvation. Otherwise in a thing that the Fathers would should be clear and manifest, they had a perpetual ambiguity, to wit; what it were to be separated from the faith of the Catholic Church. For there would remain always this question, whether the points of separation were points of Faith; and the separation might be made upon such a point, as the one side would say; it were a point of Faith, and the other; that it were not: As the Pellagians disputing against the Catholics, said their difference was not in a point of Faith: And the Catholics said the contrary; and as 
Sus. c. 10.  yet to this day the zwinglians and the Caluinistes disputing against the 
Ibid.  Lutherans, their contestation is not about a point of faith, and the Lutherans say the contrary. But the Fathers absolutely set Down this Maxim, that out of the Communion of the Catholic Church, there is none salvation; reducing all the certainly and evidence of this proposition, that out of the Church there is no salvation, to the separation of Communion. It is true that the separation of Communion, may proceed from either of these two causes, to wit; either from an error in faith, in which case those that forsake the Church are called heretics: or from defect in Charity, in which case they are called schismatics. But because those, that sin either in the one or in the other, cannot be so easily convinced, either of the one, or of the other, as of the separation of the Communion of this visible Church eminent above all heretical and Schismatical sects, whom God would be exposed to the view of all Nations and called Catholic; and to whom he hath affected the promises and prerogatives of the perpetual assistance of his holy Spirit; For this cause, the Fathers and the Counsels of Africa, (Saint AUGUSEINE being 
Conc.  
〈◊〉. 4.  their Secretary,) have pronounced this sentence, (so often before particularised 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aug. 〈◊〉. 152.  by the penns of the preceding authors,) that out of the Catholic Church there is no salvation; without making distinction between those that separate 〈◊〉 from the faith of the Church, and those that separate themselves from her communion; for as much as all those, that separate themselves visibly from the faith of the Church, separate themselves also from her Communion. For there are no declared heretics, but they are withal schismatics also: Only there is this difference, that heretics separate themselves from the Faith and Communion of the Church both together; and the schismatics only separate themselves from her communion: although there are few schismatics, who to the separation of communion, add not the separation of some point of faith. For as Sea-crabbs when they see oysters open, cast in little stones within their shells, to keep them from shutting again, that they may have time to devour them; so when schismatics see a breach made in the Church, to hinder it from closeinge again, they cast points of heresy into their Schism, and from Schismatics become accessorily 
〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 3.  heretics. We esteem (said Saint JEROM) the difference between heresy and Schism to be, that heresy holds a perverse doctrine, and Schism for Episcop all dissension separates men equally from the Church; which difference may well have place a while in the beginning, but in tract of time, there is no Schism that doth not forge to itself some heresy, to seem to have the juster cause to separate itself from the Church. And therefore, when the Emperors speak of the Donatists, who are those principally, (for whom his Majesty added this clause,) or have separated themselves from her communion, they tax them accessorilie of heresy. From thence, saith the law, it is happened, that from Schism heresy is bred 
〈◊〉.  
Theod. l. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 6. l. 4.  And when Saint AUGUSTINE disputes against them, he proves to them, that they are not only schismatics, but alsoe heretics: Thou art (said he to Gaudentius) both a Schismatic by sacrilegious dissension, and an heretic 
Cont. 〈◊〉 l. 3.  by sacrilegious doctrine. But the principal difference that we observe is, that all call those, that have begun with dissension in faith, and to whom Schism hath but the place of an accessary, heretics; and those that have begun with schism, and to whom heresy is come accessorily after the schism, (as the fever after the wound,) schismatics.    

Of the agreement of the ancient Catholic Church, with the modern. CHAP. XVIII.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
ANd here, most Illustrious Cardinal, his Majesty requires from you, that you will represent to yourself, how great Difference there is between Saint AUGUSTINS' time, and this of ours: how the face, and all the exterior form of the Church, (to say nothing of the interior,) is changed.   

THE REPLY.  
THis is the request, that I would myself most humbly make to his Majesty; to wit, to set before his eyes the estate of the Catholic Church in the time of Saint AUGUSTINE and of the four first Counsels: 
c. 10. and those following.  A Church that believed ᵃ the true and real presence, and the oral manducation of the Body of Christ in the Sacrament under the kinds and within the Sacramental kinds, as Zuinglius the principal Patriarch of the Sacramentaries acknowledgeth himself, in these words, 
b 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 2. l. de ver. & sals. relig cap. de Euch.  From the time of Saint AUGUSTINE (that is, 1200. years ago) the opinion of corporal flesh had already gotten the mastery. A church that in this quality 
c 〈◊〉. Cyrill. Ther. ca tech. myst. 5.  adored the Eucharist, not only with thought, and inward devotions, but with outward gestures and adorations actually really and substantially, the true and proper body of Christ. For I will not speak now of 
〈◊〉. in 1. 〈◊〉. hom. 24.  Transubstantiation, for which I reserve a treatise apart. A Church that believed the body of Christ, to be in the Sacrament 
d Cyrill. Alex. ep. ad 〈◊〉. Patric. and others see 〈◊〉. l. 7 c. 9  even besides the use; 
〈◊〉 in Psalm. 96. Theod. 〈◊〉. 2. and other see here after. l. 7. c 8.  and for this cause kept it after Consecration 
e 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 2. Cyp. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  for domestical communions 
f Euseb. 〈◊〉 l 7.  to give to sick persons; 
g 〈◊〉. de obit. 〈◊〉.  to carry upon the Sea, 
h 〈◊〉. hist. eccls l 5  to send into far provinces. A Church that believed 
i See below l. 12. in the chapter of the cómunion under one kind.  that the communion under both kinds, was not necessary for the integrity of participation, but that all the Body and all the blood was taken in either kind: and for this cause 
* See the places above alleged.  in domestical communions, in communions for Children, in communions for sick persons in communions by Sea, in communions of penitentes at the hour of Death, in communions sent into far provinces, they distributed it under one kind. A Church that believed that the Eucharist was 
k Cyp. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ep. 63.  a true, full, and entire Sacrifice, 
l Aug. de 〈◊〉. l. 7. c. 〈◊〉.  it alone succeeding all the Sacrifice of the law; 
m 〈◊〉. c. 4. l. 32.  the new Oblation of the new Testament, 
n Aug. count. Faust l. 20. c. 21.  the external worship of latria of the Christians, and not only an Eucharistiall Sacrifice, but alsoe a 
o Euseb. de vit Con. l. 4. Cyrill. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and other under. l. 8.  Sacrifice propitiatory, by application of that of the Cross; and in this quality offered it, as well for the absent as for the present, aswell for the communicantes, as for the non-communicantes; as well for the living 
a Chrys. in 1. Cor. hom. 41.  as for the dead. A Church that for the oblation of this sacrifice used Altars both of wood and 
b Greg. Nyss. de baptis.  stone, 
c Aug. ubi sup.  erected and Dedicated to God in memory of the martyrs; and consecrated them by certain forms of words and ceremonies, and amongst others by the in shrivinge their relics. A church wherein the faithful made voyages and pilgrimages, 
d Basil. in 40. martyr.  to the bodies of the said Martyrs, to be 
e Aug. supra.  associated to their merits, and helped by their intercessions: prayed the holy martyrs 
f Ambr. de vid. Greg. 〈◊〉 in Cyp. and other under l. 10.  to pray to God for them; 
g Aug. psalm. 63. and 88  celebrated their Feasts, 
h jer. ad Marcell. ep. 17.  reverenced their relics, 
i Idem. cont Vigil.  made use of them to exorcise evil spirits, 
k 〈◊〉.  kissed them, 
l Aug. de civet. l. 22. c. 8.  caused them to be touched with flowers, 
m jer. cont. Vigil.  carried them in clothes of silk and in vessels of gold, 
n Ruff. de hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 33. Chrys. 2 Cor. hom. 26  prostrated themselves before their shrines, 
o 〈◊〉. cont. Vigil.  offered sacrifices to God upon their tombs, 
p Rufman hist Eccl. 2. c. 33. Chrys. 2. Cor. hom. 26.  touched the grates of the places where their relics were kept, 
q Hier. con. Vigil.  took and esteemed the dust from under their relickaryes, and went to pray to the martyrs, not only for spiritual health, 
r Aug. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  but for the health and temporal prosperity of their families, 
s 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. in Theod.  carried their Children, yea their sick cattle to be healed. And when they had received some help from God by the intercession of the said martyrs, 
t Theod. de Graec. aff. l. 8. Paul. Nol. in Foel. nat. 6. Theod. super.  hung up in the temples, and upon the Altars erected to their memory, for tribute and memorial of the obtaining of their vow, images of gold and silver of those parts of their body, that had been healed: And, when the godly and learned Bishops of the ancient time report these things, they celebrate and exalt them, 
v. Basil. de S. 〈◊〉. and others undet lib. 6.  as so many beams, flashes, and triumphs of the glory of Christ. A Church which held 
v 〈◊〉. de S 〈◊〉. & others under 〈◊〉. 6.  the apostolical traditions not written, but consigned viva voce, and by the visible, and ocular practice of the Apostles to their successors, to be equal to the Apostolical writings: and held for apostolical tradions all the self same things that we acknowledge and embrace in the quality of apostolical traditions. A Church that offered prayers both private and public 
w 〈◊〉. de Mon. Aug. de verb. Apost and others under l. 9  for the Dead, to the end to game ease and rest for them, and to obtain that God would use them more mercifully, than their sins deserved; and held this custom for a thing 
a Aug de 〈◊〉  necessary for the refreshing of their souls, 
b Chrys. 〈◊〉 hom. 3  and for a doctrine of apostolical tradition, and placed 
c 〈◊〉. her 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 53  those, that observed it not, in the catalogue of heretics. A Church that held the fast of the 40. days of Lent for a Custom 
d 〈◊〉. ad Marcel. 〈◊〉. 54  not free and voluntary, but necessary, and of Apostolical tradition, 
e 〈◊〉. in compend. & in Anaceph.  and reckoned amongst heretics those that observed it not, and during the time of Lent, as in a general mourning of Christians 
f Conc. l. cod. c. 52.  forbadd the Celebration of weddings, and the solemnisations of marriages. A Church that out of Pentecost held the fast of all the Fridays in the years, in memory, of the Death of Christ, except Christmas day fell upon one, 
g Epiph in compend.  which she excepted namely as an apostolical tradition. For I speak not of wednesdays supplied in the west by satturdaies. A Church that held the 
h 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 de daemon. 〈◊〉. l. 〈◊〉 c 9 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. 〈◊〉 Epiph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 59 and others.  interdiction made to Bishops, Priests, and Deacons to marry after their promotion, for a thing necessary, and of apostolical tradition. A Church that held 
i Epiph. cont. Apostol 〈◊〉. 61.  marriage after the vow of virginity a sin, and that by apostolical tradition, 
k Chrys. ad Theod or 2. Ambr ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. cont. 〈◊〉. 1  and reputed religious men and religious weemen that married after the solemn vow of single life, not only for adulterers, but for incestuous persons. A Church that held the l mingling of water with wine in the Sacrifice of the Eucharist for a thing necessary, and of divine and Apostolical tradition. A Church that held the 
m Aug de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. c. 40  exorcisms exsufflations and renunciations, which are made in baptism, for sacred Ceremonies, and of Apostolical tradition. A Church that besides baptism and the Eucharist, which were the two initiatinge-Sacramentes of Christian Religion, held 
n Aug. count. 〈◊〉. l. 3. c 4.  Confirmation made with the Chrism and the sign of the Cross, 
o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  and allowed only to Bishops the power to confer it, 
p Aug 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Marriage for a true and proper Sacrament, 
q Amb de 〈◊〉. 7. Aug. de 〈◊〉 l. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Penance for a true and proper Sacrament, 
r 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 and others. 〈◊〉 below. 〈◊〉  and vocal Confession to the Pastors of the Church, for one of the Conditions 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 63. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 24.  necessary to this Sacrament, 
s Aug. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 l. 2 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Decent 〈◊〉 8  Order for a true and proper Sacrament: and Extreme Onction for a true and proper Sacrament; which are the seven Sacraments that the Roman Church acknowledges, and 
a Censur. Orient Eccl. c. 7.  the Greek Communion alsoe makes profession to embrace with us. A Church which in the Ceremonies of baptism, used 
b Cyp. ep. 70.  oil, 
c Conc. Carth. 3. c. 5.  salt, 
d Greg. Naz. de bapt.  wax, lights, 
e Aug. cp. 101  exorcisms, 
f Aug con. jul l 6. c. 8.  the sign of the Cross, 
g Amb de Sacr l. 1  the word Epheta and other things that accompany it; to testify by oil, that in baptism we are made Christians, that is, partakers of the unction of Christ; by salt, that God contracted with us in baptism an alliance for ever, following the stile of the Scripture, which calls eternal alliances, alliances of salt; by the light, that Christ is the light, that enlightens all men commeinge into the world; 
h Aug. cp. 205.  by exorcisms, that baptism puts us out of the Devil's possession; 
i Aug. in joamn tract. 1 8  by the sign of the Cross, that it is the Death of Christ that gives strength to all Sacraments; 
k Amb. de Sacr. l. 1.  by the word Epheta, that God accomplisheth spiritually in us by baptism, what he wrought corporally in the deaf and dumb man. A Church that esteemed baptism for persons of full age necessary, with a conditional necessity; 
l Aug. de an. & eius orig. l. 3. c. 15.  and for children necessary with an absolute necessity: and for this cause permitted 
m Tert. de bapt.  lay men to baptise in danger of death. A Church that used holy water, consecrated by certain words and ceremonies, and made use of it 
n Basil. de S. Sparke c 27.  both for baptism, 
o Epiph. haer. 30  and against enchantments, 
p Theod. hist eccls l. 5. c. 23.  and to make exorcisms and conjurations against evil spirits. from whence it is that 
q Theod. hist eccls l 9 ep. 71.  S. Gregory the great, (who, though he were after the first four Counsels, yet not to be excepted against by English men, who took the original of their mission from him.) ordained when Englad returned back from paganism to Christian Religion, that the temples should not be demolished, but expiated by the sprinkling of holy water. A Church, that in the oeconomy of Ecclesiastical ministry held diverse degrees, 
r Conc. I ao c 24. Conc. Carth. 4. c. 2. C. l. tit. 3. l. 6. Hier. ep. ad Tit. l. 3.  the Bishop, the Priest, the Deacon, the Acolite, the Exorcist, the Reader, and the Porter, and consecrated and blessed them with diverse forms and ceremonies; And in the order Episcopal acknowledged diverse seats of iurisdictino of positive right, to wit, Archbishops, Primates, Patriarches, 
s Hier. ad Damas. ep. 77. Aug de duab. ep. Pel. l. 1 c. 1. Conc. Chalc ep. ad Leon.  and one supereminent by divine law, which was the Pope, without whom nothing could be decided appertaining to the universal Church; & the want of whose presence, either by himself or by his legates, 
t Socr. hist. eccls l. 2. c. 10. Soz l. 3 c. 10  or his confirmation, made all Counsels pretended to be universal, unlawful. A Church which held a 
u Cyp ad Magn. ep. 76. Chryso. ad Epiph. ho. 11.  succession of Bishops not interrupted since the first mission of the Apostles, for an essential condition of her; & reputed those, who had it not, or that communicated with those that had it not for schismatics, and cull pable of the same Curse, with Core, Dathan, and 〈◊〉. A Church that held the distinction of Bishop and Priest, and namely in the act of ordination, for a thing of divine law. 
v Hier. ad Euag. ep 85. in fine.  and Apostolical tradition; 
y Epiph. hear. 75. Aug. de haer c. 53.  and condemned as heretics those, that held it not, A Church 
a Aug de great. & lib. arb. c. 2. & ep 46.  that held free will, for a doctrine of faith, & revealed in the holy scripture; 
b Aug. de great. & lib. arb. c. 8 & l. 83 quaest. q 76.  that held that faith only without Evangelicall works, is not sufficient for salvation; 
c Prosp. add artic. sibi impoes.  that wicked men persevering to the end, were reprobates, but not predestinate to evil; 
d Aug. de cor. & great. c. 13.  that the certainty that particular men presumed to have of their predestination, was a rash boldness. A Church wherein their service was said throughout the East, in Greek, and through the west, aswell in Africa as in Europe, 
e Under in cap. of the service in the 〈◊〉.  in Latin; although that in none of the provinces neither of Europe nor Africa (except in Italy, & in the cities where the Roman colonies resided) the latin, were understood by the simple people, but only by the learned. In brief a Church that used either in gender, or in species, either inform or in analogy, the very same ceremonies, which are the words well known the all men, which the Catholic useth universally at this 〈◊〉; 
f Aug ep. 118. Idem psal. 63 & 88  observed the distinctino of the Feasts and ordinary days; the distinction 
g Conc. I. 20. c 22 & 23. 〈◊〉 ad Helio. ep 3. Theod. hist ecc. l. 2. c 27  of Ecclesiastical and lay habits; 
h Hie 〈◊〉 in ep. Theo Optat. l 1.  the reverence of sacred vessels; the custom 
i Theod. hist l. 5. cap 8. Isid. de diu. off. l 2 c. 4.  of shaving 
k Greg Naz. de pac. or. 1.  and unction for the collation of orders, the ceremony of 
l cyril Hier. cat. myrt. 5.  washing their hands at the Altar before the consecration of the mysteries; 
m Conc. Laod c. 19  the kiss of peace before the 〈◊〉, 
n Conc Laod ibid.  pronounced a part of the service at the Altar with a low voice, and wheard: 
o Aug. de civet. l. 22 c. 8.  made processions with the relics of the martyrs, accompanied the dead to their 〈◊〉 with 
p Gregor Naz. in jul. orat 2.  wax tapers in sign of joy and future certainty of their resurrection, had the pictures of Christ and his Saînts both 
q Euseb de vit cont. l 3.  out of Churches and 
r Paulin. ep. 12. Basil. in martyr. Barlaam. Greg. Niss in S. Theod  in Churches, and 
s Prudent. in S. Cassian  upon the very altars of martyrs, not to adore them, as adoration signifies di nine worship, but to reverence by them the soldiers and champions of Christ: 
t Tert de cor. milit.  used the sign of the cross in all their conversations, 
u Aug. de symb. ad catec l. 2.  imprinted it on the forehead of their catechumenists, 
x Cyril. cont jul. l. 6.  painted it on the portal of all the houses of the faithful, 
y Hier. in vit. Hil.  gave the blessing to the people with their hand by the sign of the Cross, 
z 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  employed it to drive away evil spirits, 
a 〈◊〉 p. 11.  proposed in jerusalem the very Cross to be adored on good friday, 
b 〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  used incense in their Synaxes, not particularly incense of Arabia, but indifferently odoriferous gums; for they held not incense for sacrifice as in the time of the law, but for a simple ceremony designed to represent the effect of prayers described by these words of David; Let my prayer arise, even as incense, into thy presence: And 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  by these of the Revelation; The smoke of the incense of the prayers of the Saints, ascended from the hand of the Angel before God. And finally a Church which held, that the Catholic Church had the infallible promise, that she should be 
c 〈◊〉. c 〈◊〉.  perpetually visible and eminent in her communion, perpetually pure and uncorrupted in her doctrine, and in her Sacraments, and perpetually bound and continued in the succession of her ministry, and that 
d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 6.  to her only belongs the keeping of the Apostolical traditions, the authority of the interpretation of scripture, and the decision of controversies of Faith; and that out of the succession 
e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 4. c. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 4 and others 〈◊〉 c. 2 〈◊〉 16.  of her Communion, 
f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aug. psal. 〈◊〉 Idem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 8. Idem 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 1. c. 38  of her doctrine, 
g Cypr. ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 69 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cp. 76. 〈◊〉 ad Epiph 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. c 3. and others under c. 37.  and of her ministry, there was neither Church nor salvation. Behold, what the excellent King, when it shall please him to consider it at sufficient leisure, shall find the Catholic Church to have been in the time of saint AUG. and of the 4, first Councils. Let his Majesty see, whether by these features he can know, the face of calvin's Church, or of ours.    

Of the conformity or inconformity of the sense wherein the word Catholic hath been common to the ancient Catholic Church, and to the modern. CHAP. XIX.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
IN how differing sense the Church is now called Catholic from what it was then.   

THE REPLY.  
I have drawn out this clause, from between the two that precede it, because I would frame an answer by itself: for as much as I believed the intention of the excellent King was, (as it is of other protestants) to say, that the Church bears the name, of Catholic now, in an other sense, than she bore it in S. AUST. time; because than she possessed all nations, and now she possesses them not.  
To this than I answer, that S. AUG. never pretended, that the Catholic Church in his time did absolutely possess all nations, but only by 〈◊〉, that is to say, by application of the name of all, to the greater part; and in comparison of other Christian sects and societies, in regard of which the Catholic Church was so large, as it was called for eminency; the Church of all the nations. Contrariwise where the Donatists set this error on soot, that the Church hadceased, and was perished; the principal 
In psal. 101  reason that S. AUGUST. opposed to them, was, that she was not yet spread over all the nations, and that she must last without interruption, from the first preaching in jerusalem, till the Gospel had been preached throughout the earth, and then should be the end of the world. So as it were to give the lie, to all the promises and prophecies of God, to suppose she were perished; since there were yet many nations, to which she had not yet extended herself. And therefore the Church bore the title of Catholic then, in no other sense, than she doth now: For so far was she from being called Catholic from the ativall possession of all Nations; that not only heresies, whose numbers were very great were excluded; but there were likewise an infinite Company of pagan Nations, to which she was not yet arrived. There are (saith Saint AUGUSTINE amongst us, that is in Africa, innumerable 
Ep. 80.  barbarous nations, to whom the Gospel hath not yet been preached. Which was so confessed amongst the Catholics and Donatists, as the Donatists made use of it against the Catholic Church, to question her Catholic title. If you pretend (saith Petilian the Donatist) that you hold the Catholic 
Aug cont. 〈◊〉. l. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Church behold you are not inpossession of all, for you are passed into a part, And Saint AUGUSTINE confuting the words of Cresconius, Thou arguest vainly (saith he) against the evident truth, that all the world communicates 
Count 〈◊〉. l 3. c. 63  not with us, because there are yet many barbarous nations, which have not 〈◊〉 ived in Christ. And again: how is the world (sayest thou) full of your communion, 
Ibid. ca 66  where there are so many heresies, whereof there is no one that communicates with 
Aug. cp. 48  you? And again, reporting these words of Vincentius: Thou sayest, that as for the parts of the earth, that wherein the Christian faith is named, is but a little portion in comparison of the world. And the Catholics on the other side, made use of it against the Donatists, to prove that the Church had never 
In psalm. 101.  received interruption; But that Church (said the donatists) is no more, she is perished; so say they (said Saint AUG:) that are not in her; o impudent voice, etc. This abominable and detestable voice full of presumption and falsehood, which is under propped with no truth, illuminated with no wisdom, seasoned with no salt, vain, rash, heady, pernicious, the spirit of God hath foreseen it. And a little after; this Gospel shall be preached: where? In all the world: to whom? in testimome to all nations: and what after? and then the end shall come. Seest thou not, that there are still nations to whom the Gospel hath not been preached? etc. and so how is it that thou sayest that the Church is already perished from all nations, since it is therefore that the Gospel is preached, to wit; that it might be in all nations? The Church then in S. AVS. time was not called Catholic for her actual extent into all nations; but she was called Catholic for two other causes; the one, that as more abundant; and the other, that as radical & original Church, she held the place of all, in regard of other Christian Societies. For in all the divisions which were made from the first beginning of the Christian name, not only she remained so full in regard of every sect, that came out from her, that she held the place of the whole, and the separated sect the place of a part; but alsoe in the act of separation, she still remained immoveable; I mean to say, that the change for which the separation happened, was made not in her, but in the heretical sect; So as it was the heretical sect that was separated from her, and not she from the heretical sect: And by consequence to her, as persevering in the same profession, & in the same Estate (wherein the whole Church was before the separation) apertained the right, to hold the place of the whole, and to inherit the being, and advantages of the whole; And to the other, to be reduced into the condition of a part, and to be cut of, and 〈◊〉 from the appellation and 〈◊〉 of the whole: no more nor less, then in the division of a tree, that part, wherein the trunk, the stock, and the root remain, keeps the name of the whole, and the part which is cut of, the name of a branch, and of a part separated from 
Cont. Transt. l. 13. c. 12.  the whole. They understand not (saith S. AUST:) speakeing generally of heretics) that there is one certain, true, & wholesome, and as I may say, germinall & radical society, from whence they are separated, & in an other place; Whosoever is separated from the whole, and defends a part cut off from the mass, or body itself, let 
De Sym. ad. cat. l. 1. c. 5.  him not usurp the name of Catholic: And again: The Catholic Church fight with all heresies, may be opposed, but she cannot be overthrown: All heresies are come forth from her, as unprofitable branches cut off from their vine; but she remains in her vine, in her root, in her charity, and the gates of hell shall not conquer 
Opt. con. Parm. l. 1.  her. And as OPTATUS Milevit before him; We must consider who stays in the root with the whole world, and who is gone forth. For these causes them, and also that the Catholic Church was so eminent, both for perpetuity and extent above all others, as it was easy to judge, that it was to her only, and to no other that the promise had been made, that in her seed all nations should be blessed; and that in her should be denounced the remission of sins through all nations, beginning from jerusalem for these causes I say S. AUG. affirmed that to her only belonged the title of Catholic. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l 3. c. 65.  Thou 〈◊〉 (saith he against Crescomius the Donatist) the rest of the nations that the Church hath not yet possessed; and takest no heed, how many she hath 〈◊〉, from whence she daily spreads to finish the possession of the rest. For how dost not thou deny the future perfection of these prophecies, thou that fearest not to deny so great in 〈◊〉, to which the perfection is due? And in an other place; 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 7.  Although there are many kinds of heresies amongst Christians and that all would 〈◊〉 to be Catholics, and call the rest except themselves., heretics; there is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Church if you cast your eyes over the whole world) more abundant in multitude and, (as those that know themselves to be of it affirm,) more sincere in truth, than all the rest; but of the truth, that is an other question That which sufficeth for this dispute is, that there is one Catholic Church, to which different heresies impose different names; they being nevertheless all called by their particular 〈◊〉 that they dare not disavow; from whence it appears in the judgement of arbiters not possessed with favour, to whom the name of Catholic, (whereof they are all ambitious) ought to be attributed. By which words S. AUG. elegantly declares, that the Church was not called Catholic because she was actually, and at oneself same time over all Nations; but for this cause amongst, others, that in multitude of people and in extent of nations, she exceeded each one of other Christian societies.    

Of the comparison of the Church with the City built upon a Mountain. CHAP. XX.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
FOr heretofore the Catholic Church (like the City built upon a Mountain, which could not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) was not way subject to be called in question, but was evident and certain to all, in such 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 no body of an undistracted spirit, could doubt of it.   

THE REPLY.  
IT seems that the excellent King holds this word (that cannot be hidden) to have reference only to the City built upon a Mountain, and will not have it belong to the Church but by accident that is; when she resembles the 〈◊〉 built upon a Mountain: That is to say, it seems that his Majesty understands not, that this condition, to be like a city built upon a Mountain, and by consequent not to be hidden, belongs perpetually to the Church: but will have it, that the Church sometimes enjoys this condition, as when Saint AUGUSTINE writ; and sometimes is deprived of it, as afterwards. Nevertelesse Saint AUGUSTINE who is the 
Cont. Pet. 〈◊〉 104. D 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 14.  best interpreter that can be of his own words, saith that the Church hath this most certain mark, that she cannot be hid. And again that of her it is said: The city built upon the Mountain, cannot be hid. From whence it appeareth, that this Epithet of being unconcealeable, belongs not by accident to the Church when she shall be found like the city built upon a hill; but appartaines to her properly, directly and perpetually. For where his Majesty adds, that the Church was then so manifest, as no man in his right wits could doubt of her; that was true; and so is she still at this day in regard of all those, that agree upon the true marks of the Church; that is to say, in regard of those, that, according to God's promises, design the Catholic Church by the perpetuity of her continuance; and by the eminency of multitude and extent over nations above all other Christian Sects. But to all heretics and schismatics, who rejected those marks, and would receive no sign for a note of the Church, but only purity of manners, or trial of doctrine, of which they attributed to themselves the judgement, by interpretation of Scripture made according to their sense; the Church was not only doubtful, but altogether hidden. It is (saith S. AUG. (a condition common to all heretics, 
Cont. Parm. l. 2. c. 3.  not to see that thing which is in the world the most apparent, an't built in the light of all nations: out of whose unity all that they do, though they seem to do it with great care, cannoe more warrant them from the wrath of God, than the spider's webs against the extremity of cold.    

Of the conformity or inconformity of the Donatists and Protestants in the question of the Church. CHAPT XXI.  

The continuance of the king's answer.  
FOR she was not shut up in any corner of the world, lying I know not where, in the South, as the foolish Donatists affirmed, but she was spread in leught and breadth, over all the space of the Earth.   

THE REPLY.  
THE Donatists held not, that their Church was enclosed by right, and for ever into Africa; but only in fact and for a certain time; no more than the Caluinistes, who have pretended, that the true visible Church had been reduced for many ages into the Province of Albigeois, and other bounds, and afterward in some valleys of Dolphiny. And yet the Donatists did not make this confession with their good will, but in their own defence by constraint: Contrariwise they attempted with all their power, to show, that their Church was not restrained only into Africa. For this cause they kept a Bishop at Rome, whom they had sent to 
Optat. l. 2.  a few African Donatists that dwelled there; They had plented a pretended Church in Spanie, in the territory of a Lady called Lucilla that favoured 
August. de unit. Eccl. c. 3  them; They had made the false Acts of the mock Council of the Arrians holden at Philipopolis near Sardica to pass current instead of the true Council of Sardica; because in the letters of those Bishops, amongst the 
Idem ep. 163.  names of the Bishops, to whom they were addressed, their was the name of Donatus the false Bishop of Carthage, one of the Bishops of the Donatistes' party; thereby to make it credible, that the Council of Sardica had communicated with them; yea when they entered into conference with the Catholics, they grew to be so impudent, (but that it was confounded at the instant,) as to maintain that their communion was spread over all the earth. here first (saith Saint AUGUSTINE speaking 
Aug. ep. 163.  of the conference that he had with Fortunius the Donatist) did he attempts to 〈◊〉, that his Communion was over the extent of the earth: I asked him there 〈◊〉, whether he could address communicatorie letters, which we call formal, whither I 〈◊〉 appoint; and I affirmed, (as it was manifest to all,) that by this means the 〈◊〉 might be easily determined, etc. but because the thing was evidently false, 〈◊〉 out of this discourse by confusion of 〈◊〉. And finally, when they 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the visible 〈◊〉 of the Church, they had recourse to the 〈◊〉 universality, and said they communicated invisibly with all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and hidden members of Christ, which were spread over all the world; for it is against them, that saint AUG. disputes, when he writes; It 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 16.  〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that God hath other sheep which I know not, but God 〈◊〉 care of them: he is too absurd in humane sense, that imagines such things. By 〈◊〉 whereof their cause, who have separated themselves from us in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ages, can be no way distinguished in the point of the Church, from that of the: Donatistes.    

Of the extent of the ancient Catholic Church, and the modern. CHAP. XXII.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
Flourishing under the Emperors, whose dominion was extended from the East to the West, and 〈◊〉 the north to the South.   

THE REPLY.  
THE Church was spread much beyond the bounds of the Roman Empire, for it was extended in Africa, besides the Roman provinces, under many barbarous Kings; to the 〈◊〉 of Arabia under Mawia Queen of the 〈◊〉: in Persia under the King of Persia: in Gothland, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  under the Kings of the Goths, where she was cruelly 〈◊〉 in saint AUGUST. 〈◊〉; and the unity of the Empire was not always an 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  on to make her more flourishing and distinct; but oftentimes caused her to be the more oppressed. For under the Emperors, that were 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 as was Julian, all kind of heresies took hart to assail her; and under the heretical Emperors, that heresy, which they professed, 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 her, as Arrianisme under Constantius, whose Sectaries did 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as the Catholic Church was reduced into narrower 〈◊〉, than she was when the separation of these last ages began: And to 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  prove that it was so, Socrates and Sozomenus do note, that the Catholic procession remained almost shut up within the bounds of the Patriarckshipp of the Latin Church; and on this side the mountain of Tusc is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Illyria; the greater part of the Bishops of the Eastern Empire being either Arrians, or banished from their Seats. In such sort as the Catholic Communion was then far from being so 〈◊〉, as she was when the last divisions were raised. For besides that at 〈◊〉 comeinge, all the Regions of Europe, except some parts of Greece, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Catholic communion; and that in Asia, not only since the expulsion of the Successors of Godfrey king of Palestina, and of Boemond prince of Antioch, the guard of the holy Sepulchre of jerusalem, did always remain to the Latins; and that yet to this day the Patriarch of the Maronites, which is one of the branches of the division of the Patriarkeshipp of Antioch, with all the Bishops of his jurisdiction, hath always lived and persevered to live in the Communion of the Latin Church; and that in Armenia the greater, under the King of Persia, before he was driven thence by the Turks, there were, and yet are many Christians of that communion, which is Called the Latin, and many Monasteries of Saint Dominicke; And that in the Isles of Cypress, Candia, Zante, Chios, Naxos, And other graecian and Asian Islands the Roman communion had place, and hath yet at this day for the most part: and that in Africa the Kingdom of Congo, whose Ambassador came, and died a few years agone in Rome, made profession of the Catholic Religion from before Luther's, time Besides that, I say, the Christians, that inhabited in all the borders of Africa, under the conquest of the king of Portugal; and in those of Asia at ormus, at Calicut, at Goa, at Cochin, and in all the east India's; and those which live at this day under the king of Spain, in whose Estate all is reunited, in the Acores, in the fortunate Islands, in the Islands of Hispaniola and Cuba, in the Continent of America, in the, Phillippinas', in the Molucas, and in other places; suffice to supply the fall of the Roman Communion in the East. Together with this, that all that the ancient Emperors possessed, was not peopled only with the Catholic communion: but there were infinite other Sects, which although, every one taken apart none of them did equal her; nevertheless all joined together, would have surmounted her, witness the Donatists words above recited by Saint 
Con. Cresc l. 3 c. 66.  AUGUSTINE how can you say that the whole world is replenished with your communion, wherein there are so many heresies, whereof no one communicates with you? So as it may be seen, that the Church in Saint AUGUSTINS' time, for being under the Roman Emperors, was no more distinct, nor easier to be discerned from heretical Sects, by external notes, than she was when the last divisions were form; but contrariwise much less, principally in the west; for as much as the watch fullness of the western princes in publishing temporal laws against heretics, hath caused the Catholic Church to remain along time alone in Europe without the concurrence of any other Sect; whereas before, there was scarce any city, that was not infected with diverse kinds of heresies, and of which 
Cont.  we might not say with Saint PACIAN; Entering in these days into a populous 
Sympr. 〈◊〉 1.  city, and finding there Marcionites, Valentinians, Appllecians, and other such like plagues, which call themselves Christians, how should I know the Society of my people, if she were not entitled Catholic?    

Of the communion that the Bishops of the East had by letters with those of the west. CHAPT. XXIII.  

The continuance of the king's answer.  
THen there might be seen the Bishops of the East and the West communicating by their letters, and by their Messengers every day, and when need required, lendinge help, the one to the others.   

THE REPLY.  
IT is true; but of those letters the principal were the consultations of the Synods with the Popes, and the answers of the Popes to the Synods: 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ep. 11.  whereof Saint JEROM speaketh, when he saith, that he had served Pope 〈◊〉 for a Secretary to answer the Synodical consultations of the East and the West: And whereof Pope INNOCENT writes to Saint AUGUSTIN, 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. Aug 〈◊〉. 93.  and to the other Bishops of the Milevitan Council; Through all the provinces, there run always the answers from the Apostolical springe, to those that 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉. 106.  them. And Saint AUGUSTINE himself in his Epistle to SIXTUS Of this there was also sent the relation of the two Counsels of Carthage and Milevis to the Apostolical Sea. And in the Epistle to OPTATUS We have bad care 
〈◊〉. 157.  to convey to you the letters which have been sent from the Apostolical Sea upon this subject, either especially to the Africans, or universally to all the Bishops, for fear least 〈◊〉 they be not yet come to your Holiness. And Pope JULIUS recited 
Athan. Apol. 2.  by Saint ATHANASIUS; Are you ignorant (said he to the Arrians) that the custom is first to write to us, and so from hence may proceed the just decision of things?    

Of these words of the constitutions of Saint Clemen the universal Episcopat is Committed to Bishops. CHAP. XXIII.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
FOR that, that is read in the Constitntions of 〈◊〉, that the universal 〈◊〉 is committed to Bishops: and by consequence that they are all in some sort 〈◊〉, now amazed we read it, and believe it not.   

THE REPLY.  
NEither is the book, that bears the title of Clement's Constitutions of such credit, as it can have authority to decide in matters of Religion. For be it, that it was from the beginning supposed under Clement's name or that it were since altered and falsified by heretics; it is certain, that 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  the authority, thereof is suspected. Saint EPIPHANIUS makes mention of a book so entitled, and saith, that many called it in question, yet as for him 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 2  〈◊〉 rejected it not; The Council of Constantinople surnamed 〈◊〉, held long after, condemned it: And Photius the Patriarch of Constantinople yet 
〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉 c. 113.  later, saith, It can hardly be justified from Arrianisme; which makes it to be 〈◊〉 that it is not the same writing, which bore that name in Saint Epiphanius 〈◊〉; or that it hath since been salsified by the Arrians. Neither doth that book 〈◊〉, either expressly, or equivalently; that all Bishops are in a sort ecumenical. 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 〈◊〉 c 14.  He saith no more, but this, speaking collectively to all Bishops, and not distributively to every Bishop; We write these things, for confirmation 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉; of you to whom the episcopat is committed over all. But if the had said it, what could follow of that? doth not Saint AUGUSTINE say, that the 〈◊〉 all charge is common to all Bishops? and for all that, doth he forbear to protest in the same place, that the Pope is supereminent in a more high 〈◊〉: As 〈◊〉 (saith he) cease not to roar about the pastures of our Lord's 〈◊〉, and to seek every side for inletts to snatch away the sheep bought at so high a 〈◊〉, and that to us all which exercise the office of Bishops, the pastor all charge is common, although thou art 〈◊〉 in a higher degree: And in an other place, that 
Epist. 162  in the Roman Church there hath always flourished the 〈◊〉 of the Apostolical chair.    

Of the comparison of the Pope with other Bishops. CHAPT. XXV.  

The continuance of the king's answer.  
But then the ordinary 〈◊〉 showed, that it was very true, and a thousand examples of history may yet easily demonstrate it.   

THE REPLY.  
ANd wherefore then, (that we may begin this information in the 
Ad hanc enim 〈◊〉 propter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cont. Val. l. 3. c. 3.  age of Saint 〈◊〉, which was the first age after that of the Apostle:, and end it in that of Saint 〈◊〉 the great, whom Calvin will have to be the 〈◊〉 true and lawful Bishop of Rome;) when Saint IRENEUS disputes against the Valentinians, doth he cry: with the Roman Church, because of a more powerful principality; (that is because of the principality of the apostolical Sea) it is necessary that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should agree? for that by this more powerful principality Saint IRENEUS meant not the 〈◊〉 principality of the City of Rome, but an other more powerful principality, to 〈◊〉; the Spiritual principality of the Apostolical Sea; we have 〈◊〉 both from the same Saint IRENEUS, who in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 period called the Roman Church, the greatest and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rome, 〈◊〉 the two most glorious Apostles 〈◊〉 and Paul: And from Saint AUGUSTINE, who saith; In the Roman 〈◊〉 hath 
〈◊〉 ep. 〈◊〉.  always flourished the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Apostolical seat: And from Saint PROSPER Saint 〈◊〉 second soul, who writ, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gent. l 2. c 6.  of the apostolical 〈◊〉 hath added more greatness to Rome, by the Tribunal of Religion, then by that of the Empire. And why then (when VICTOR had excommunicated the Churches of Asia the lesser, upon the question of Easter day, which they observed not according to the universal tradition of the Apostles, but according to a local and particular tradition, which had been instituted for a time in their Provinces;) did not the same Saint IRENEUS reproach to him, that he could not do it, and that he had no more power to cast them out of the Church, than the other Bishops; only admonish him as it shall appear hereafter, that he should not for so small a matter cut of so many, and so great 
under chap 42.  Churches? He exhorted him (said EUSEBIUS) not to cut of all the Churches of God which held the tradition of this ancient custom: And RUFFINUS translating 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l 5 c. 26. 〈◊〉. ibid.  EUSEBIUS, He reprehended him (said he) to have done 〈◊〉 to cut from the unity of the body, so many, and so great Churches. For as for the slanders, wherewith EUSEBIUS and RUFFINUS heretical. Authors, the one an Arrian, and the other an Origenist, both enemies to the Roman 
under chap 42.  Church, do poison this history, they shall be answered hereafter; and it shall be showed, that the censure of VICTOR was so just; that it was after followed by the Ecumenical counsels of Nicaea, and Ephesus. And why then when TERTULLIAN priest of Carthage in Africa, was fallen into the heresy, or rather frenzy of Montanus doth he write, that Praxeas 
〈◊〉. con. 〈◊〉.  had enforced the Bishop of Rome, who did before acknowledge the prophecies of Montanus, Prisca, and Maximilla, and by this acknowledgement brought peace to the Churches of Asia and Phrigia, to revoke his letters of peace already published, and cease to 〈◊〉 the spiritual gifts, persuading him to believe false things of these prophets and of their Churches, and opposing to him the authority, of his predecessors? For the Montanists of Asia and Phrigia having been excommunicated by the Catholic Bishops and Metropolitans of their Provinces; what 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 apud 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. eccls l. 5. c. 16  right could the Pope have to receive them into his communion, and to grant them peace, if he were not head and superintendent of the whole Church? and principally according to the ancient Ecclesiastical discipline, which held, that no Bishop, except he were superior, could receive to his communion those, that had been execmmunicated, by their 
〈◊〉. Nic. 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  own Catholic Bishops? And why then when the same TERTULLIAN declaims against the decree of Pope Zepherinus, (which ordained that Adulterers having done penance, 〈◊〉 be received into the communion of the Church;) doth he call him (though which a 〈◊〉 and heretical scorn,) the great high priest, and the Bishop of Bishops, and the good 〈◊〉, and the blessed Pope? I hear (saith he) that an Edict hath been propounded, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. c. 1.  and certainly peremptorily, to wit; that the great high priest, and the Bishop of Bishops saith, I pardon the crimes of adultery and 〈◊〉, to those that have performed their penance. And again; thou dost sweeten thy sermons with 
Ibid. c. 15.  all the allurements of mercy that thou canst, good shepherd and blessed Pope, and in the parable of the sheep, thou seekest thy Goats. And why then, when the blessed 
Ad Anton. 〈◊〉. 52.  Martyr CORNELIUS had been created Pope did Saint CYPRIAN say, that the Emperor Decius bore with more patience to see a competitor arise in the 〈◊〉, then to see an high priest of God constituted at Rome; or according to 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉. Pamel.  the oldest and best Copies, them to see an high Priest constituted his rival in Rome; alluding to the two titles that the pagan Emperors assumed, the one of Emperor, and the other of high Priest; and comparing the concurrence that the Emperor received in the quality of Emperor, by the creation of a rival in his Empire, with the concurrence that he received in the quality of high priest, by the creation of a Bishop of Rome: And wherefore doth he call the 〈◊〉 Church the Chair of Peter, and the principal Church, 
Ad Cornel ep. 55.  and the original of the 〈◊〉 all unity? They durst (saith he) sail to Rome, and carry letters from profane and Schismatical persons, to the chair of Peter, and to the principal Church from whence the sacerdot all unity is derived. And in virtue of what power did he solicit Pope STEPHEN, to write letters to the Gauls whereby he should depose Martian Bishop of Arles? Thou 
Ad Steph. ep. 67 under chap. 43.  shouldest (saith he) write letters into the province and to the people inhibiting in Arles, by which Martian being deposed, an other might be substituted in his place. And why then when the same Saint CYPRIAN and the council of Africa had embraced the error of rebaptising heretics, which since the 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. c. 9  Donatists have converted into an heresy, did Saint VINCENTIUS 〈◊〉 say; then Pope Stephen of happy memory prelate of the Apostolic Sea, with, 〈◊〉 before his other colleagues resisted it, esteeming it a thing worthy of him to surpass all others as well in devotion of faith, as he surmounted them by authority of place. For as for the angry words that Saint CYPRIAN let slip against Pope STEPHEN (which Saint AUSTIN judges unworthy to be reported) 
under chap 42.  they shall be spoken of hereafter. And why then, the same Pope STEPHEN had deprived of his communion Firmilianus Archbishop of Cappadocia, and the other Bishops: of the Religions of Cappadocia, Cilicia 
Di. Allex. apud 〈◊〉. hist. Eccl. l. 7. c. 5.  and Galatia, for the same error of S. CYPRIAN, but more obstinately defended, did Firmilianus, amongst his other words of fury, (which bore with them their own confutation) that he spewed up against the Pope, reproach to him that he was so senseless; (he that boasted so much of the place of his Bishop's Sea, and gloried that he had the succession of Peter, upon which the foundation of the Church had been established) as to introduce many other Peter, and to constitute a plurality of Churches? 
Firmil. ad Cyp. inter. ep. Cyp. ep. 75.  I am angry (said he) not without cause, with so manifest and evident a folly in Stephen, that he that glorifies himself so much for the place of his Bishop's Sea, and maintains that he hath the succession of Peter, upon which the foundation of the Church hath been set; hath introduced many other Peter's, and constituted new buildings of many Churches, in sustaining by his authority that baptism is amongst heretics. And why then when DIONYSIUS Patriarch of Alexandria had seen, that Pope STEPHEN had shut the gate of his communion from Firmilianus, and the other Bishops of Cappadocia, Cilicia, Galatia, and the other neighbouring nations, did he write to him letters of intercession 
Di Allex. ep. Eu. list. eccls l. 7. c. 5.  and of entreaty upon this subject? I writ to him (said he) beseeching him for them all, or praying him concerning all these things. For as for that, that Saint BASILL Archbishop of 〈◊〉 in Cappadocia omitted not to reckon Firmilianus amongst his Catholic Predecessors, notwithstanding his stain; it was, because he repented afterwards, as Saint 
Aug. cont 〈◊〉. l. 3. c. 3 Hier. cont. Lucif.  AUGUSTINE witnesseth in these words: Those of the East, that had held the opinion of Cyprian corrected their judgement. And Saint JEROM in these; Finally the Bishops themselves, that had conceived with Cyprian, that heretics should be rebaptised, returning to their ancient custom published a new decree, saying; what do we? so to them and to us their Elders and ours have given it by tradition. And why then when the same DIONYSIUS Patriarch of Alexandria was fallen into suspicion of heresy, did the Catholics of Alexandria, in steed of having recourse to the Synods of their provinces, 
Ath. de 〈◊〉. Dion.  come to accuse him at Rome, before DIONYSIUS Bishop of Rome; They went up (said saint ATHANASIUS) to Rome, to accuse him before the Bishop of Rome, being of his own name. And a while after, And the Bishop of Rome 
Ibid.  (the translator hath falsely reported the surname to that of Alexandria) sent to Dionysius that he should clear himself from those things whereof they had accused him, and suddenly he answered and sent his books of defence and apology. And in an other place, Some having accused the Bishop of Alexandria before 
Id desyn. At. & Sel.  the Bishop of Rome, to hold the Son for a creature, and not consubstantial with the Father; The Synod of Rome, (that is to say, the consistory of Rome, compounded of the Bishop's neighbouring upon the 〈◊〉 of Rome without whom the Pope judged nothing of importance, and of the principal Church men of Rome) was offended with him; and the Bishop of Rome writ to him the opinion of all the assistants; and he justifying himself, addressed to him 
Euseb. hist eccls l. 7 c. 29. & 30.  a book of defence and apology. And why then when the council of ANTIOCH twice called from the provinces of Pontus, Capadocia, Cyria, Cilicia, Lycaonia, Palestina, Arabia, and from all the other Provinces of the East, had deposed Paulus Samosatenus, Patriarch of Antioch, and substituted Domnus in his steed; And that Paulus, would not quit the possession of the Church, did the Emperor Aurelian, though a Pagan ordain And that (saith EUSEBIUS very fitly, that it should be delivered to him whom the Bishops of Italy and of Rome, that is, the Bishops of Italy assembled with the Pope should direct it to by writing? For for what cause should EUSEBIUS, who was one of the Bishops of the Patriarkship of Antioch, and besides, as an 〈◊〉 not well affected to the Roman Church, and this word very 〈◊〉; but to show, that the Emperor had in this action, followed the order of the church; and that it was a thing fit for the Ecclesiastical laws, that the 〈◊〉 of Rome should judge the affairs of the East, even after the 〈◊〉 of the East, and synods compounded of a far greater number of 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Bishops and Provinces? When Paul (saith EUSEBIUS) would not quit the 〈◊〉 of the Church; the Emperor Aurelian, being called to this business, ordained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that it should be delivered to him, to whom the Bishops of Italy and of Rome, of the same law, should write back. And the Greek manuscript of the 〈◊〉 of the counsels, kept in the private library of the most Christian king; The Emperor Aurelian, although, a Pagan, sent back the question of Paul 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  to the Bishop of Rome, and to those that were by him, that when they had examined whether he were justly deposed, he might be dispossessed of the Church. And Zonaras and after him Balsomon, not only Grecians, but schismatics: The Emperor Aurelian enjoined the Bishop of Rome and the Bishops that were with 
Zon pret. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  him to examine those things wherewith ` Paul was charged, and if he were justly deposed, to cast him out of the Church of the Christians. Which alsoe since, the 〈◊〉 council of Ephesus did imitate when it reserved, (as shall 
under in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 chap and in chap 29. below in the same Chapters. below there also.  appear hereafter) the judgement of john Patriarch of Antioch to the Pope; and that Iwenall, Bishop of jerusalem said, that the ancient custom, and the 〈◊〉 tradition bare, that the Church of Antioch, was always to be ruled by the Roman: And after the council of Ephesus, the sixth ecumenical council of Constantinople, when they sent back the cause of Macarius Patriarch of Antioch to the Pope. And why then, when the Arrians held their false council at Antioch 1270. years agone, did Socrates an 
Socrat. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 8.  ancient Greek author of 1200, years standing, write; JULIUS Bishop of Great Rome, was not there, nor sent he any in his steed, although the Ecclesiastical Canon forbids to rule the Churches, without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome: 
Soc. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 l 〈◊〉 c. 8.  And likewise Zozomenus a greek author alsoe, and of the same time with Socrates:: JULIUS (said he) reprehended them, that they had secretly and privily 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 9  altered the faith of the Council of Nicaea, and for that against the laws of the Church, they had not called him to the Synod; for there was a Sacerdot all law, which imported, that all things which were done without the advice of the Bishop of Rome, should be invalid. And why then, when Eusebius of Nicomedia, usurper of the Bishopric of Constantinople, and firebrand of the Arrian faction, and the other Arrians his complices saw that the deposition of Saint ATHANASIUS, that they had packed in the council of Antioch, was argued of nullity, because the Pope's authority did not appear therein; Did they advise themselves, to repair this defect to prevent the Pope, and to pray him to call the 
〈◊〉 2. 〈◊〉. 11.  cause to his tribunal? EUSEBIUS (saith Socrates) having done in the council of Antioch what he listed sent an Ambassador to JULIUS Bishop of Rome, requiring him to be judge in the affair of ATHANAS, and to call the cause before him. And this not after the voyage of S. ATHANAS. to Rome as Socrates and Sozomene and the Protestants with them pretend; but before; as JULIUS recited by S. ATHANASIUS, & saint ATHANASIUS himself, and THEODORET do writness. ATHANASIUS (said JULIUS) is 
Athan. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  not come to Rome of his own motion, but having been called, and having received 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 from us. And saint ATHANASIUS, EUSEBIUS and his party writ to Rome, that is to 〈◊〉, to the Pope; they writ alsoe to the Emperors CONSTANTINE and CONSTANT & C. that is to say to CONSTANTINE Emperor of the Gauls, whose residence was at Treuers, and to CONSTANT Emperor of Itali and Africa, whose residence was at Millen; but the Emperors rejected them; and as for the Bishop of Rome, he answered, that we should keep a Council where we would. And 
Athan. pol. 2.  in an other place; The Eusebians writ to JULIUS, and thinking to terrify us, demanded of him that he would call a Council, and that himself, if he would should be the judge thereof: That is to say, they demanded, either that the Pope would keep a Council out of Rome, in which the cause might be judged in the presence of his Legates; or that he should judge it himself 
Athan. apol. 2.  at Rome, if he pleased; And a while after; But when they heard the news of our arrivull at Rome, they were troubled, not expecting our coming thither: And THEODORET; as soon as ATHANASIUS received the citatior from 
Theod. 〈◊〉 eccls l. 〈◊〉 c. 4.  JULIUS, he transported himself in diligence to Rome.  
And why then, when the same JULIUS objected to the Arrians the enterprise of the Council of Antioch, did he reproach them, that against the custom of the Church, they had deposed saint ATHANASIUS in the Council of Antioch, without attending first for a decision from Rome? Are you ignorant (said Pope JULIUS in the second answer to the Arrians, 
Athan. apol. 2.  recited by saint ATHANASIUS) that the custom is, that we should be first written to, and that from hence the just decisions of things should proceed? And therefore if there were any suspicion conceived against your Bishop there, you must have written to this Church. A manifest argument, that the request, that the Arrians a while after the Council of Antioch had made to the Pope, to 
Fragm.  call the cause of ATHANASIUS before him, and to call a Council to 
Hil. de 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. p. 36.  judge it, or to judge it himself if he would; was no new attribution of jurisdiction to the Pope, (as the adversaries of the Church imagine) but a truce of their rebellion to the Pope's jurisdiction. For how could the Pope, have reproached to the Arrians, that the Council of Antioch, against the ancient custom of the Church, had deposed saint Athanasius without staying for a decision from Rome, if the Pope had not had right to judge the cause of saint Athanasius, but since the Council of Antioch? And how could the Arrians themselves have inserted 15. years after, these words in the false letter, that they enforced Pope Liberius to write against saint Athanasius: I have following the traditions of the ancients, sent on my behalf Lucius, Paul, and Aehanus, Priests of the Roman Church, into Alexandria to Athanasius, to cause him to come to Rome, that we might ordain (himself being present) upon his person what the discipline of the Church exacts: if this right had been from the new attribution of the Arrians, and not from the ancient tradition of the Church, and even from that that JULIUS newly came from speaking of: For the things which we have received from the blessed Peter, I do signify them to you? But let us again go forward with our interrogatories.  
And why then, when the articles of the Eusebians against S. Athanasius were brought to Rome, did the Pope upon the accusation of one of the parties, as the common judge, adjourn or give them both a day, and that following 
Theod. hist. 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 4.  the Ecclesiastical Canon? Julius (saith Theodoret) following the Ecclesiastical law commanded the Eusebians, to present themselves at Rome; and gave assignation to the divine Athanasius, to appear in judgement. And why then when those great Prelates; Athanasius Patriarch of Alexandria, Paul Bishop of Constantinople MARCELLUS primate of 〈◊〉 in Galatia; ASCLEPAS, Bishop of Gaza in Palestina; LUCIUS Bishop of Andrinopolis in Thrace; who had been accused of diverse crimes, some Secular; As Athanasius of the crimes of manslanghter and Rape; and other Ecclesiastical, as the same Athanasius to have caused a Chalice to be broken: And Asclepas to have overthrown an Altar; and had been, deposed from their seats by diverse counsels of Thrace and of Asia; and had been heard at Rome; did the 
Soc. hist. eccls l. 2. c. 15.  authors of the Ecclesiastical histories say; that the bishop of Rome restored them, forasmuch as to him (because of the dignity of his sea) the care 
a Ibid.  of all things appartained; JULIUS Bishop of Rome (said Socrates) because 
〈◊〉. hist. 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 15  of the privilege of his Church, armed them with courageous letters, and sent them back into the East, and restored to each of them his place; 
a 〈◊〉.  rebukeinge those that had 〈◊〉 deposed them. And Sozomene, the Bishop of Rome, having examined their 
〈◊〉. hist. 〈◊〉. l. 3. c. 8.  complaints, and found that they agreed touching the decree of the Council of 〈◊〉 received them into his communion as conformable, and of the same belief; And because that to him (for the dignity of his Sea) the care of all things belonged, he restered to every one of them his Church. For as for the out ragious letters, that those 
Under cha 50.  of the East (that is to say, as it shall appear hereafter; the Bishops of the Patriarckship of Antioch and their complices who were Arrians) writ against JULIUS in hate, because he had broken their Council, and restored saint Athanasius: I mean to confute them particularly in an other place. It shall suffice now, that I say two things; one, that these 
Ibid.  letters, having been written by heretical authors, to wit, the Arrians; and reported by an heretical historian, from whom Socrates and Sozoment 
Socr. hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. graec. ed. t. 17.  took them; to wit by Sabinus a macedonian heretic, who took part with the Council of Antioch against the Pope, and against the council of Nicaea, and was a sworn Enemy to the Trinity, to saint Athanasius, 
Ibid. etc. 15 Idem. l. 2. c. 7.  and to the Council of Nicaea; they carried their confutation on their forehead, and are of as little weight, as those that the Lutherans or other Protestants should now write against the Pope. For who knows not that the Pope hath always proved that concerning Religion, that Cicero said of himself, concerning the common wealth; to wit, that none ever declared himself Enemy to the Church, but he took him (the Pope) for his adverse 〈◊〉 at the same time? And the other, that notwithstanding the boldness, or (to 
Soz. hist. Eccl. l. 3. c. 9  speak with Sozomene,) the impudency of these heretical and Arrian letters, the restitution, that the Pope had made of these great persons, and amongst others Athanasius Patriarcke of Alexandria, and of Paul Archbishop of Constantinople, was nevertheless executed and embraced, as just, both in form, and matter, by the universal consent of all the Catholics in the world. Athanasius and Paul (saith Sozomene) recovered each one 
Soz. hist. Eccl. l. 3. cap. 7.  his seat: And in an other place, speaking of the 300. Orthodoxal Bishops of the Council of Sardica, who represented all the Catholic Bishops upon the Earth; They answered (said he) that they could not separate themselves from the communion of Athanasius and Paul; and principally, for as much as julius' Bishop of Rome, having examined their cause, had not condemned them.  
And why then when the same Council of Sardica (where assisted according to the calculation of saint Athanasius, Socrates and Sozomene) more 
Athan apo 2. Hist. 〈◊〉 l. 2. c. 20. Soz. l. 3. c. 12.  than 300. Bishop's: and which JUSTINIAN 
† justin. in 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. cont. 〈◊〉. l. 5. Inchap 50.  calls an Ecumenical Council; And which Vigilius the ancient Bishop of Trent, saith to have been assembled from all the provinces of the Earth: And where saint Athanasius, and the greater part of the same Fathers that had been at the Council of Nicaea assisted, proceeded not to institute the appeals, as it shall appear hereafter; but to rule or to reduce into writing the customs of the appeals; did they ordain, that when a Bishop should appeal to the Pope, it should be in the Pope's choice either to give him judges out of the neighbour provinces, or to grant him legates, which should be transported into those places? If a Bishop (said the Council) having been deposed by the assembly of Bishops of his province, hath recourse in form of an appeal to the most blessed Bishop of Rome, and desires to be heard a new; and that the Bishop of Rome holds it just, that his cause should be reexamined; let him vouchsafe to write to the Bishops, neighbbours to that province. And a little after; and if 〈◊〉 think it fit to send priests from about his person, which may together with the Bishops decide the business having his authority from whom they are sent, that alsoe aught to be allowed. For as for what passed afterward in Africa about the matter of Appeals in lesser causes, that shall be spoken of hereafter, in a chapter by itself.  
And why then when the Fathérs of the same council of Sardica, yielded an account of their Acts to the Pope, did they write to him according 
Hil. in fragm. 〈◊〉 Arim. ex Bib. P. Pithoei.  to the copy which is inserted in the fragment of saint HILARY, and cited tacitly by Pope 
* Int. ep. Aug. ep. 91. Ep. ad 〈◊〉. Galhar.  INNOCENT the first, and expressly by Pope NICHOLAS the first; It were very Good ad convenient, if from all the princes, the Prelates of God would send relations to their Head; that is to say to the Sea of the Apostle Peter.  
And why then when Valens Bishop of Murses in Mysia; and Vrsatius Bishop of Singidon in Hungaria, two of the chiefe Whirlwinds in the Arrian tempest, would depart from the heresy of Arius and from the 
Sulp. Seu. lust. 〈◊〉 l. 2.  slanders that they had invented against saint ATHANASIUS, did they come to Rome to ask the Pope's pardon, and to protest obedience to him? To the absolution of Athanasius (said Sulpitius severn's) there was yet added, that Vrsatius and Valens chief of the Arrians, after the council of sardica seeing themselves excluded from the communion, came in person to crave pardon of julius' Bishop of Rome, for having condemned an innocent. And saint ATHANASIUS; Vrsatius and Valens, seeing these things, were touched with remorse, and going up to Rome confessed their fault, and repenting craved pardon. And themselves 
Idem.  in the act of their penance given by writing to the Pope and inserted in the Relations of saint ATHANASIUS and Sozomene; We confess (said they) to your blessedness in presence of all your priests our brethren, that all those things that are come hither to your ears against ATHANASIUS are false and feigned, and far from being his actions; and for this cause we earnestly desire to have communion with him; and principally because, your pictie, out 
Athan. Apol 2.  of your natural goodness, hath vouchsaffed to pardon our Error: And we farther promise, that if for this occasion either those of the East, or Athanasius himself, do 
Soz. hist. eccls l. 3. c. 22.  maliciously call us to judgement, we will not depart from what you shall ordain.  
And why then when the Emperor constantius would set the last hand to the persecution of saint Athanasius, did Amianus Marcellinus, though a Pagan author report that he solicited Pope Liberius to condemn him not contenting himself, that he had been deposed by a council cmpounded of 300. Bishops of the East and West, unless the Pope himself confirmed 
Amianus Marcellinus. l. 15.  this deposition? Although (said he) that the Emperor know this was done; nevertheless he procured with an earnest desire, that it might be comfirmed by the authority, where of the Bishops of the eternal City, are superiors. For whereas afterward Pope LIBERIUS, overcome by the persecutions of Constantius the Arrian Emperor, gave himself up to sign the condemnation of saint Athanasius, it was after he had been cast out of his seat by the Emperor at the instance of the Arrians, and confined into Thracia; And after he had suffered an exile of two years, and a long continuance of imprisonments, threats of death, and corporal afflictions, and vexations. Now we make a great difference, between those sentences, that Popes pronounce de Cathedra, that is to say, set in their Ecclesiastical Tribunal, & in the form of public and judiciary acts, and with solemn and canonical preparation; and those things, that they do in the form of particular and personal acts, and not as constituted in the state and liberty of ludges, but as reduced into the condition of captives and prisoners; and constrained by the violence of humane fear, such as may Be in a spirit morally constant. And yet here meet three miraculous circumstances, and worthy of God's providence toward the Apostolicks Sea in this history: The first, that as in the solemnity of the Pythian games, wherein the Grecians celebrated the Feast of Apollo, when one of the strings of Eunomius lyre was broken, the greek fables say, that 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  a grasshopper came and set herself upon the lyre, and supplied with her song the defect of the string that wanted; so when LIBERIUS, banished and cast out of his seat by the Arrians, began to be wanting to the consort and 〈◊〉 of the Church; Felix, one of the Deacons of Rome, that the Arrians had caused to be substituted in his place, supplied against their expectation, the defect of LIBERIUS, and so lifted up his voice 
Hier. chron in 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  sor the innocence of ATHANASIUS, and the faith of the Council of 〈◊〉, that he was for this cause driven out of Rome by the Arrians, and (if we will believe the ancient inscriptions) martyred. The second, that when the Emperor had drawn by force from LIBERIUS what he would, he sent him back to Rome, to exercise jointly with FELIX the gowerment of the Church; LIBERIUS in steed of persisting in the conditions, that the Arrians had wrested from him, took up again such a zeal for the protection of the cause of saint ATHANASIUS, and for the defence of the faith, that he despised from thence forward, all the threatenings and persecutions of the Emperor, and did no less imitate saint Peter in repairing the offence of his fall, than he did before in committing it. And the third, that when LIBERIUS was arrived at Rome, 〈◊〉, (if we will believe Sozomene,) died; which was (saith the same 
〈◊〉. hist. eccls l. 4. c. 15.  Sozomene) a notable care of the divine providence in the behalf of S. Peter Sea. A while after (saith Sozomene) FELIX deceased and Liberius alone ruled the Church, which was disposed by the providence of God, lest the seat of Peter should be dishonoured, being governed, by two Rulers.  
But let us return to our interrogatories. And why then when the Arriars had caused LIBERIUS to be removed from Rome, doth saint 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  AIHANASIUS cry, they have not had a reverend memory that Rome was the Apostolic Sea, and Metropolitan of Romania: that is to say of the Roman Empire? For first that saint ATHANASIUS by the word Romania, meant all the Roman Empire, we learn from saint EPIPHANIUS, who saith Manes passed out of Persia into Romania. And in an other place; The fire of 
〈◊〉. 46.  Arius took possession of almost all Romania. And again; Constantine sent letters 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 49.  against Arius throughout all Romania. And from POSSIDIUS, who calleth the Vandals that sacked Africa, the destroyers of Romania. And secondly, 
〈◊〉.  that by the word Metropolitan, he means a spiritual and Ecclesiastical 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aug. c. 30  Metropolitan, and not simply a secular and temporal Metropolitan; a Metropolitan of Religion, and not simply a Metropolitan of state and policy: we learn it from the allusion to the Epistle to the Arrians, that he cues in the same place; in which the Arrians, though scornfully, and ironically had called the Catholic Church, the School of the Apostles, and 
〈◊〉 hist. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Metropolitan of Religion: And from the Epistle of saint JEROM against john By hop of Jerusalem in which he said, that the Council of Nicaea ordained 
〈◊〉. 61  that 〈◊〉 should be the Metropolitan of all the East: that is to say, the spiritual and Ecclesiastical Metropolitan of all the East.  
And why then, when the Macedonians in the Council of Lampsacus in 〈◊〉 resolved to reunite themselves to the Catholic Church, did they send EUSTATHIUS Bishop of Sebaste in Armenia; THEOPHIL. and 〈◊〉, and other Asian Bishops to Rome, who after their confession of faith, subscribed with their hands, added these words to Pope 
〈◊〉 hist. Eccl. l 2.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any one after this confession of faith expounded by us, will attempt any accusation against us, or against these that sent us, let him come with letters from thy Holiness before such orthodoxal Bishops, as thy Holiness shall please to appoint and contest with us in judgement; and if there do a crime appear, let the authors thereof be punished.  
And why then, when the same Eustathius who had been; deposed from the Bishopric of Sebaste in Armenia by the Council of Militine in Armenia and showed to the Council of Tyana in Cappadocia the letters of restitution, that he obtained from Pope Liberius, was reestablished in his Bishopric? Eustathius, (writes S. Basile to those of the West,) 〈◊〉 
Basil. ep. 74.  been cast out of his Bishopric, because he had been deposed in the synod of Militive, advised himself to find means to be restored, to travail to you. Now of the things that where propounded to him by the most blessed Bishop LIBERIUS, and to what he submitted himself, we are ignorant; only he brought a letter which restored him; which being showed to the Council of Tyana, he was reestablished in his Bishop's seat.  
And why then, when the abrogation of the Council of Arimini was in question, did saint BASILE write to S. ATHANASIUS; It seemed to 
Basil. cp. 52.  us, to be to good purpose, to write to the Bishop of Rome, to be watchful over these parts and give his judgement to the end that since there is difficulty in sending from thence persons in behalf of a common and synodical decree, he may use his authority in the business, and choose men capable of the labour of the way etc. and having with them the acts of Arimini, that they may disannul those things that have been done by force? For whereas in an other place, the same saint BASILE, stung with the intermission, that the Bishops of the west had made, in communicating by Ecclesiastical letters with him, upon an advertisement 
Ad Euseb. ep. 8.  that had been given at Rome, that he communicated with heretics, cries against the pride of those of the west; and saith, that they knew not 
Ep. 10.  the truth, (that is to say, the truth of the Eastern affairs;) neither had prtience to learn it: And again, that they should not by affliction add pain 
Ep. 77.  to those that were oppressed and humbled, nor esteem that dignity consisted in disdain: It was not to tax those of the west, that they stretched their jurisdiction to far, that he spoke this language; but chose to tax them, that they took not sufficient notice of the Asian affairs, as it appears by the letter he writ to them in the name of himself, and all the Bishops of Cappadocia, whose Metropolitan he was; which 
Ep. 77.  contained these words; We are ready to be judged by you, provided that those, which slander us, may appear face to face with us in the presence of your Reverence. And again; Comfort us with your peaceable letters, and with your charitable communications, easinge, as by a sweet somentation, the wound which your former negligence hath made in our hearts. And that which he 
Epist. 10.  adds to the first complaint, that those of the west prevented with false suspicions, did the same things in his behalf, as they had done in the cause of Marcellus, to wit, that they took them for adversaries, that reported the truth to them, and established heresy in trusting too much in their own opinions; not that he pretended the Pope had ever approved the heresy of Marcellus: Only he meant to say, that those of the west, not having been informed that Marcellus taught 
Athan. Ad solit. vit. agent.  an other doctrine in Asia, then that he had professed at Rome, which was Catholic. The restitution that the Pope had made of his person 
Soc. l. 2. c. 15.  to the primacy of the lesser Galatia, was an accidental cause; that in the East they adhered to his heresy. 
Soz. l. 3. c. 7   
But let us go on with our demands. And why then, when the Synod of the west, holden under Pope DAMASUS, did disannul and abolish the Council of Arimini, doth he say that the number of Bishops assembled at Arimini, how great soever it were, could be of no weight, because neither the Pope LIBERIUS, whose judgement should first of all be attended; nor VINCENTIUS Bishop of Capua, who had been Pope SYLVESTERS Legate in the Council of Nicaea, whose confirmation or information, was treated of in that of Arimini, and who came then from being the legate of Pope LIBERIUS for the same effect to the Emperor 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  CONSTANTIUS; nor many other had ever consented to it? The multitude of the Bishops, said the Council, assembled at Arimini, aught to make no preiudication; since this confession was composed without the consent of the Bishop of Rome, whose sentence should be attended before all others; or that of VINCFNTIUS, who had for so many years administered the Bishop's seat 〈◊〉 
Theodor. hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 22.  or that of many others.  
And why then, when the Emperor Valeus had caused PETER the Patriarch of Alexandria, to be driven from his Patriarkeship, and had placed 〈◊〉 in his 〈◊〉; did PETER obtain letters of confirmation from Pope DAMASUS, which restored him, and approved the faith of MOSES 
Soc. hist. Eccl. l. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  new Bishop of the Arabians? PETER (saith Socrates) being returned from Rome into Alexandria, with letters from DAMASUS Bishop of Rome which confirmed the saith of Moses, and the creation of Peter; the people encouraged drove away Lucius, and restored PETER in his place.  
And why then, when the Emperor GRATIAN became an administrator of all the Empire, was the first thing he had care of, to ordain that the Churches, that had been possessed by heretics, might be delivered to the 
Theodor. hist. Eccl. l. 〈◊〉. 2.  Bishops, that were of the Pope's communion? He ordained (saith THEODORET) that the sacred houses might be delivered to those, that communicated with Damasus; which was, as he further saith, executed throughout the world.  
And why then when Sapores to whom the execution of this Edict had been committed in the East, arrived at Antioch, did he find three Competitors in the Patriarckship of Antioch, Paulinus, Miletius, & Apollinarius, which reported themselves all three to be in the communion of DAMASUS because each of them would have had the possession of the Patriarkship of Antioch to be adjudged to himself? Sapores coming to Antioch, (saith THEODORET) and showing the law of Gratian; Paulinus affirmed that he 
Theod. ibi. c. 3.  was of DAMASUS his party; the same Apollinarius affirmed, hiding the venom of his error. And 〈◊〉 writing afterward to Pope DAMASUS; Miletius 
〈◊〉 ep. 58  and 〈◊〉 (so was the successor of Apollinarius called) and Paulinus say, that they communicate with 〈◊〉; I would believe them, if but one said so; now either two lie, or all three.  
And why then, when the Emperor Theodosius the great was associated to the Emperor Gratian did they make this famous law, which marches 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 1.  in the front of the Code of Justinian: We will, that all the people ruled by the Empire of our clemency, shall live in the same religion which the divine Apostle Peter gave to the Romans, as the religion insinuated by him until this present witnesseth, and which it is manifest that the high-Priest Damasus followeth, and Peter of Alexandria, a man of Apostolic sanctity: that is to say; this Peter Patriarch of Alexandria, 
Soct. ubi supra  that Socrates said, that Pope Damasus had newly confirmed & restored.  
And why then, when S. JEROM priest of Antioch, and resident in the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. her.  Patriarkship of Antioch, and created by Paulinus the Bishop of Antioch, 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 61.  whom he calls an admirable man, and high Priest of Christ; addressed his first letters to Pope DAMASUS upon the business of the division 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. cp 27.  of the Church of Antioch why I say did he write to DAMASUS: I am 〈◊〉 in communion with thy blessedness, that is to say; with Peter's chair; I know the 
Ad Damas. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Church is built upon that rock; whosoever eats the lamb out of this house is 〈◊〉 etc. I know not Vitalis; I reject Miletius; I am ignorant of Paulinus; whosoever gathers not with thee, scatters; that is, whosoever is not of Christ, is of Antichirst? For whereas the Protestants object, that saint JEROM says in the praeludium of this passage, that he follows no chief but Christ; it is a Corruption of the copies of Bosle, and other the late Copies which read nullum primum nisi Christum sequens, that is to say, following no chief but Christ; where it should be read nullum praemium nisi Christum sequens, that is to say; following no reward but Christ; as it appears, both by the aim of S. JEROM, which is to protest, that he had not recourse to the greatness of the Pope, for the desire he had to obtain any temporal reward, but for the only ambition he had to obtain the reward of souls, which is Christ; and by the 
Caus. 24. q. c.  copies of saint JEROM, which passed currant five hundred years ago, and which the author of the decree hath followed, which read proemium, and not primum, that is; reward and not chief, conformably to the stile of the Church which singsin the hymn of the Martyrs;  

O God thy Soldier's only guard, 
Gregor.   
Their lot, their crown and their reward.   
And why then when the perfidiousness of Vitalis was discovered, did saint GREGORY Nazianzen write, that Pope DAMASUS, who in the beginning had received him into his communion under a profession of a captious faith cast himout of the Church, and from the Priesthood, by a sentence of interdiction and anathema? Let them not accuse us, (said 
Greg. Hat. ad Cledon. ap. 2.  saint GREGORY Bishop of Nazianza in Capadocia) for having first approved the faith of Vitalis, which at the instance of blessed DAMASUS bishop of Rome he gave him set down in writing, and now disallowing it etc. for that profession, if it be well understood, is accompanied with piety, if evil with impiety. And a little after: Whereof DAMASUS himself having afterward been otherwise infor med, and havingle arnt that they persisted in their first exposition, interdicted them, and blotted out their profession of faith by anathema.  
And why then when the council of the one hundred and fifty Fathers assembled at Constantinople entitled the second ecumenical council; where assisted all the Patriarches, metropolitans, and principal Bishops of the Eastern Empire, had been celebrated; did they demand the confirmation of their decisions of Faith from the Pope; and namely that of the 
Theod. hist. eccls l. 5. c. 9  deposition of Timothy, one of the Bishops: of the East, deposed for matters of Faith? Whereas your Charity my dear children, (saith Pope DAMASUS, 
Ibid.  in his answer to the council) yields due reverence to the Apostolic sea, it shall turn you to great honour? And a while after; But what need was there to exact from me the deposition of Timothy, since he was long since deposed here, with his Master Apollinarius, by the judgement of the Apostolic sea, and in the presence of Peter Bishop of Alexandria! For whereas the demand of this confirmation is not to be found in the Epistle of the council of Constantinople, reported by THEODORET; it is, because that Epistle is not the letter of the council of the one hundred and fifty Fathers, but of an other council celebrated the year following at Constantinople by some of the same Fathers, either called back again, as THEODORET pretends; or remaining of the former council as it appears by the tenor of that letter.  
And why then (when the same council had confirmed the election that the Syrians had made of Flavianus instead of Miletius competitor of Paulinus to the Patriarkshipp of Antioch, and had reunited in Flavianus person both their Rights) did the Pope call the cause to Rome, before a council that he assembled there, and by his letters, accompanied with those of the Emperor GRATIAN sent for the council of Constantinople which had confirmed this election to cause them to come and put it again to trial at Rome, and gave assignation to both parties to appear there, whereof one, to wit, Paulinus appeared, but Flavianus distrusting the equity of his cause, had recourse to excuses and delays? The Ecclesiastical 
Ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  necessity (saith saint JEROM) drew me to Rome with the holy Bishops, PAULINUS and EPIPHANIUS, whereof the one governed the Church of Antioch in Syria, and the other the Church of Salamina in Cypress. And again When the Imperial letters had drawn to Rome the Bishops of the East and west 
Ad Eustoc. cp 17.  Paul saw there the admirable men and Bishops of Christ, Paulinus Bishop of Antioch, 
Soz hist. eccls 7. c. 11.  and Epiphanius Bishop of Salamina in Cypress. And Sozomene: the Bishop of Rome (said he) and all the western Praelates bore the ordination of Flavianus very impatiently. And a little after: And therefore, because it should be 〈◊〉, 
Ibid.  they together with the Emperor 〈◊〉 writ and called the Bishops of the 
Theod. hist eccls l. 5. c. 9 Theod hist. eccls l. 5 c. 9  East into the west: And the same Fathers of the council of Constantinople excusing themselves to the Pope, and the council of Rome that they could not come to Rome moved, (said they) with brotherly charity, you have called us as your members, by the letters of the most religious Emperor etc. But besides that, our Churches but a while before beginning to be restored if we should have done this, had been 〈◊〉 abandoned; it was a thing which many of us could no way put in execution, for as much as we traveled to Constantinople upon the letters of 
Ibid.  your Reverence sent the last year after the council of Aquilea to the most religious Emperor Theodosius, having prepared us for none, but that only journey of Constantinople, and having gotten the consent of the Bishops remaining in the Provinces for none but that. And towards the end of the Epistle speaking of PAULINUS, whom they believed Pope DAMASUS favoured, as having been 
Russ. hist. l. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  created Patriarcke of Antioch by Lucifer Legate to the Pope LIBERIUS, his predecessor: we 〈◊〉 you not to prefer the favour or friendship to one particular 
Ibid.  man, before the edification of the Churches, that by this means the Doctrine of saith and Christian Charity being confirmed amongst us, (that is to say: of those of the East amongst themselves) we may cease to have in our mouths these words condemned by the Apostle I am of Paul, and I of Apollo, and I of 〈◊〉: that is to say, we should cease from saying, I am a Miletian, I am a Paulinist. I am an Appolinarist. For that it is which those signify, I am of Paul, I am of Apollo, I am of Cephas, which do not design (as our adversaries pretend,) the Pope and the Bishops of the Empire of the haste, but the three factions whereinto the Churches of the Eastern Asia had been divided and rend under Paulinus, Miletius and Appollinarius. And indeed how could those of the East, mean by those words. amongst 〈◊〉 the Pope, and themselves; they that were so tied in communion to the Pope as they had not been restored to their seats (as Theodoret said 
Theod. hist eccls l. 5. c. 2  but even now) but under condition to communicate with the pope? but that is so clear as it needs no proof; let us go on.  
And why then, when the evasions of Flavianus (who withdrew himself because he knew he had been ordered against the oath made 
Soc hist. eccls l. 5. c. 〈◊〉.  between Miletius his predecessor and Paulinus, that the longest liver of them two should remain the sole Patriarch) had been discovered, and 
〈◊〉 hist eccls l. 7. c. 11. Theod. hist eccls l. 5. c 23.  that the complaints thereof were arrived to the Emperor THEODOSIUS, then only Emperor, who resided at Constantinople; did the Emperor make him come from Antioch to Constantinople, and pressed him to go to Rome, even after the departure of the council of Rome? The Emperor (said THEODORET) often called upon, made Flavianus come to Constantinople, 
Ibid.  and commanded him to travail to Rome, but Flavianus answering, it was winter and promising to perform his command in the return of the Spring, returned into his country. And a while after, the Emperor having again made him come to him, again commanded him to transport himself to Rome. For that THEODORET, Suffragan of the Patriarkship of Antioch, and creature to one of Flavianus successors. adds that the Emperor touched with the second answer of Flavianus, sent him back to his province, and took upon him protection of his cause, is a testimony, that hath more relation to favour then to truth; as it appears by these words of saint AMBROSE, written after the council of Capua. which was holden under Pope SIRICIUS Successor to DAMASUS; Flavianus hath cause to fear, 
Amb. ep. 78.  and therefore he flies a trial. And again, one only Flavianus not subject to laws as it seems to him, appears not, when we are all assembled. And a while after; Flavianus only is exempted, as he pretends, from the conditions of the Sacerdotal College, who will neither exhibit his presence to the Sacerdotal assembly, nor to the imperial decrees.  
And why then when Paulinus was dead, and that Euagrius was substituted in his steed, did the same council of Capua (which the third Council of Carthage calls an universal council, and that S. AMBROSE 
〈◊〉 Carth 3. c. 38.  describes, as assembled from an infinite number of Provinces) continue the first proceeding of the Pope; and seeing that Euagrius had appeared, and that Flavianus persevered in his contempt delegated THEOPHILUS Bishop of Alexandria, whose Patriarkship bordered upon that of 
Amb. ep. 78.  Antioch to examine it: The sacred Synod (saith saint AMBROSE in his Epistle to Theophilus) having committed the right of examining this affair to your unanimity and to our other colleagues of Egypt, it is necessary that you cite again our brother Flavianus. And why then when the council of Capua had given this commission to THEOPHILUS Patriarch of Alexandria, 
Amb. Ibid  did saint AMBROSE write to him, that he should, after he had judged it procure his judgement to be confirmed by the Pope? Certainly, (said he) we conceive, that you should relate the affair, to our holy brother, the Bishop of the Roman Church, for we presume that you will make no judgement that can displease him. And a little after; To the end that we having received the tenor of your acts, when we shall see that you have judged so as the Roman Church will undoubtedly approve it, we may reap with joy the fruit of your examination. And why then (when it appeared that EVAGRIUS Successor to PAULINUS had been evil ordained, for as much as Paulinus only had imposed his hands upon him, and that Flavianus by this occasion remained without a competitor) did Theophilus send a legation to Rome to put Flavianus again into the Pope's grace; and Flavianus an other, to obtain the 
Soc. hist. eccls l. 5. c. 15.  restitution of communion with the Pope? THEOPHILUS (saith Socrates) having sent the priest I sidorus appeased Damasus (you must read Anastasius) that was offended, and represented to him, that it was profitable for the concord of the people, to forget the fault of Flavianus; and so the communion being restored to Flavianus, the factions of the people of Antioch, a while after (that is to say, under Pope Innocent the first) were reconciled And Sozomene speaking of saint JOHN CHSOSTOME Archbishop of Constantinople, who had a little before been a priest of Flavianus, and for that cause affected him: JOHN (saith 
Soz. hist. eccls 8. c. 3.  he) prayed Theophilus to labour with him, and to help him, to make the Bishop os of Rome to be propitious to Flavianus; and to this end there were deputed Acacius Bishop of Beroe and Isidorus. And THEODORET, although for his partiality, he be not altogether to be credited in this cause, speaking of the Emperor THEODOSIUS his voyage to Rome: The Emperor (said he) exhorted 
Theod. hist eccls l 5. c. 23  them to extinguish this unprofitable contention (for you must read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and represented to them that Paulinus was already dead, 
Sec Nicephorus l. 12. c. 24.  and that Euagrius came not by lawful means to the prelacy. And a little after: Then upon the exhortation of the Emperor, those of the west promised to lay aside all 
Theod. hist eccls l 5. c. 23.  bitterness and to receive the Ambassadors that Flavianus should send: which the divine Flavianus having learned, he sent to Rome a legation of most famous Bishops, and priests, and Deacons of Antioch; for all which the chief was Acacius Bishop of 〈◊〉 in Syria, renowned through all parts of Sea and land. But here is too much of this history: let us pass on to the rest.  
And why then when Saint AMBROSE, Archbishop of Milan (a city where the Emperors of the west, made their residence, speaks of his brother Satyrus, doth he say, that when he had escaped Shipwreck, and was cast upon the Isle of Sardinia, he inquired of the Bishop of that 
〈◊〉. Or. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  place, whether he agreed with the Catholic Bishops, that is to say (as himself adds) with the Roman Church? And why then when he excuseth the custom of washing of feet which was practised in the Church of Milan although it was not used in the Church of Rome, doth he cry; We follow in 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  all things, the type and the form of the Roman Church: And again The same Peter is our warrant for this observation, who hath been Bishop of the Roman Church? And why then when he, or the author (that was of his time) of the commentary, that is attributed to him upon the first Fpistle to Timothy, explains these words of the Apostle, to converse in the house of God, Doth he write 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  that Pope DAMASUS was the Rector of the Church? Although (saith he) the whole world belongs to God, nevertheless, the Church is called the house of God, of which at this day Damasus is the Tector?  
And why then, when OPTATUS Milevitanus, that is Bishop of 〈◊〉 in Africa, whom saint AUSTIN calls a Bishop of reverend memory, and whom Fulgentius honours with the title of a Saint disputes. Thou against the Donatists, doth he say to Parmenian a Donatist Bishop; 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 2.  canst not deny, but that thou knowest that the Episcopal chair was first set up in Rome for Peter, in which seat wassett the head of all the Apostles, Peter; whereof also he hath been called Cephas: (so saith he, to allude to the greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies he head; & ressembles the Hebrow, Cephas; that is to say, a stone, from whence this Apostle was named) to the end, that in this only chair, unity should be preserved to all; lest the other Apostles might attribute to themselves, each one his particular chair, but that he should be a Schismatic and a Sinner, that would against the only chair, set up an other? And for what cause after he had cited the catalogue of Popes from saint PETER even to his time, doth he infer from thence, the Donatists could have no chair, and consequently no Church, since they had no communion with the Bishop of Rome? Give us (said he) an account of the original of 
〈◊〉 ibid.  your chair, you that will attribute to yourselves the holy Church? But you 〈◊〉, (quoth he) that you have alsoe some part at Rome; but this is a branch of your Error, sprunge out of a lie, and not from the root of truth: for in the end if Macrobius be inquired of (so was the name of the false Bishop that the Donatists kept at Rome) where he sits there, can he answer in the chair of Peter, which 〈◊〉 he knows not so much as by sight? And a while after; From whence is it then, that you attempt to usurp to yourselves the keys of the Kingdom, you that fight against the chair of Peter by your bold and sacrilegious presumptions? And why then when saint AUSTIN an African as well as he, pressed the same Donatists, did he say to them; In the Roman Church there hath always 
Aug. cp. 162.  flourished the principality of the apostolic Sea. And again, Reckon the 〈◊〉, 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  even since the seat of Peter, and in this order of the Fathers, see who hath succeeded one an other; this is the Rock, that the proud gates of Hell shall never overcome. And in an other place, considering the Popes as successors of 
〈◊〉. 65.  saint PETER according to the other interpretation; to wit; according 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  to that of the figure of the Church; In this order of Fathers (said he) that is to say from Saint Peter to Pope Athanasius, there is not one Donatist: And in his disputations against the Manichees, In the Catholic Church I am detained by the Successiion of Prelates from the Seat of Peter to whom our Lord gave his sheep to feed after his resurrection, unto the present Bishop's seat?  
And why then when the Empress Eudoxia, wife to Arcadius' Emperor of the East, seeing her husband would cause Theophilus to be degraded from the Patriarkship of Alexandria, (but delayed, because, saith the Emperor 
Leo Imp. in vit.  LEO the Learned, that the legates of Rome and of the western Church stayed long ere they came) had cast upon saint Chrisostom Archbishop of Constantinople 
Chrys.  the tragedy, that was begun for Theophilus, and had caused him to be deposed by a council of Bishops assembled at Constantinople under Theophilus Patriarch of Alexandria; did this divine Prelate have recourse by 
Chrys. ap Innoc. cp. 1  letters of Appeal to the Pope? Vouchsafe (saith this sacred golden pen, writing to Pope Innocent the first) to command that these things so wickedly done, and we absent and not refusing judgement, may be of no value, as in truth they are not; and that they, that have carried themselves so 〈◊〉, may be submitted to the punishment of the Ecclesiastical laws. For to think to avoid these words, by saying, faint Chrisostome speaks in plural terms, in his letter as writing to many: Who knows not that it was a common custom with the Eastern authors, and communicated by derivation to those of the west, when they would honour or gratify him, to whom they write to speak in the plural number, to signify, that they consider him, as having in him the authority of many? And this in imitation of the Syrians, who 
Rab: 〈◊〉 Rabbi.  to express master or Lord, called it Rabbi, which signifies many, that is to say, containing in him, the authority of many? God (saith EUSEBIUS' 
Rabbuni.  
Inter ep. Leon. 1. post. ep. 50. Conc. 〈◊〉. sub. Men. act. 1.  Archbishop of Milan in his Epistle addressed only to Pope LEO) hath constituted ye Prelates of the Apostolic sea, worthy protectors of his worship: And the Bishops of Syria writing only to the Emperor justinian; The Lord preserve ye devout zealous and guardians of the faith; And the bishops of the council of Mopsuestia, a city of Asia in an Epistle to Pope Vigilius alone; It was very reasonable, o ye most holy, since ye hold the first dignity of priesthood, that those things which concern the state of the holy Curches, should be represented to 
Conc.  your divinely honoured, Blessedness: And the Pope saint GREGORY in the 
Const.  Epistle addressed to Cyriacus Patriarch of Constantinople alone, to congratulate 
Oocum. 2. Act. 5.  with him for his promotion; In this most blessed Brethren, ye are strong, that mistrusting your own strength, ye trust in the power of God. jointly, that although the acts of the Popes were often dispatched in their name 
Greg. l. 6. ep. 4.  alone, nevertheless they were framed with the consent of the neighbour Bishops which were at their Synods and consistories; As Pope Julius testifies to the Arrians in these words: Although it be I alone that have written, 
jul. apud Ath. in apol 2.  yet I have not only written mine own opinion, but that of all the Bishops of Italy and of these parts. And therefore not only the inscription of saint Chrysostom's Epistle is singular and directed to the Pope alone, but also 
Pal. in. vit. Chrys.  Palladius and Photius cite it, as addressed to the Pope alone. And to hope also to avoid these words by saying, that in the end, not of the copy 
Phot. bibl. c. 86.  which is in saint Chrisostomes' works, but in that which is recited by Palladius, saint Chrisostome adds that he hath written the same things to Venerius Bishop of Milan, and to Chromatius Bishop of Aquilea, it is a vain and frivolous hope. For he intends the same things in regard of the report 
Chrys. ad Innoc. ep. 2.  of the history, but not that in any of his other letters, he useth any of those forms of Appeal: Vouchsafe to command, that these things done against us, may be invalid and that those which have done them, may be submitted to the punishment of the Ecclesiastical Canons. And again; Of one thing I beseech your 
Chrys. ad Innoc. cp. 2.  watchful mind, that although those that have filled all with troubles, be sick of an impenitent and incurable disease, if yet they will remedy these things, that then they may not be punished nor interdicted. More vain were it to hope to avoid them by saying, that saint CHRISOSTOM before he was condemned had appealed to a general council, and that then after his condemnation, he could not appeal to the Pope. For what inconvenience were it, that saint 〈◊〉 before his condemnation, to stay the fury of those 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  that were to be his judges, and his adversaries together, appealed to a general council, which he knew could not be held without the assistance of the Pope, or his Legates? and that after his condemnation, seeing this refuge had failed him, and that all hope of a general council was taken 〈◊〉, because the Emperor and Empress of the East, (against whose wills it could not be celebrated,) had declared themselves his 〈◊〉; 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  he appealed to the Pope? And to add that the Pope also strove to cause a general council to be held, and then the appeal had not 〈◊〉 to him; what incompatibility was there, that the appeal should devolue to the Pope, and that the Pope should judge of the validity of the appeal, and should ordain, that the first judgement should be disannulled, and things by provision set in the same estate they were before: and that to search it to the bottom to clear it, with the satisfaction of all the Provinces, and to hinder a schism between the two Empires, he desired it night be judged definitively in a general council? The rule of 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the 〈◊〉 of Sardica upon the matter of Appeals, (which is that that 〈◊〉 and Zozomene teach us, Pope INNOCENT followed in this case) did it not cast, two things upon the Pope after the interjected 〈◊〉 the one to judge whether the reason of the appeal seemed to him lawful, and in case he found it lawful, to annul the sentence, and to remit by way of entire restitution, the parties in such estate, as they were before: The other, after he had 〈◊〉 the first sentence, to ordain a new judgement should be proceeded to, and to name judges to that effect either taken from the neighbouring Provinces, or sent from Rome to judge the cause with the Bishops of the neighbour-provinces? Now doth not Palladius (that Photius calls a worthy and a diligent writer of the history of saint CHRISOSEOME) witness that the Pope did, when he 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  saith; INNOCENT having received both parties to his communion, determined 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  that the judgement of Theophilus should be abrogated and annulled, saying, they should hold another Synod unreprovable of the Prelates of the west and east? And doth not the success of the history teach us, that saint CHRISOSTOM remained absolved upon the Pope's single sentence, without any 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  council to follow it? And Pope GELASIUS an author of the same age, doth not he confirm this when he writes, a Synod of prelate's yea 〈◊〉 having condemned john of Constantinople even the sea Apostolic alone, 〈◊〉 it consented not to it, absolved him: And why then when saint CHRISOSTOME was dead, did George Patriarch of Alexandria, an author of one thousand years' antiquity, and cited by saint DAMASCENE and 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 Patriarch of Constantinople, and printed in Greek in England, with 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  the greek words of saint CHRISOSTOME and followed by Cedrenus, 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 Harmenopolus, And other greeks) write, that Pope INNOCENT, advertised of his death, excommunicated the Emperor 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  〈◊〉 and the Empress Eudoxia in these words: And therefore I, the 〈◊〉 and a sinner as depositary (or Keeper) of the Throne of the great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 off thee and her from the participation of the immaculate mysteries of Christ our God, and ordain that whtasoever Bishop or Clarke, of the holy, Church of God, which shall presume to administer them to you, after he hath read this 〈◊〉, shall be deposed? For whereas Socrates, and after him Prosper, and 〈◊〉 Comes, reckon the Death of the Empress Eudoxia to be many 〈◊〉 before the death of saint CHRISOSTOME, which is peradventure the cause that moved Photius to say, that this George mistakes himself in some places of the history: this is an Error in Socrates a Novatian author, and an Enemy to saint CHRYSOSTOM'S memory, who in steed of saying (as Cedrenus, Zonarus, Nicephorus, and all the later grecians say) that Eudoxia died three months after the death of saint chrysostom, and under the seaventh consulship of Honorius, and the second of Theodosius, hath said, that she died three months after the exile of S. chrysostom, and under the consulship of Honorius and Aristenetus; perchance deceived by the ambiguity of the greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies sometimes death, & sometimes going out; whereof it is credible, they from whom he took his history, had made use. The proof of the error is, that Sozimus a pagan author, who writ above 30. year before Socratcs, and was eye witness of this history, which Socrates was not; extends the life of Eudoxia many years beyond the banishment of S. chrysostom. For he saith plainly, that the revolt of the Isaureans was after the banishment of john, and that upon the news that came to Constantinople of their revolt, the Emperor sent Arzabacius with an army into Pamphilia to suppress them, who having had many victories and prosperous successes against them, might have wholly rooted them out, had not Arzabacius degenerated from his first vigour, and given himself up to pleasures and covetousness; for 
Zosim. hist. l 5.  which cause he was called back to Constantinople, to undergo a capital judgement; but being returned to the Court, he gave part of his spoils to the Empress, who saved him. Now, besides that it was impossible, that all these things should happen in three months, (and moreover that S. chrysostom testifies, that during his stay in Cucusus, where he spent the 
Marcel. Com. in Chronic.  first year of his exile, the Isaurians had not yet been suppressed by the Romans:) Marcellinus Comes sets down precisely the departure of Arzabacius against the Isaurians, to be the year after the consulship of Honorius and Aristenetus; to wit, under the consulship of Stilicon & Anthemius, a thing wholly incompatible with what Socrates and himself say; that the Empress died the year of the consulship of Honorius and Aristenetus. For how could the Empress save Arzabacius after his return from the Isaurians war, begun under the consulship of Stilicon and Anthemius, if she were dead in the consulship of Honorius and Aristenetus, which was before that of Stilicon & Anthemius? And why did not S. chrysostom himself, in so many letters as he writ in his four years' banishment, make mention of the death of Eudoxia, that was the cause of it; if she were dead 3. months after his departure into banishment? And how could Palladius, (who although he extendes not his history to the time of Arcadius his excommunication, nevertheless he goes on with it to S. Chrysostoms' death) have forgotten to put Eudoxia's death, amongst the examples of the persons that died, for having persecuted S. Chrysostom, if she had been dead, when he writ his history? & therefore also the Emperor Leo, surnamed the learned, 
Leo Imp. in vit.  & Cedrenus, & Zonarus, & Nicephorus, & Glicas', & all the other later greeks, 
Chrys.  have rather chosen to follow Zozimus & George of Alexandria, & their 
Cedr. Zonar. & caete ri in Arcadio.  computation in Eudoxia's death, then that of Socrates; but this observation deserves a discourse of more leisure: let us get ground.  
And why then when the tempest was appeased, would the same Innocent never receive Alexander Patriarch of Antioch, and Atticus Bishop of 
Innoc. ad Alexep. 17  Constantinople into his communion, till they had restored the name of saint chrysostom into the records of their Churches? I have diligently inquired, (saith Pope Innocent writing to Alexander Patriarch of Antioch,) whether the cause of the blessed Bishop john hath been fully satisfied in all conditions; and being informed by those of your legation, that all things have been fully performed according to our desire, I have (giving God thanks) admitted the communion of your Church. And a little after, As for the letters of the Bishop Atticus, because they were joined with yours, I have received them, lest the refusal of a man long ago suspended by us, might be an injury to you; and yet we have sufficiently, and more than sufficiently ordained in the acts, what ought to be observed in his person. And why doth THEODORET say, john being dead, those of the west 
Theod. hist. eccls l. 5. c. 34.  would never admit the communion neither of the Egyptians, nor of those of the East, nor of the Bishops of Bosphorus and Thrace, that is to say, of the jurisdiction of Constantinople, till they had inscribed the name of this admirable personage into the roll of the Bishops his predecessors, and they esteemed Arsacius that succeeded him, not worthy of a bare salutation? And as for Atticus successor of Arsatius after 
Ibid.  many legations and treaties for peace, they finally received him, but not until he had first added the name of john to the other Bishops. For that Theodoret saith this of those of the West, and that saint Innocent recites it of himself, are not things repugnant, forasmuch, that as the greeks by the word Eastern meant the Patriarch of Antioch, and the Bishops of his Patriarkship; and by the word Egyptians, the Patriarch of Alexandria, and the Bishops of his Patriarkship: so by the word Western, they understood, the Pope and the Bishops of his patriarkship, because the Pope never decided matters of moment without some assembly either general or particular of the Bishops of his patriarkship; from whence it is, that in 
Innoc. ad 〈◊〉. cp. 16.  the same letter of Innocent to Alexander, it is added at the end; that twenty 〈◊〉 Bishops of Italy have subscribed to it.  
And why then when the cause of Pelagius and Celestius had been judged both in the East, where Pelagius was, by the Synod of Palestine, and in Africa where Celestius had been, by the Counsels of Carthage and Milevis, did the Council of Carthage write this to Pope Innocent; This proceeding 
Aug. ep 90.  then our holy Lord and brother, we conceived we ought to represent to your charity, that to the statutes of our mediocrity, there might be also applied, the authority of the Apostolic Sea: And again, We doubt not but your Reverence, when you shall have seen the decrees of the Bishops, which are said to be made upon this occasion in the East, will frame such a judgement where at we shall all rejoice in the 〈◊〉 of God? And why doth the Milevitan Council, to which S. AUSTIN was secretary, write these words to Pope INNOCENT: For as much as 
Aug cp. 92.  God by the gift of his principal grace, hath placed you in the Apostolic Sea, and hath granted you to be such in our days, as we ought rather to fear that it should be imputed to us for a crime of negligence, if we should conceal from your Reverence those things, which for the Church ought to be represented to you; then to imagine that you can receive them disdainfully or negligently; we beseech you to apply your pastoral diligence to the great perils of the weak members of Christ: And towards the end; But we believe with the help of the mercy of our God JESUS CHRIST (who vouchsafe to direct you consulting with him, and to heart you praying to him) that those that hold these opinions so perverse and pernicious, will more easily yield to the authority of your Holiness drawn from the authority of the holy Scriptures? And why then when the same Pope INNOCENT answered both the Counsels, did he testify to them, that they had behaved 
Int. ep. Aug. ep. 71. Aug cont. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 2. c. 4.  themselves toward him in the same manner as all the other provinces had done to his predecessors? It was not by human sentence, but divine (said that great Pope in the answer to the Milevitans Council inserted amongst saint Augustine's Epistles, and cited by saint Austin himself in his writings against the Pelagians) that the Fathers have ordained, that all things that are treated in provinces distant and far of, should not be determined, till first they were come to the knowledge of the Apostolic Sea; to the end that the sentence that should be found to be just, might the confirmed by the entire authority of the same Sea; and that from thence, the other Churches as springs, all proceeding from their mother source, and running with the purity of their original, through the diverse Regions of the whole world might take what they ought to ordain? And in the answer to the Milevitan Council, which is alsoe inserted amongst saint AUGUSTINE'S Epistles: You provide (said he) diligently 
Inter epist. Aug. ep. 93  and worthily for the Apostolic honour, for the honour I say of him, that besides assaults from without, sustains the care of all the Churches, following in the consultation of difficult things, the form of the ancient rule which you know hath always been practised by all the world with me: And a while after, & princippally as often as there is question in points of faith; I conceive all our brethren and Colleagues in the Bishop's Sea, ought not to refer what may profit in common to all the Churches, to any but to Peter, that is to say, to the author of their name and dignity. And why then to take away all occasion from replying, that he spoke in his own cause, doth saint AUSTIN, so highly 
Aug. epist. 106.  praise both these answers? Upon this affair (saith saint AUSTIN) were sent the relations of the two Counsels of Carthage and Milevis, to the Apostobick Sea, etc. to all these things Pope INNOCENT answered us as was convenient, and as the Prelate of the Apostolic Sea should answer us. And in the epistle to Optatus; Of this new heresy, Pelagius and Celestius having been authors 
Epist. 〈◊〉.  or most violent and famous promoters, they alsoe by the means of the vigilancy of two Episcopal Counsels, with the help of God, who undertakes the protection of his Church, have also been condemned in the extent of the whole Christian world, by the Reverend Prelates of the Catholic Sea; yea even by the number of two of them, Pope INNOCENT and Pope ZOZIMUS, if they correct not themselves, and besides do not penance. And why then when the Africans had held their last Council against Celestius, did Prosper write: under the twelfth consulship of 
Prosp. in Chron.  Honorius & Theodosius; The decrees of the Council of Carthage of 214-Bishops were carried to Pope ZOZIMUS, which having been approved, the Pelagian heresy was condemned throughout the world? And again Pope ZOZIMUS of happy 
Idem. 〈◊〉 Collat.  memory added the power of his sentence to the decrees of the African Counsels, and to cut of the wicked, armed the right hands of all the Bishops with Peter's sword: And in an other place, speaking of the Roman Church in general: The 
Id. de voc. Gent. l 2. c. 6.  principality of the Apostolical priesthood, hath made Rome greater by the tribunal of Religion, then by that of the Empire? And why then when the Bishops of Africa were assembled at Caesarea in Mauritania, doth saint AUSTIN 
Aug. epist. 157.  say: The necessities of the Church enjoined to us by the Reverend Pope ZOZIMUS Bishop of the Apostolic Sea had drawn us to 〈◊〉.  
And why then when BRIXIUS Bishop of Tours, had been cast out of his Seat, and JUSTINIAN created Bishop in his steed, and Armenius after him, had BRIXIUS recourse to Rome to the same Pope Zozimus, that gave him letters of re-establishment, upon which he was received and restored? BRIXIUS (saith saint GCEGORIE of Tours) transporting himself to Rome, related to the Pope all his sufferings. And a little after, Returning 
Greg. Tur. hist. l. 2.  then from Rome the seaventh 〈◊〉 with the authority of the Pope of the cities, he disposed his way to Tours.  
And why then when Socrates, a Greek author of the same age with Zozimus, produced examples of the translations of Bishops, did he allege in the head of all the other examples, the translation of Perigenes Bishop of Patras, one of the cities of Peloponesus, that the Pope commanded to be made Archbishop of Corinth; And who alsoe in his quality assisted at the Council of Ephesus? Perigenes (saith Socrates) had been ordained Bishop of Patras, but because the citizens of Patras had not received him, the Bishop of Rome commanded 
Soc. hist. eccls l. 7. c. 36.  that he should be Bishop of the Metropolitan Church of Corinth the Bishop of that place being dead, in which Church also he governed all the days of his life.  
And why then when Pope Boniface successor to Zozimus was raised to the Popedom, did S. AUSTIN write to him; Thou disdainest not to be a 
Aug. cont. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. c. 〈◊〉  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the humble, though thou rulest more highly. And again; The pastoral watch is common to us all that exercise the office of Bishops, although thou art 〈◊〉 in a more high degree.  
And why then when Pope CELESTINE had succeeded in the Pontifical dignity to Pope BONIFACE, did Prosper report, that he sent 
Prosp. in 〈◊〉.  GERMANE the Bishop of Auxerra into Great Brittany and made him his legate there, and instituted Palladius first Bishop of Scotland? Pope Celestine (said Prosper) at the instance of Palladius, sent Germane Bishop of Auxerra in his 〈◊〉, that casting out the heretics, he might address the Britons to the 〈◊〉 saith: And again; Palladius was ordered and sent first Bishop by Pope Celestine to the Scots believing in Christ. And why then when Nestorius, Archbishop of Constantinople, begun to trouble the Faith of the Eastern Church, did the same Pope Celestine make S. Cyrill Patriark of Alexandria his Vicar in the East, to judge the cause of Nestorius, and appointed him to excommunicate Nestorius, if within ten days after the receipt of the letters from the Apostolic Sea, he did not anathematise his error? The authority of our Sea (said he) being added to thee, and using with power the representation of our 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  place, thou shalt execute exactly and severely this sentence; to wit, that if within ten 〈◊〉 told, aster signification made to him of this admonition, Nestorius' 〈◊〉 not his naughty doctrines, etc. thy Holiness providing without delay for that 〈◊〉, shall declare him wholly cut of from our body. And Prosper touching the 
Prosp. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  same history; Celestine to cut of the Nestorian impiety, aided cyril the Bishop of Alexandria, most glorious defender of the faith, with the Apostolic sword. And why then, when S. Cyrill had received the Pope's admonition, did he send to signify it to Nestorius, and to the Constantinopolitans in these words: 〈◊〉 are constrained to signify to him by Synodic all letters, that if very speedily, and 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 1. c. 17.  within the time set down by the most holy Bishop of the Roman Church Celestine, he renounce not his novelties and anathematise them by writing etc. he shall no more have any part amongst the ministers of God. And for what cause when Pope 〈◊〉 was come in the age following to Constantinople, did the Religious men of Syria pray him to do the same to Anthimus, Archbishop of 〈◊〉 We pray you (said they) to do to Anthimus, as Celestine did to Nestorius, 
〈◊〉. Cost. sub Men.  assigning him a 〈◊〉 as Celestine did to Nestorius.  
And why then, when the Council of Ephesus proceeded to the condemnation of Nestorius, did they couch it in these terms, Constrained necessarily 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 p. 2. act. 1.  by the 〈◊〉 of the Canons, and by the letters of our most holy Father and fellow minister 〈◊〉, we are come not without many tears, to pronounce this sad sentence against him? And why then when the Legates of the Pope were arrived to the same Council of Ephesus did they thank the Bishops of the Council, for having showed themselves true and holy members of the Pope. We give thanks (said they) to this reverend Synod, that the letters of our 
Ibid. act. 2  most holy and hlessed Pope, having been recited to you, you have by your holy and religious voices showed yourselves holy members, to your holy head: for your 〈◊〉 is not ignorant, that saint Peter was the head of all the faith, and of all the 
Ibid.  Apostles: And again, none doubts for it hath been notorious in all ages, that the holy and most blessed Peter, Prince and head of the Apostles, pillar of the faith, foundation of the Catholic Church, did receive from our Lord JESUS CHRIST, the 〈◊〉 of the heavenly Kingdom, and the power to bind and lose sins, and that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and decides causes yet unto this day, and for all eternity by his Successors: of 〈◊〉 than the holy Successor and ordinary Vicar, and most blessed Pope and Bishop Celestine hath sent us for him as his Lieutenant to this holy 〈◊〉. And why then when there was a question to pass from the cause of Nestorius, to that of john Patriark of Antioch did IWENALL Bishop of 〈◊〉 say in presence of the whole Council, that the ancient custom, and the Apostolic tradition have been, that the Church of 〈◊〉 was to be judged by the Roman? It is fit (said he) that the Right 〈◊〉 
Ibid. part. act. 4.  Bishop of Antioch, john, honouring this great holy and 〈◊〉 all Council, should have recourse hither to justify himself of what is objected against him, and that he should obey and honour the Apostolic Throne of great Rome (sitting with us and with the Apostolic Throne of jerusalem) before which principally it is accustomed by Apostolic tradition and practice, that the Seat of Antioch is to be ruled and judged. For that we must refer the last clause of the period of IWENALL to the Sea of Rome, as 〈◊〉 hath done, (deceiving himself with this that the word to obey governs the dative, and not considering 
In chap. 29  that the verb to honour which is there added, changeth the Rule) it shall be showed hereafter by seven necessary and undoubted proofs. And why then, when the Council proceeded indeed to the cause of JOHN Patriark of Antioch, did they reserve the decision to the Pope? 
Ibid. act. 5.  Being moved (writes the Council to the Pope) with the indignity of the thing we would pronounce against him and the rest the same sentence that he had unlawfully pronounced against those, which were convinced of no crime: but to the end to conquerr his rashness with meekness; although he had most justly deserved to suffer such a sentence, yet we have reserved him to the judgement of thy piety. Which afterward the third ecumenical Council of Constantinople did imitate in the cause of Macarius Patriark of Antioch, as the Emperor Constantine Pogonat 
Cont. Const 6. act. 18.  reports in these words: Macarius Bishop of Antioch and his adherents have been deposed by the consent of the whole Council, and remitted to the discretion of the most holy Pope?  
And why then when HILARY Bishop of Arles undertook to ordain Prelates in the province of Vienna, without the Pope's leave, did the Emperor Valentinian the third make a law, which afterward the Emperor Theodosius the second inserted into his new constitutions, under the title of the law of Theodosius and Valentinian; by which he forbadd that any invocation should be made in the Church without the Pope's licence? 
Constit. Nou.  Whereas (saith the law) the merit of Peter who is the Prince of the Episcopal society, and the dignity of the city of Rome, and the authority of the sacred Synod, 
Theod. & Valent. 〈◊〉 24.  have so established the primacy of the Apostolic Sea; as presumption should attempt nothing unlawful against the authority thereof; for so the peace of Churches shall be maintained by all, if the universality acknowledge her Rector: And a little after, We decree by a perpetual ordinance, that it shall not be lawful, either for the Bishops of the Gauls, or those of other provinces, to attempt any thing against the ancient custom, without the authority of the Reverend Pope of the eternal city: but to them and to all, those things shall be laws which have been ordained, or shall be ordained by the authority of the Apostolic Sea; in such sort, as whatsoever Bishop, being called to the judgement of the Pope of Rome, shall neglect to present himself, he shall be constrained by the Governor of the province, to appear. For to object, that Prosper for all this attempt, did call HILARY Bishop of Arles a Saint, it had been somewhat, if between HILARIES attempt and his death, there had been no penance interposed: but so far was HILARY from persisting in this crime to the end of his days, that he went himself to make personal satisfaction to the Pope: He undertook 
Author 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 15 c. 38.  (saith the author of his life reported by Cuias) a journey to ` Rome on foot, and entered into the Town without a horse or any beast of carriage, and presented himself to Pope Leo, reverently offering him obedience, and requiring with humility that he might ordain of the estate of the 〈◊〉, after the accustomed manner, etc. nevertheless, if it were not his will, he would not importune him: And again; He applied himself wholly, to appease the spirit of Leo, with a prostrate humility.  
And why then, when Eutyches who lived in the time of the same Emperors, pretended that he had appealed from Flavianus Archbishop of Constantinople to Pope Leo, did not Flavianus dispute that he could not appeal, but that he had not appealed? Eutyches (saith Pope Leo, writing to 
〈◊〉 ep. 8.  〈◊〉) affirms, that in full judgement he pretended you a request of appeal, and it was not received; by which means he was constrained to make acts of protestation in the city of Constantinople. And Flavianus answering Leo; Eutyches 
In epist. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  (said he) hath informed you, that in the time of judgement, he pretended to us, and to the holy Council here assembled, libels of appeal, and that he appealed to your 〈◊〉, which was never done by him. And again; Moved then most holy Father with all these attempts of his, and with those which have been done, and are done against us, and against the holy Church, do you work confidently according to your wont courage, as it belongs to the priesthood, and making the common cause, and the discipline of the holy Churches, your own; vouchsafe to confirm by your writings, the condemnation which hath been regularly made against him. And for what 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  cause did the Council of Chalcedon embrace the judgement that the Pope had given against Eutyches after the sentence of Flavianus his own Bishop, as given by a competent judge, and attributed the final deposition of Eutyches to the Pope's judgement? By the decrees of his tyranny (said the Council of Chalcedon, writing to the Pope, and speaking pf the attempts that Dioscorus had made in the false Council of Ephesus) he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 innocent, and bathe restored to him the dignity, whereof he was deprived by your Holiness. And why then when Peter Chrissologus Bishop of 〈◊〉 writ to the same Eutyches, the Epistle which is annexed to the front of all the Greek and Latin acts of the Council of Chalcedon, did 
In epist. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  he say; We exhort thee in these things Reverend Brother, to lend an obedient attention, to the letters of the most holy Pope of the city of Rome, for as much as the blessed Peter, who lives and rules in his own Seat, exhibits the true faith, to those that seek it; for we for the desire we have of peace and faith, cannot hear matters of faith, without the consent of the Bishop of Rome?  
And why then, when Theodoret Bishop of Tire a town near Persia, and subject to the Patriarch of Antioch, had been deposed in the false Council of Ephesus, did he appeal to the Pope? I attend (said Theodoret in his letter 
Theod. ep. ad Leon.  to Pope Leo) the sentence of your Apostolic Throne, and beseech your Holiness to succour me, appealing to your right and just judgement, and command that I transport myself to you, and verify that my doctrine follows the Apostolic steps. And for what cause did Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople, having been deposed by the same Council, appeal to the same Pope? We ought (said the Emperor Valentinian the third writing to Theodosius the second Emperor of the East) to preserve inviolable in our days, the dignity of particular Reverence to the blessed Apostle Peter, that the holy Bishop of Rome, to whom antiquity 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  hath attributed the priesthood above all, may have place to judge in matters of saith, and of the Bishops, etc. for therefore, according to the custom of Counsels, the Bishop of Constantinople, had appealed to him, in the contention which is risers 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. c. 12.  about points of Faith: and Liberatus Archdeacon of Carthage: Flavianus (saith he, the sentence having been pronounced against him) appealed to the Apostolic Sea, by petition presented to his Legates? For to say as the Pope's adversaries do, that the acts of the false Council of Ephesus, which were read again in the Council of Chalcedon, only bare, that Flavianus said to Dioscorus, I appeal from thee, without saying; I appeal from thee, to the Pope; Who knows not, that those acts, as it was represented to the Council of Chalcedon, had been all falsified by Dioscorus, who had put in and put out 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  what he listed, making the Bishop's sign by force to blanks? They have 〈◊〉 us violence with wounds (said the Bishops of the East, to the Council of Chalcedon) we have signed blanks? And Eusebius Bishop of Dorilaus reporting 
Euseb. Doryl. in Conc.  the same history, to the council of Cbalcedon; Dioscorus (said he) inserted in the acts, things that were never spoken, and constrained the Bishops to sign to blanks. 
Chalc. act. 3.   
And besides the exhibition that Flavianus made of his Petition of apppeale 
Leo. ep 23. & Liberat. c. 12.  to the Pope's Legates, and the opposition that the Pope's Legates made for him against Dioscorus, and against all the Council, as soon as 
Act. pseudo synod.  he had appealed; and the appeal that Theodoret the neighbouring bishop to Persia, and companion in Flavianus condemnation putin from the same 
Ephes. 〈◊〉. in Conc Chalc. act. 1.  council to the Pope, resisting and making his appeal be judged of before the Pope; doth it not sufficiently manifest, that it was to the Pope, that Flavianus appealed. 
Thedor. ep ad Leon. & Conc. Chalc act. 1.   
Moreoner, how had Flavianus in saying simply I appeal from thee, made it understood, that it was to an ecumenical council, that he apealed; since, the council wherein Dioscorus condemned him, took alsoe in condemning 
Conc. Eph. 2 relect: in Conc. Chalc act 1.  him, the little of ecumenical, and had been assembled by the Emperor THEODOSIUS the second in the quality of ecumenical and after confirmed as ecumenical; and that to be truly ecumenical, there 
Lex Theodos. Conc. Chalc part 3 c. 19  wanted nothing of the number and plenitude of Bishops, but the only authority of the Pope, which was distracted from it, by the separation of his Legates, whereof some were fled, and the rest remained out of their rank, and amongst the press? Contrariwise, that all the patriarchs of the earth, and all the principal metropolitans, and Bishops of their Patriarkshipps, were there, and that there wanted of the patriarchs none but the Pope alone; is it not a sufficient proof, that Flavianus saying, I appeal and presenting his libel of appeal to the Pope's Legates, and the Pope's Legates, protesting at the same tymt, an opposition against the sentence from which he appealed, that it was to the Pope that he appealed, though the Emperor VALENTINIAN had not also said these express words; The Bishop of Constantinople, according to the custom of counsels, hath appealed to the Pope: and Liberatus these; Flavianus sentence having been pronounced against 
Idem.  him, appealed to the Sea Apostolic? For to object, that the Pope did not retain the judgement of the cause entirely, but desired, it might be judged in a 
pag. 118. 19  general council; have we not already said, that the Pope's custom after appeals, was to do two things; one to judge of the validity or invalidity of the appeal: and in case of validity, to annul the first judgement, and restore by provision, the Appellant to his former Estate. The other, after he had annulled the first sentence, to ordain to proceed to a second judgement; and in case that the Pope would not take the pains to examine it himself, than not to vex parties, to give them judges, either sent from Rome, or taken by commission from Rome out of those parts; or in case of danger of schism between the two Empires, to decree that the cause should be judged, his legates being present in an ecumenical council? Now did not Pope Leo do this in the cause of Flavianus? for first did he not declare the appeal to be lawful, abrogating and annulling the judgement of Dioscorus, and the false council of Ephesus, against Flavianus, and setting things in the same estate they where before, that is to say, restoring Flavianus even after his title of Bishop of Constantinople, and excommunicating all those that did not communicate to his memory, and that without staying till the Council of Chalcedon was holden?  
And secondly, did he not ordain that to pass to a new judgement (where all the proceedings of Dioscorus, and of the false council of Ephesus against Flavianus, might again be put to the trial, and when Dioscorus, if he persisted in his contumacy might be used according to his desert) the holding a general council should be procured, that the matter might be judged under the eye of the Legates, with the knowledge and satisfaction of all the world; for that the Pope and the Council of Rome, prayed 
〈◊〉. 23.  the Emperor of the East, to command, that all things might be set in the same state, wherein they were before judgement, till a greater number of Bishops might be called together from all parts of the world; was 
In chap. 37.  in regard of the temporal laws; for as much as a little while before, the Emperor of the East, a Prince that signed as shall appear hereafter Dispatches without reading them, and whose favour Chrisaphius the Eutychian 
The law of the Emp. Theod. 2. reported at the end of the acts of the council of Chalecedon part. 3.  abused had made a law in his Empire, by which he confirmed the false council of Ephesus, which he believed to be oecumenicke, and the deposition of Flavianus; and ordained that all those that in the east should hold the doctrine of Flavianus, that is to say doctrine contrary to Eutyches heresy, should be either excluded, or dispossessed from their Bishoprickes, and their books publicly burnt, and their adherents punished with confiscation of goods, and perpetual banishment.  
For these causes then, the Pope and the council of Rome, prayed the Emperor of the East, to revoke this law, and to command, that all things in regard of temporal jurisdiction, might be set in the same state as they were before; but not that in regard of spiritual and Ecclesiastical authority, the false council of Ephesus was already disannulled by the decree of the Council of Rome, and so disannulled as Anatolius, that had been made Bishop of Constantinople in the false Council of Ephesus, was fain to renounce the Doctrine of Eutyches, and of the same Council of Ephesus, and the communion of Dioscorus, and to restore the memory of Flaviannus into the records of his Church, and the rest of the East that 
●p. Paleb. Imp●●. ●●d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chal●  would return to the communion of the Pope, were fain to do the same, and this before the Council of Chalcedon. Anatolius (saith the Empress Pulcheria writing to Pope Leo, long before the Council of Chalcedon) hath embraced the Apostolic confession of your letters, rejecting the error that was lately advanced by some, as your Holiness may see by his answer. And Pope LEO himself in the first Epistle to Anatholius Bishop of Constantinople written six months before the Council of Chalcedon, Your charity 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ●p. 38  must (said he) observe in regard of silencing the names of Dioscorus, Iwenall, and ●●●●athius at the holy altar, that which our Legates in those places told you, aught to be done, and which shall not be repugnant to the honourable memory of saint Flavianus. And in the second Epistle to the same Anatolius written four months before the Council of Chalcedon, Remember (said he) to keep this 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 44.  rule, that all those that in the Synod of Ephesus, which neither could obtain nor deserve the name of a Synod, and wherein Dioscorus showed his corrupted will, and Iuu●nall his ignorance, &c: are grieved for having been overcome with fear, and for suffering themselves to be forced to consent to that most abominable judgement; and desire to be received to the Catholic communion, let brotherly peace be restored to them after competent satisfaction; provided that they condemn and anathematise by an undoubted able Eutiches with his doctrine and his Sect. But as for those that have more grievously offended, in this case &c. (he means Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, and Jwenall Bishop of Jerusalem and their complices) if they perchance come to an acknowledgement, and abandoning their own defence, convert themselves to condemn their own error, and that their satisfaction shallbe such, as it shall not seem fit to be rejected, let that be reserved to the more mature deliberation of the 〈◊〉 Apostolic.  
And indeed that it was not by virtue of any appeal of Flavianus to the Council, that the Council of Chalcedon, which likewise had never been held but for the Pope, judged of Flavianus cause but in virtue of Flavianus appeal to the Pope, and the Pope's commission to the council, for the complete review of the cause, three things show it,  
First, the Canon upon which, Pope Leo grounded his procuring a Council after an appeal, was a Canon of the Council of Sardica, concerning appeals to the Pope; The decrees (said he, writing to the Emperor 
Leo ad Theodos. ep. 23.  Theodosius) of the canons made at Nicaea, which have been decreed by the Prolates of the universal world, and whose copies are hereunto annexed, witness that after the putting in of an appeal, the seeking a Synod is necessary. For the Canon annexed to that letter in the greek acts of the Council of Chalcedon, is 
Cancrone. annex. ep. Leo. ad Theod in act grec. Conc. Chalc & in manuser. grec. libls regle Lupar. Conc. Chalc act. 3 & Euang. l. 2. c. 4.  a Canon of the Council of Sardica, though incorrectly transcribed by those that copied it; which Canon Pope Leo calls a Canon of the Council of Nicaea for as much as the Council of Sardica had been as a Seal and an Appendix, to the Council of Nicaea.  
The second, that when the Pope's legates in the Council of Chalcedon, pronounced their judgement upon the punishment that Dioscorus should incur, they pronounced it in these words: And therefore the most holy and blessed Archbishop of the great and ancient Rome, Leo, hath by us, and by this present synod, together with the thrice blessed and worthy of all praise, the Apostle Peter, who is the rock and pillar of the Catholic Church, and the foundation of the right faith, deposed Dioscorus from all dignity, as well Episcopal as Sacerdotal.  
And the third that when the Emperors confirmed in the secular tribunal, the same Council of Chalcedon, to make it temporally executory, they testified that it was by the Pope's authority that it had judged the cause of Flavianus: The synod of Chalcedon (said the law) by the authority of 
〈◊〉. Marc. in Cono. Chalc. part 3. c. 11.  the most blessed Bishop of the City eternal in glory, Rome; examining exactly matters of Faith, and strengthening the foundation of Religion, attributed to Flavianus the reward of his past life, and the palm of a Glorious death. Now how is this any other thing, but to say that which Pope Gelasius writ forty years after in these words: The sea Apostolic delegated the Council of Chalcedon 
Gelas. de Anath. Vin cull.  to be made for the common faith, and the Catholic and Apostolic truth. And again, Flavianus having been condemned by the Congregation of the Greek Bishops, the sea Apostolic alone, because he had not consented thereunto, absolved him; and contrary wise by his authority condemned Dioscorus Prelate of the second sea, who had there been approved, and alone annulled the wicked synod, in not consenting to it; and alone by his authority ordained, that the Council of Chalcedon should be kept? But things incident, carry us away, let us again return to our career.  
And why then when the Council of Chalcedon was open, was the first complaint that was made against Dioscorus patriarch of Alexandria that he had presumed to undertake to keep a general Council, and to be Precedent there without commission from the Pope: Upon which complaint also Dioscorus came down from this Patriarkall seat, wherein he was 
Conc.  first set, and stood in the midst of the place, as an accused party, and 
Chalc. act. 1.  not as judge? We have in our hands (said Paschasinus Bishop of Lylibea in Sicilia, and Legate from the Pope, speaking to the Council) the commaundments of the blessed and Apostolic Prelate of the City of Rome, who is the head of all Churches: whereby he vouchsaffed to ordain provisionallie, that Dioscorus sit not in the council, and that if he attempt it, that he should be cast out. And Lucentius 
Ibid.  Bishop of 〈◊〉 also the Pope's Legate; Dioscorus (said he) must yield an account of judgement, for as much as having no right to do the office of a judge, be attempted it, and presumed to hold a Synod without the authority of the sea Apostolic, which never hath been lawful, nor never was done; And Euagrius, in the narration of the history of the Council; The senate (saith he) having 〈◊〉 of the legates from Leo, what charge there was against Dioscorus; they 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  〈◊〉, that he must yield an account of his own judgement, because against might, 〈◊〉 had usurped the person of a judge, without the Bishop of Rome's permission After which answer, ` Dioscorus by the senate's judgement, stood in the 〈◊〉 of the place.  
And why then when Theodoret Bishop of Cyre a city as, hath been said, in the confines of Persia had been restored by Pope Leo from the Deposition of the Council of Ephesus from whence he had appealed to him, did the Emperor's Officers (who assisted in the Council of Chalcedon to cause 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  order to be observed) proclaim. Let the Right Reverend Bishop 〈◊〉 come in, that he may have part in the Synod; because the most holy Archbishop 〈◊〉 bath 〈◊〉 him to his ` Bishopric, and that (supplied upon this restitution) the most sacred and religious Emperor hath ordained, that he shall assist in the holy 〈◊〉 For that the Emperor had made himself the Executor of the Pope's authority in this Council, it appears by the protestations he had made of it a little before in these words: We conceived that we ought first to 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  address ourselves to thy Holiness, who hast the superintendance and principality of Faith: And again Our desire is, that peace should be restored to the Churches by this Council celebrated under thy authority.  
And why then when the Priests and deacons of Alexandria, presented their Petitions against Dioscorus in the Council of Chalcedon, did they couch them in these terms; all the Council seeing and approving it, and ordaining that they should be registered in the Acts: To the most holy, and most blessed Archbishop and Universal patriarch Leo, and to the most holy and 〈◊〉 Council? For as for the instance that the Bishop of Constantinople made afterward, to participate in this title under the Pope, and in second place after the Pope, as Constantinople being a second Rome it shall be spoken of hereafter.  
And why then when Paschasinus the Pope's Legate, gave his voice upon 
In chap. 14.  the deposition of Dioscorus did he say; That the Pope had pardoned all those, who in the false Council of Ephesus, had by force consented to Dioscorus, that is to 〈◊〉, to almost all the Metropolitans and patriarchs of the Eastern Empire? The 〈◊〉 Apostolic (saith he) grants them pardon for those things, that they committed 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  there against their wills for as much as they have remained unto this time, adhering to the most holy Archbishop Leo, and to the holy and universal Council.  
And why then when the acts of the false Council of Ephesus, were in the Council of Chalcedon annulled, did Anatolius. Bishop of Constantinople pronounce, that of all that had been done in the Council of Ephesus, nothing ought to remain entire, but the election of Maximus Bishop of Antioch, for as much as that had been confirmed by the Pope? My voice (said he) is, that 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  none of the things ordained by the pretended Council of Ephesus shall remain firm, concept that which was done for Maximus Bishop of great Antioch, for as much as the most holy Archbishop of Rome Leo, receiving him into his communion, hath judged that he ought to rule the Church of Antioch. From whence it is also, that the same 〈◊〉, who had been created Archbishop of Constantinople in the false Council of Ephesus, held not his archbishopric from the false Council of Ephesus, but from the confirmation of the sea 〈◊〉, as Pope Leo writing to the Emperor Marcian puts him in mind 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  in these Words: It should have sufficed him, that by the consent of my favour, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Bishopric of so great a City.  
And why then when the Fathers of the Council of Chalcedon framed that famous relation to Pope Leo (which is not only inserted in all the 〈◊〉 and latin Acts of the Western and Eastern libraries, but also is cited by the Greek schismatics and amongst others by Nilus' Arch 
Nil. de primate. l. 〈◊〉.  bishop of Tessalonica in his Book against the Pope) did they write to him, that he had ruled in the Council as the head to the members, and that the Emperors had presided there, to cause order to be observed, that is to avoid such murders and tumults, as happened in the false Council of Ephesus: And put a like difference between the Pope's presidency, and the Emperors; as between the presidency of jesus the high priest of the Synagogue, and that of Zorobabel prince of the jewish people in the building 
Conc. Chalc relat. ad Leon.  of the Temple: You presided (the Council writ to the Pope) in ' this assembly, as the head doth to the members, contributing your good pleasure by those that 〈◊〉 your place; and the faithful Emperor presided, to cause order to be observed; striving jointly with you, as Zorobabel with jesus, to renew in the doctrine, the building of the Ecclesiastical Jerusalem.  
And why then when they came to touch in their relation, the fact of Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, did they call the presidency which he had usurped in the false Council of Ephesus without the Pope's commission TYRANNY: and accused him, to have attempted even against him, to whom the guard of the vine had been committed, that is, against the 
Ibid.  Pope? By the decrees of his tyranny (saith the relation of the Council to the Pope) he hath declared Eutiches innocent, and that dignity which had been taken from him by your Holiness, as from a man unworthy of such grace, he hath restored it to him: And again; And after all these things he hath extended his felony even against him to whom the guard of the vine hath been committed by our Saviour, to wit, against your Holiness?  
And why then when they prayed the Pope to approve the decree, by which they gave the second rank, to the Archbishop of Constantinople did they beseech him, that as they had corresponded with him that was their head when there was question of Faith, so his sovereignty would gratify them in what concerned discipline, using to express the spiritual sovereignty of the Pope by the same word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which had been used to express the temporal sovereignty of the Emperors? We have alsoe (said 
In Conc. Chalc. act. 1. ep. 14.  they) confirmed the canon of the 150. Fathers assembled at Constantinople under the great Theodosius of Religious memory, which ordains that after your most holy and Apostolical Throne, that of Constantinople should have the order of honour, moved with this, that the Apostolic beam reigning amongst you, you according 
Conc. Chalc relat. ad Leon.  to your ordinary government do often spread it toward the Church of Constantinople, because you have accustomed to enrich without envy your posterity (that is to say, the Church of Constantinople, which was extracted from the blood and lineage of that of Rome) with the participation of your goods: And again; We beseech you, then to honour our judgement with your decrees, and that as in what concerns the weal, we have brought correspondency to our head, so your Sovereignty will perform 
Ibid.  in the behalf of your children, that which concerneth comeliness.  
And why then when Pope Leo refused to approve this decree, were the Emperor Marcian and Anatolius Patriarch Constantinople in whose favour it had been propounded, constrained to forbear it, and to leave the business then without effect, as it appears by these words of Pope 
Leo ad Ahant. ep. 96.  Leo to Anatolius: This thy fault, which to augment thy power thou hast committed, as thou sayest by the exhortation of others, thy charity had blotted out better and more sincerely, if thou 〈◊〉 not imputed to the only Council of thy Clergy, that which could not be attempted, without thy goodwill, etc. But I am glad, dear brother, that thy charity protesteth, thou art now displeased with that which even then ought not to have pleased thee: It sufficeth to re-enter into common grace, the profession of thy love, and the testimony of the Christian Prince, and let not his correction seem slow, that hath gotten so reverend a surety? And why then when Anastasius Bishop of Thessalonica and the Pope's Vicar in Macedanico, Achaia, and other Greek Provinces near Constantinople, had abused the authority of his Vicarship against Atticus Bishop of Nicopolis and Metropolitan of the aunciét Fpirus, did Pope Leo write to him; We have in such sort committed our 
Leo ad. Anatt cp. 82.  vicarship to thy charity, as thou art called to a part of the care, and not to the fullness of the power: And toward the end: It hath been `provided by a grand Order, that all should not attribute to themselves all things; but that in every province there should be some, whose sentence might hold first rank; and again, that some others constituted in the greater Cities, might use the more diligence, that by them the care of the universal Church might flow to the only seat of Peter?  
And why then when Ceretius and the other French-Bishops, congratulated Pope Leo for the instruction of the Faith, that he had sent into the 
Int ep. Leon post cp. 49.  East, did they write to him; By good right, the principality of the sea Apostolic hath been constituted in the place from whence there springe forth still the oracles of the Apostolical Spirit?  
And why then when the Emperors Leo and Maioranus, had succeeded the Emperor Marcian, under whom the Council of Chalcedon was kept, did the Emperor Maioranus residing amongst the Gauls, decree by an express law, that every Bishop that should ordain a clerk against his 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  will, should be called before the Pope? If any Bishop (saith the law) 〈◊〉 dispense with himself in this respect, let him be called before the Prelate of the Sea Apostolic, that in that reverend Seat, he may incur the note of his lawless presumption.  
And why then (when the Emperor Zeno, Leo's successor, had caused john surnamed Talaia to be cast out from the Alexandrian, Sea, and set Peter surnamed Mongus in his place) did john appeal to the Pope, who deposed Peter his adversary, and Acacius Patriarch of Constantinople that adhered to him? john (saith Liberatus an African author, and of near eleven 
〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉. c. 16.  hundred years' antiquity) addressed bimselfe to Calandion Patriarch of Antioch, and having taken from him Synodical letters of intercession, appealed to the 
Vict. Tun. in Zen.  Pope of Rome Simplicius. And Victor of Tunes, an author of the same time, and Country: after the consulship of the most noble Longinus, 〈◊〉 Bishop of Constantinople Peter Bishop of Alexandria, and Peter Bishop of Antioch, enemies to the Council of Chalcedon, were condemned by Felix 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 18.  Prelate of the Roman Church; and by a Synod held in Italy, and the condemnation sent to Constantinople to Acacius. And Euagrius a greek author somewhat later; john having taken his flight, and being come to Rome represented to Felix the successor of Simplicius, the things that Peter had done, and persuaded Felix to send a sentence of deposition to Acacius, for the Communion he had with Peter. For though Zacharie an Eutychian author write, that Acacius who was supported by the Emperor Zeno a complice of his heresy, despised 
Vict. Tun. in Zen.  this deposition. From whence it is, that Victor of Tunes saith, that Peter and Acacius died in condemnation; nevertheless, the Pope's Sentence had in the end such effect, as both their names, to wit, Peter Patriarch of Alexandria and Acacius Bishop of Constantinople, they being already dead were razed out of the Records of their Churches, and out of the catalogue of the patriarchs of Alexandria, and Constantinople, and excluded from recital in the mysteries.  
And why then when Hunericus, King of the Vandals, would needs press Eugenius Archbishop of Carthage to enter into conference with the Arrians, did Eugenius (reported by Victor of Utica) answer him, that 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  he might not enter into those lists, without the consent of other Churches, and namely of the Roman Church, which is the head of all Churches? Let the King (said Eugenius) write to his friends, and I will written my 〈◊〉 that our colleagues may come, who with us may show you our common faith, and principally the Roman Church, which is the head of all Churches.  
And why then when Fulgentius an African Bishop of the same time, and the other Bishop, of Africa assembled with him made their answer to Peter a deacon and deputy of the East, did they say to him; The Roman Church which is the top of the world, enlightened with two great lights Peter and 
Fulg. de incárn. & great. c. 〈◊〉.  Paul, 〈◊〉 it is so? And why then when the Emperor Anast asius, Zeno's successor, solicited Macedonius Patriarch of Constantinople to suppress in the service of his Church, the memory of the Council of Chalcedon, did Macedonius answer him, that he could not do it without a general Council 
Theod. Anagn. ad calc. hist. eccls Theo. in edit. Robert. Steph  presided by the Pope? The Fmperor Anast asius (saith Theodorus Anagnostes) pressed Macedonius to abrogate the Council of Chalcedon, but Macedonius answered him he could not do it, without a general Council, wherein the Bishop of Rome must be Precedent.  
And why then when the Bishops of the Eastern Church banded themselves against the prevarication of their Patriarch Acacius did they write to 
Ep. Orient, ad Sym in't Orthodoxogr. impr. Basil. to. 2.  Pope Symachus; Thou art every day taught by thy sacred Doctor Peter, to feed the sheep of Christ, which are committed to thee throughout the habit able earth, not constrained by force but willingly, thou that with the most learned Paul criest out to all thy subjects, we do not rule over you in faith, but cooperate with you in joy.  
And why then when Vitalianus a Scythian had rebelled against the Emperor Anastasius because he persecuted the Catholics, & had borne arms at the gates of Constantinople, did Victor of Tunes say, He would never promise 
Vict. Tun. in Anest.  peace to the Emperor, but upon condition, that he should restore to their Seats, those that had been banished for defending the Council of Chalcedon, and should unite all the Churches of the East with the Roman Church. And why then when Justin a Catholic Prince had succeeded the Emperor Anastasius, did he cause Pope Felix sentence to be executed against Peter Patriarch of Alexandria, and Acacius Patriarch of Constantinople, and made their names be razed even after their deaths, out of the records of their Churches, and 
joan. Patr. Const. ep. ad Hormis.  from the recital in the mysteries? We anathematise (saith John Patriarch of Constantinople in an epistle to Pope Hormisdas) Timothy the parricide surnamed Aelurus, and we condemn likewise Peter of Alexandria his disciple, and partaker in all things; and we alsoe anathematise Acacius sometimes Bishop of this city of Constantinople, etc. and we promise here after not to recite in the sacred mysteries, the names of those that are excluded from the communion of the Catholic Church; that is to say, that consent not fully with the Sea Apostolic. And the Emperor 
Iust. ep. ad Hormisd.  justin in his epistle to the same Pope; We have given order, that the reverend Church of Constantinople, and many others, should accomplish your desire, not only in other things, but also in razing the names that you have required to be taken away from the sacred records. And a while after praying the Pope, that he would be content, that the names of those only, which had been condemned by name by the Sea Apostolic, should be blotted out, without exacting the racing of those that had communicated with them, for the difficulty that there would be in razing the names of so many Bishops to be taken away out of the records of their churches; We ask no grace (said he) for the names of Acacius, nor for either the one Peter, or the other (that is to say, Peter Patriarch of Antioch, and Peter Patriarch of Alexandria) nor for Dioscorus, nor Timothy of whom your Holiness letters addressed to us, made special mention; but of those that the Episcopal reucrence hath celebrated in other cities. And Victor of Tunes; The 
Vict. Tun. Chron, in Iust.  Emperor justin (saith he) reunited those of the East under worthy satisfaction to the Prelates of the West, except the evil Bishops (for it must be read pravos, and not paruos) which died blinded with their ancient error, to wit, Acacius late Bishop of Constantinople, Peter Bishop of Antioch, and Peter Bishop of Alexandria; and caused the decrees of the Council of Chalcedon to be revived, that had been banished by the Emperors Zeno and Anastasius.  
And why then when the Emperor Justinian, nephew and successor to Justine was come to the Empire near eleven hundred years ago, did he make profession to acknowledge the Pope for he head of all the Churches? We preserve, (said he in the law to Epiphanius Patriarch of Constantinople,) 
Paris. 〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 1. l. 7.  the Estate of the unity of the most holy Churches in all things, with the moct holy Pope of the ancient Rome, to whom we have written the like; because we will not suffer any thing to pass concerning the affairs of the Church, which shall not be alsoe referred to his Blessedness, for as much as he is the head of all the holy Prelates of God: And in the law, Inter claras, where the Epistle of the same Emperor to the Pope, and the expedition of Hipatius and Demetrius his Legates to the Pope against Cirus, and Eulogius Legates for the Acaemites, so were certain Religious men of Constantinople called because of their long watches; is inserted; We will not suffer (said he) that any thing shall be treated of belonging to the state of the Churches, 
Cod. tit. 1. l. 8.  though 〈◊〉 and manifest, which shall not alsoe be referred to your Holiness, who are the head of all the Churches. For as for the shifts of those that not being able to avoid the law, Inter claras, strive to make it suspected for false, I will not stay to confute them. It sufficeth that the defence of those two great Oracles of Themis, Alciat and Cuias have, made of this law; and 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 4. c. 23.  the authentical copy which is to be found in the Greek Basiliques, beginning with these words, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: And the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 12. c. 16.  history that Liberatus an African author of the same time reports of it when he saith; Hypatius Bishop of Ephesus, and Demetrius Bishop of 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 20.  Philippi, were sent by the Emperor justinian to Pope john surnamed Mercury, to consult with the Sea Apostolic against Cyrus and Eulogius deputed by the Acaemites, etc. but Pope john, (we being then present at Rome) confirmed the Imperial confession by an Epistle of his, and addressed it to the Emperor, And the testimony that justinian himself gives it in the 
Cod. tit. 1. l. 7.  law to Epiphanius, and in the Epistle to Pope Agapet and the old greek 
Int. epist. A gap. tom. 1. cp. Rom.  paratitles translated and published by Leunclavius a protestant lawyer, which reckon for the eight law of the Code, the Emperor Justinians Epistle 
〈◊〉.  to the Pope, and the Pope's answer to him, stop their mouths that 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  think to call it in question. And yet less will I stand to solve this, that justinian, in the law Constautinopolitana writes, that the Church of Constantinople is the head of all the other Churches. For it shall be showed 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  hereafter, that he speaks of the other Churches of the jurisdiction of Constantinople which are treaetd of in the law; and not of the other Patriarkall Churches, amongst which justinian never attributed but the second rank to the Church of Constantinople, as it appears by the Novel. 〈◊〉. where he sayeth; We ordain (following the definitions of the four first Counsels) that the holy Pope of the ancient Rome, is to be first of all Prelates; and that the most Blessed Archbishop of Constantinople, or new Rome, shall have the second place after the holy Sea Apostolic of old Rome, and shall be preferred before all the other Seas.  
And why then when Epiphanius was dead, and that Anthymus Bishop of Trebisond had been made Patriarch of Constantinople in his steed, did Anthymus oblige himself by protestation written to all the other patriarchs, 
〈◊〉 Cost 〈◊〉 Men. act 4.  to obey the Pope? Anthymus (saith the Council of Constantinople held under Menas) promiseth to do all that the Archbishop of the great Sea Apostolic should ordain; and writ to the most holy patriarchs, that he would in all things follow the Sea apostolic.  
And why then when Pope Agapet was a while after arrived at Constantinople, did he depose the same Anthymus Patriarch of Constantinople, and then even in Constantinople, and in the sight of the Emperor justinian that favoured him, and excommunicated the Empress Theodora his wife, who did obstinately maintain him; and ordained Menas priest of Constantinople Patriarch in his steed? Agapet (saith Marcellinus Comes an author of the same 
In Chron  time) being come from Rome to Constantinople, drove away Anthymus soon after his arrival, from the Church, saying; that according, to the 〈◊〉 rule he was an adulterer, because he had left his Church, and had unlawfully procured another; and ordained the priest Menas Bishop in his room: And Liberatus one 
〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉. c. 12.  likewise of the same time with Marcellinus Comes, saith; The Empress in secret promising great presents to the Pope, if he would leave Anthymus in his 〈◊〉; and on the other side proving him with threats, the Pope persisted not to 〈◊〉 to her demand: And Anthymus seeing he was cast out of his Seat, gave up his Mantle to the Emperor, and retired himself where the Empress took him into her protection, and then the Pope for the Emperor's sake, ordained Menas Bishop in his steed, consecrating him with his own hands: And Victor of Tunes of the same 
Vict. Tun. in 〈◊〉. edit per los. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 calc Cnron. Eus  time with Liberatus published by joseph Scaliger; Agapet (saith he) Archbishop of Rome, came to Constantinople, and deposed Anthymus ` Bishop of Constantinople usurper of the Church (for it must be read pervasorem and not 〈◊〉 versorem) and enemy to the Council of Chalcedon, and excommunicated the Empress Theodora his Patroness, and made at the same time Menas Bishop of the Church of Constantinople: And the Emperor justinian himself: We know (saith he) 
Iust. 〈◊〉 42.  that the like thing hath been done in the case of Anthymus, who was deposed from the Seat of this royal city, by the most holy Bishop of the Ancient Rome Agapet, of sacred and glorious memory. For those that from these ensuing words of justinian's; but he hath been also deposed and condemned first by the sentence of this Prelate of holy memory, and after of the sacred Synod here celebrated do inserre, that the final deposition of Anthymus was not made by the Pope, but by the Council of Constantinople: do not consider that the first clause of justinian speaks (as shall appear hereafter) of the deposition of Anthymus from 
In chap 39  the Patriarkall Seat of Constantinople, which was done and perfected by the Pope; And the second speaks of the deposition of Anthymus from the archbishopric of Trebisond, which was begun by the Pope, but having been tied to certain conditions, which the continuance of 
Ibid.  the Pope's life did not permit him to clear, it was finished after his death by the Synod of Constantinople. But time presseth us, let us hasten.  
And why then when Menas Patriarch of Constantinople, gave his voice in the Council of Constantinople upon the second deposition of Anthymus, 
Conc Const sub Men. act. 2.  that is to say, upon his deposition from the archbishopric of Trebisond, did he say, we follow as you know the Sea Apostolic, and obey him, and have his communicants for ours, and condemn those that are condemned by him?  
And why then when the body of the Council form a sentence against the same Anthymus, is it couched in these terms: We ordain (following things well examined by the holy and blessed Pope, etc.) that he shall be cut of from the body of the holy Churches of God, and cast out of the Archbishop's Seat of Trebisond; and deprived from all dignity and Sacerdotal action, and according to the sentence of the same holy Father, stripped from the title of Catholic.  
And why then (when the Emperor justinian would at the instance of the Empress Theodora his wise, who was an Eutychian persecute Pope Siluerius, Agapits Successor) doth Liberatus Archdeacon of Carthage an African author, and of the same time, and that Hinemarus an ancient Archbishop of Rheims cities under the title of a Saint, say, that the Bishop of Patara in 〈◊〉 one of the provinces of Asia, dissuaded him from it, by the remonstrance that he made him, that there was no temporal monarchy which was equal in extent, to the spiritual authority of the Pope? He represented to him (said Liberatus) the judgement of God upon the expulsion of the Bishop 
〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉. c. 22  of so great a Sea, admonishing him, that there were many kings in the world, but there was not one of them as the Pope, who was over the Church of the whole world, who had been dispossessed of his seat.  
And why then when the same Emperor justinian would erect the first Justinianea of Bulgaria, the city where he was borne into the form of a supernumerary Patriarkship, did he ground his ordinance upon the 
Iust. Non. 131.  Vicarship and concession of the Pope? We ordain (said he) that the Bishop of the first Justinianea, shall always have under his jurisdiction the Bishops of the Provinces of the Mediterranean Dacia, of Dacia Ripensis of Triballea, of 〈◊〉, of the upper Misia, and of Pannonia, etc. and that in all provinces subject to him, he shall hold the place of the sea Apostolic of Rome, according as things were defined by the most holy Pope Vigilius.  
And why then when Rusticus deacon of Rome, of the same time with 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. cont.  Justinian, writ his book against the Ascephales'; did he make this grave 
〈◊〉. impress.  exhortation to himself; Remember that thou art a Christian, and a Deacon, and that of the most sovereign Church of all the world? And why then when the 
〈◊〉. Council. 〈◊〉. 2. c. 21.  Bishops of France, celebrated the second Council of Tours, 1048. years ago, did they say, our Fathers have always observed, what the authority of the Prelates of the sea Apostolic hath commanded.  
And why then when saint GREGORY the Great (to whom I have brought down this information, as well because the English men derive from him the original of their Mission Ecclesiastical, as because Calume propoundes him for true and lawful model of the jurisdiction of Popes) reprehended 1027. years agone Natalis Bishop of Salona in Dalmatia for the fault that he had committed, for which he after did penance in deposing Honoratus Archdeacon of Salona notwithstanding Pope Pelagius letters) did he write to him, that such a disobedience had been intolerable, even in one of the four patriarchs? If one of the four patriarchs (said 
Greg. ep. l. 2. cp. 37.  he) had committed such an act, so great disobedience, could not have escaped without a grievous scandal.  
And why then (when Clementius Primate of Bysacia in Africa had been accused before the Emperor, and sent back by the Emperor to the Sea 
Id. l. 7. ep. 64.  Apostolic,) doth the same S. GREGORY say; If there be any fault in the Bishops, I know not what Bishop is not subject, to the Sea Apostolic, if a fault require it not, according to the reason of humility, we are all equal.  
And why then when John Archbishop of Larissa in Thessalia, had unjustly and unworthily condemned Adrian Bishop of Thebes, one of the Bishops of his jurisdiction, and that the Bishop of Thebes had appealed to Rome from him, did S. Gregory eclipse the Bishop and Bishopric of Thebes from the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Larissa his Metropolitan, and declared the Archbishop of Larissa, if ever he attempted more to exercise any act of Metropolitan over him, interdicted from the sacraments, so as they could not be restored to him, except at the hour of death. but with the leave of the Bishop of Rome? We ordain (said he) that 
Greg. cp. l. 2. cp. 46.  thy brotherhood abstain from all the jurisdiction which you have formerly had over him, and over his Church? And a while after, that if in any time, or for 〈◊〉 occasion whatsoever, thou shalt attempt to contradict this our statute, know that we declare thee deprived from the sacred communion, so as it may not be restored to thee, except in the article of death, but with the leave of the Bishop of Rome.  
And why then finally, when the Patriarch of Constantinople had gotten the upper hand of the other patriarchs, did he continue to suffer appeals of causes from his jurisdiction to the Pope's tribunal, and to acknowledge himself subject and inferior to the Pope? john priest of Chalcedon 
Id. l. 4. ep 82.  (saith S. GREGORY, in the cause that he had against our Brother colleague john Bishop of Constantinople) hath had recourse according to the Canons to the Sea Apostolic, and the cause hath been determined by our sentence: and again pronouncing the restitution of Athanasius a priest, and a Religious man of Lycaonia, who had been deposed and cast out of his monastery by the same John Patriarch of Constantinople, and had appealed to him: We declare thee (said he) to be free from all spot of heresy, and a Catholic 
Id. l. 5. ep. 64.  &c. and give thee free leave to return into thy Monastery, and to hold there the same rank as thou didst before. And again, who doubts but the Church of Constantinople 
Id. l. 7. ep. 63.  is subject to the Sea Apostolic, which the most Religious Emperor, and our brother Bishop of the same town do continually protest? For as for the word universal Bishop, wherein the Bishop of Constantinople desired to participate 
See chap. 34.  with the Pope, but under the Pope, and in the Empire of the East, forasmuch as Constantinople had been erected into the title of the second Rome, it shall be answered in a chapter by itself: & for the refusal that S. GREGORY made, to use the title of universal Bishop, though it had 
In chap 34  been given to his Predecessors in the Council of Chalcedon, it shall be satisfied in the same place, and showed that it was because of the evil sense the word universal Bishop might receive, which was to signify (only Bishop,) and so exclude the other Prelates from the title of Bishops in chief, and of ministers and officers of God, and to hold them but for committees, and deputies of the universal Bishop, as the same S. GREGORY 
Greg ep l. 7. ep 37. & lib.  protests when he faith; If there be one that is universal Bishop, all the rest are no more Bishops: and not to deprive himself from the superintendency and jurisdiction over all other Bishops of which he cries clean contrary: If there be any crime in the Bishops, I know no Bishop but is subject to the Sea Apostolic: if no crime require it, according to the reason of bumilitie, we are all equal.    

Of form letters. CHAPT XXVI.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
THAN were alsoe in frequent use, form letters: by the commerce and contexture where of, the communion was admirably exercised, amongst all the members of the Church, how far soever they were distant one from an other in place.   

THE REPLY.  
IT is true, but the centre of this communion and of this Ecclesiastical unity, which was exercised and entertained by the commerce of form letters, was the Sea Apostolic and the Roman Church. This appears 
Iren. cout. Valent. l. 3. c. 3.  by S. Ireneus who cries to the Roman Church because of a principality (that is to say, as it hath been above manifested, because of the principality of the Sea Apostolic) it is necessary that every Church should agree. This appears 
Cypr. ad Corn. ep. 55.  by S. Cyprian, who calls the Roman Church, the chair of PETER, and the principal Church, and the original of Sacerdotal unity. This appears by the law of the Emperor Gratian, which ordained, that the Churches should be delivered to those that were in the Pope's communion: He ordained (saith Theodoret) that the sacred houses should be restored to those that communicated 
Theod. lust. eccls l. 5. c. 2. Ibid. c. 3. Amb. de ob. 〈◊〉.  with Damasus: And a while after; and this law was indefinitely executed in all nations. This appears by S. Ambrose, who writes, speaking of his Brothers coming into one of the cities of the Isle of Sardinia: He asked the Bishop of that place whether he agreed with the Catholic Bishops, that is to 
〈◊〉 Dam ep 57  say, (added he) with the Roman Church. This appears by S. JEROME, who writes to Pope Damasus; I am joined in communion with thy Blessedness, that is to say, with Peter's chair: I know the Church is built upon that Rock; whosoever is not in the Ark, he shall perish at the coming of the flood; he that eats the lamb out os this house, is profane: And a while after, Whosoever gathers not with thee, scatters, that is to say; whosoever is not of Christ, is of Antichrist: And again; Send me word with whom I ought to communicate in Antioch, for the heretics of Camps with those of Tharses have no other ambition but that they might under the authority of your communion, preach the three hypostosies according to the ancient understanding: 
jerom. ad Dam. ep. 58.  And in an other place, The while I cry, if any of you be joined to Peter's chair he is mine; Miletius, Vitalis, Paulinus, (so were the 3. patriarchs of Antioch called,) say that they communicate with thee; if but one of them had said so, I had believed it, but now either two, or all three do lie and therefore I coviure thy Blessedness by the Cross of our Lord, by the necessary ornament of our faith, by the passion of Christ, etc. that thou signify to me by thy letters with whom in Syria I ought to communicate. This appears by Optatus Bishop of Milevis in Africa, 
Opt. Mileu. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. lib. 2.  who saith; At Rome hath been settled for Peter first the Episcopal chair, in which the head of all the Apoctles Peter hath sat, etc. to the end that in that only chair, unity might be observed by all, lest the other Apostles should attribute to themselves each one his sever all chair, but that be might be a sinner and a schismatic, that against that only chair, should erect an other. And a little after; To Peter then succeeded Linus, to Linus Clement, to Clement Anacletus, to Anacletus Euaristus etc. to Damasus Syricius who is at this day our Colleague, by which means all the world communicates with us by the commerce of form letters. This appears by 
Chrysost. ad Innocent. cp. 1.  saint chrysostom who writes to Pope Innocent; Let us enjoy the continuance of your letters, and of your charity, and those of all the rest which we enjoyed before. This appears by saint AUSTIN who says, Cecilianus might well despise 
Aug. ep. 162  the conspiring multitude of his enemies, seeing himself united by communicatory letters with the Roman Church, in which the principality of the Sea Apostolic hath always sllorisht, & with other Countries from whence the Gospel came into Asrica. This appears by Eulalius Bishop of Syracuse who a while after S. Augustine's death dissuaded Fulgentius an Asrican afterward Bishop of Ruspa in Asrica from going to inhabit with the monks of Egypt in the deserts of Thebaidis, 
Auth. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Const. ep ad 〈◊〉. come. 2. 〈◊〉.  because they were not in the communion of saint Peter: The country, (said he) whither thou desirest to travail a perfidious dissension hath separated them from the communion of the blessed Peter: All those Religious men whose admirable abstinence is celebrated, shall not have the Sacraments of the altar in common with thee. This appears by john Patriarch of Constantinople, who writ to Pope 〈◊〉, in abjuration of Acacius memory: Following (said he) in all things the Apostolic chair; we declare all that hath been thereby decreed and therefore hope to be in one communion with you declared by the Sea Apostolic, in which there is the integrity of Christian Religion and perfect solidity, promising hereafter not to 〈◊〉 amidst the sacred mysteries their names, that have separated themselves from the communion of the Catholic Church; that is to say, that consent not in all things with the Sea Apostolic.  
This appears by the Emperor justinian, who writes in the law addressed to Epiphanius Patriarch of Constantinople; We preserve in all things the estate of the 
Cod. Paris Antwerp. & Geneu. tit. 1. l. 7.  unity of the holy Churches, with the holy Pope of old Rome. And in the law addressed to the Pope; We have had care to unite and submit all the Bishops of the East to the Sea of your Holiness, 〈◊〉 who are the head of all the holy Churches. 
Cod tit. 1. l. 8. see above. Con. Const. sub. Men. act 4.  This appears by Menas Patriarch of Constantinople, who said in the Council of Constantinople; We follow the Sea Apostolic and obey it, and communicate with those that communicate therewith, and condemn those that it condemns. This appears by the form that saint GREGORY left us of the abjuration, that the bishops returning from Schism, to the communion of 
Greg. ep. l. 10. ep. 31.  the Church, made into the hands of the Apostolic Procurators, which have these words: I Bishop of such a City, having discerned the trapp of division wherein I was caught, after a long and mature deliberation, I am returned by God's grace with my pure and free will, to the unity of the Sea Apostolic, and that I may not be esteemed to return maliciously or sainedly, I vow and promise under pain of falling from mine Order, and under obligation of 〈◊〉 to thee, and by thee, to the holy Prince of Apostles, Peter, and to his Vicar the most Blessed GREGORY, or to his Successors, that by any persuasion whatsoever, or in any other manner, I will never return to Schism, from whence by our Redeemers mercy I have been delivered, but that I will always remain in the unity of the Catholic Church, and in the Communion of the Bishop of Rome:  
And this finally appears by the extract of the Council of 〈◊〉 which is to be read at the end of the latin edition of the Council of Chalcedon under the name of the extract of the Council of Nicaea for the composition 
Manuse.  of form letters made by Atticus Bishop of Constantinople; but some 
Conc.  manuscripts of the sixth Council of Carthage testify they were sent into 
Carth. 6. D. Praesidis de Champigny.  the west by the same Atticus, with the other decrees of the Council of Nicaea, when the Asrican Bishops requested them of him. For this extract ordained, that they should take the number of the first Greek letters of 
Attic. episc. qnaliter formata epistolafiat. In fin. editionis latin Conc. Chalc.  the names Father, Sonn, and Holy Ghost, the number of the first letter of the Apostle Peter's name, and of the author that writ, and of him to whom he writ, and of the bearer of the letter, and of the place from whence it was written, and the day of Paske, and adding them to the number of the indiction which then was currant, they should thereof make a sum, whose cipher should be added to the Epistle, to serve it for a form and character. By means whereof when there was no more occasion to doubt, who was either in communion with the Roman Church or saint Peter's sea, or out of it, as the diligence of the Catholic Emperors, and Kings have in the West left no subject of that doubt this many ages, the necessity of these kind of letters hath ceased. And therefore so far off is it, that the use of the letters form or communicatory whereof antiquity made use, was a mark to show, that the Church was then more manifest than now, as contrariwise it was a testimony, that she was much harder to be discerned than she is at this present. For that which constrained them to use this means, was the multitude, and confusion of heresies which were then in so great number and so mingled in abode, and habitation amidst the Catholic Church, as there was almost no Town, where there was not to be found, besides the true Church, a dozen Sects, and heresies, and the most of them agreeing in form, and outward worship with the Catholic Church; Arians, Donatists, Pelagians Novatians Macedonians, Appolinaristes, and other such like plagues.    

Of the pretended excommunications attempted against the Pope. CHAP. XXVII.  
But against this thesis, to wit that the Sea Apostolic was the Centre and beginning of all the form and communicatory letters, the Pope's adversary's object three instances; first, that Stephen Patriarch of Antioch, in the false, Council of Sardica excommunicated 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Pope Julius because he had admitted saint ATHANASIUS into his communion. The second, that saint HILARY proclaimed anathema against Pope Liberius, because he had received the Arians into his communion. And the third, Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria in the false Council of Ephesus, excommunicated the Pope saint Leo the first, because he had condemned the heresy of Eutyches. And from hence they 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  conclude, that the Pope was not then the centre, and original of Ecclesiastical communion, since that, as the Pope excommunicated the other patriarchs, Archbishops, and Bishops; so the others reciprocally excommunicated him: And therefore it is best to block up their objections before we pass further.  
To the first then of these objections, which is that Stephen Patriarch of Antioch, excommunicated, Pope julius, because he had received saint ATHANASIUS into his communication, we bring three answers: The first answer is, that it was not Stephen Patriarch of Antioch that made this excommunication, but it was all the Bishops assembled at the false Council of Sardica, which pretended to be the true and whole ecumenical 
〈◊〉. Syn. 〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. lust. ec. 〈◊〉. l. 2. 〈◊〉. 16.  Council of Sardica, forasmuch as they said, the three hundred Catholic Bishops which constituted the true Council of Sardica, were fallen into the communion of Marcellus whom they held an heretic of the heresies of Sabellius and of Paulus Samosatenus, and therefore imagined, that the true and intier authority of the ecumenical Council of Sardica, was devolved to them. Now there is greatdifference between saying, that a Council that pretends to be ecumenical, and conceives itself to represent the universal Body of ihe Church should undertake to excommunicate a Pope, that they suppose to have fallen into heresy, and that a particular Bishop Archbishop or Patriarch should undertake it.  
The second that the false Council of Sardica, which committed this 
〈◊〉. Apol. 2. Aug ep. 〈◊〉.  presumption, was an Arian Council, and whose enterprise consequently cannot be drawn into example, nor make any precedent against the discipline 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  of the Church. For what marvel is it that the Arians who trod under foot, the divinity of Christ, who is the invisible head of the Church, should likewise tread under foot, the authority of his principal lieutenant, that is to say, the Pope, who is the visible head of the Church?  
And the third, that in the same time, that the false Council of Sardica spit in the face of heaven, and excommunicated not only the Pope but 〈◊〉 SUS-CHRIST himself, and all his Church in rejecting the communion 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. c. 16.  of them, that held him to be consubstantial with the Father; the true Council of Sardica, compounded of more than three hundred Catholic Bishops, acknowledged the Pope for head of the Church, and writ 
Ep. Conc. Sard. ad jul. Pap in 〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉. 1. in ep. ad Episcop. 〈◊〉. Hilar. in fragm. de Syn. Arim. p. 48.  to him; It seems very good and convenient that the Prelates of all the Provinces should refer the affairs to their head, that is to say, to the Sea Apostolic of Peter.  
To the second objection, which is, that after that Liberius being cast out from the Sea of Rome by the Arians, and overcome with the enduring a far banishment, and many corporal persecutions & vexations sorgott himself so far, as to subscribe the condemnation of saint ATHANASIUS, and to receive the Arrians into his communion; saint HILARY reciting the Epistles of the same Liberius insertes these clauses; This is the Arrian treachery, this I have noted I that am no Apostata: And again; Anathema for my part, to thee o Liberius, & to thy Complices; And a while after; Anathema to thee the second, & third time, o wicked Liberius, we bring four answers.  
The first answer is, that though it be certain, and not to be doubted, that this is written by an ancient author, and of saint hilaries time, as besides the antiquity of the manuscriptes, which are to be sound in sundry libraries, it appears both by the manner of that stile, which fully agrees with that of saint hilaries age, and by many things which are there recited, which could not have been known but by the authors of saint hilaries age; nevertheless, it is not equally certain, that it is S hilaries. chose there are four conjectures, which seem to intimate, that either it should be hilaries the Luciserian deacon, of the same time with saint HILARY, or some other authors of the same Sect, and age, which have supposed it, and made it pass under the name of saint HILARY; or that the Parentheses which are inserted into Liberius his Epistles that he cities, which also are inserted in form of notes, and marked with signs of a cross at the head, and environed with semye-circles, and written in an other character, are not saint hilaries, but some exemplaristes of that age.  
The first conjecture is, that these Parentheses condemn the Faith of the Council of Sirmium which Demophilus caused Liberius to sign; that is, the Faith of the first Council of Sirmium, which did not err but in the omission of the word Homoousion (for Demophilus as the Illustrious Cardinal 
Anual 16. 3. ad an 357.  Baronius hath observed, abhorred the Faith of the Second, which denied both Homoousion and Homoeusion) and calls it, an Arrians treachery, 
Hilar de Syn.  where saint HILLARY chose to spare and husband the demi- Arrians, which held the first confession, and to oblige them to bandy against 
Hilar. Ibid  the complete Arrians, which held the second, styled in his works of the Synods; The faith of the first Council of Sirmium, or rather, the first faith of the Council of Sirmium orthodoxal and Catholic. And saith speaking of the Bishop Eleusius, Bishop of Cyrica, and of the other demi; Arrians which embraced it, except the Bishop Eleusius, and a few others with him; the ten Asian provinces wherein I dwell, for the more part do not know God truly.  
And it will not serve for an antidote for this that Monsieur de Feure, who 
Nic. Fab. in 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 Hilar.  published that work, saith that the Arrians yet made another profession of Faith composed at Sirmium in the presence of the Emperor, in the year 
Soc. hist. ec cl. l. 2. c. 29. 〈◊〉. hist. 〈◊〉 l. 4 c. 10. & 14. etc. 18. Am. Marc. hist. l. 15. Sul Seu. hist Sacr. l. 2.  of the Council of Arimini, where they abolished the word. Substance For this last confession of Faith was made after Liberius his fall, and not before, as some have thought, not considering that Liberius suffered two banishements confounded by Socrates, but distinguished by Sozomene: The one when he was confined into Beroe in Thrace, which began according to Amianus Marcellinus account, and that of Sulpitius Severus, the year wherein Arbitio and Lollianus were consuls; that is, four year before the Consulate of Eusebius and Hypatius under which the Council of 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉 So 〈◊〉.  was held, and lasted according to saint ATHANASIUS and 〈◊〉, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 17.  two years. And the other by which he was simply cast out of Rome, which sell out after the Council of Arimini, because Liberius refused to consent to it. They report (saith Sozomene, speaking of those who described more truly the history of the Council of Arimini) that the Arrians constained 
〈◊〉 hist. 〈◊〉. 4 c. 18.  the Bishops to sign their confession, and cast out of the Church many which resisted it, and in the first place Liberius Bishop of Rome. Now Liberius fall was in the end of his first banishement as saint HILLARY insinuats, when he 
〈◊〉. de Syn.  reproacheth to the Emperor Constantius, that he had plucked Liberius out of 〈◊〉, and that he was uncertain whether he had showed more impiety in his banishement, or in his repeal: And as saint JEROM affirms when 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  he saith, Liberius overcome with the weariness of his banishment, and having subscribed to the Arrian impiety, was entered into Rome in manner of a conqueror. And therefore the faith of Sirmium which Liberius had signed before his fall, which happened at the end of his first exile; that is to say, two year before 
〈◊〉 hist. 〈◊〉. l. 4. c. 14.  the Council of Arimini, could not be that which was forged at 〈◊〉 the year of the Council of Arimini, but it was the first of Sirmium; which 〈◊〉 also ratifies when he saith, that, Those of the East brought a form of Faith, that they had drawn from Liberius, by which he condemned those that did not affirm, that the Son was like to the Father in substance, and in all things. For that was the first Creed poposed to the Council of Sirmium, and embraced by the Demy- Arrians, which concealed the word 〈◊〉, and instead thereof, substituted, like in substance.  
The second conjecture is, that the Latin translation of the faith of the false Council of Sardica, which is inserted into the Appendix of the Epistles, which is annexed to the end of this writing, which Monsieur le 
Append ep 〈◊〉 Calcem. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 p. 27.  Feure will have to be gathered by the same Author, is so differing not in sense, but in words, from that which is found in the work of the Synods of saint HILLARY, that it seems, they could not both come from one pen; and besides, it is noted with this Title; The decree of the Arrians; whereas saint HILLARY in his book of the Synods, to spare the Demy-Arrians, which held the Symbol of the false Council of Sardica, and to oblige them to bandy against the complete Arrians, whose impiety was proceeded much farther in their latter professions; reckons the Faith of the false Council of Sardica, amongst the orthodoxal beliefs, supplied by interpretation; that it might receive, an orthodoxal interpretation, and was not heretical by expression, but by omission.  
The third conjectures is, that in the time this writing entitled from saint HILLARY, was composed; that is to say, after the Council of Arimini, neither saint HILARY, not any other Catholic, could say 〈◊〉 to Liberius whosefault and repentance were both arrived before the Council of Arimini; but only the Luciferians, who withdrew themselves from the communion of Liberius and of the Catholic Church after the death of Constantius because that when Constantius was dead, Liberius, and the other Bishops, and Catholics, received into the communion of the Church, and to the exercise of the Episcopal order, those Bishops which having been induced by fraud or force, to sign the council of Arimini protested to repent it. For when this writing was made; that is to say, after the Council of Arimini, Liberius was acknowledged for a Catholic, by all the Catholic Bishops of the Earth, and was so, ever after the Council of Arimini, even to the end of his life, as it appears both by the testimony of the Council of the West, celebrated under Damasus, immediate successor to Liberius, which disannulling the acts of the Council of Arimini, alleged amongst other nullities, that the 
Theod. hist. 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 22.  Bishop of Rome whose sentence should be attended before all others, never consented to it. And by the testimony of saint BASILE, who solicits saint ATHANASIUS, to write to the Bishop of Rome, to be watchful over the affairs of the East, 
Bas. ep. ad. Athan.  and send some to disannul the Council of Arimini: and testifies that the Catholics of the East, and namely the Counsels of Militina and Tyana, communicated with Liberius; and himself calls him the blessed Bishop Liberius: And by the testimonies of saint EPIPHANIUS, who writeth; 〈◊〉 
Id. ep. ad Occident. Epiph. count. Aer. her. 75.  Bishop of Sebaste in Armenia the less, seemed to do the office of a Legate with many other Bishops, to the blessed Liberius of Rome; and subscribed to the proposition of the council of Nicaea, and to the profession of the orthodoxal Faith. And by the testimony of saint AMBROSE, who entitles Liberius after his Death, 
Amb. de Verg. l. 3. Syrie. ad Himer.  Liberius of happy memory. And finally, by the testimony of Siricius immediate Successor to Damasus, who saith; The general decrees of my Predecessor Liberius of Reverend memory, sent through all the provinces after the disannulling the 
〈◊〉.  Council of Arimini, forbade to rebaptise the Arrians when they returned to the Church. By means whereof either this writing which anathematizeth Liberius after the Council of Arimini, is not saint hilaries, but of some Luciferian author of the same age, or these parenthesises inserted by form of notes, in the Epistles of Liberius, environed with Semycircles, and written in other characters: this is the Arrian treachery, this I have noted, I that am no Apostata: And a while after; I for my part, say anathema to thee Liberius, and to thy complices: And again; Anathema to thee for the second & third time, o wicked Liberius; have been interlaced by the Luciferians; or saint HILARY inserted the parenthesis into the Epistle of Liberius, before he made this writing; and having in this writing left the places, void, to put in the Epistles which he cited, whose Collection was a part in his papers; those that caused them to be published after his death, set into the void blank places which he had left, the copies of the Epistles which were amongst his papers, as they were there found.  
And the fourth conjecture finally is; that this writing is not a complete, and entire writing of saint hilaries, but a collection of diverse fragments of the intier work of saint hilaries, put together in a heap, and without order; as may appear by the transposition of the 
Fragm. 〈◊〉 p 35. &. 36  Epistles there inserted; and particularly of one of Liberius Epistles, which is set in the place, where the Epistle of the Council of 〈◊〉, to Constantius should have been. By occasion whereof it remains uncertain, whether these parenthesis be of the author or of the collector; that is, either of saint HILARY, or of some Luciferian compiler, who to favour the 〈◊〉 of the Luciferians, and to make the memory of Liberius odious, and adhominable, hath thrust in these parenthesis. And this is spoken of the first answer.  
The second answer against saint hilaries pretended anathema against Liberius, is that there is great difference, between an excommunication, and an anathema; for as much as every formal excommunication imports jurisdiction; and every anathema doth not so. For there are two kinds of anathema, the one judiciary the other executory, applicatory, and adiuratory. judiciary anathemas are those which are pronounced by persons constituted in the Ecclesiastical Tribunal, and which have power to judge of matters of Religion, and who decree what kinds of things, or persons ought to be anathematised; and these anathemas' import jurisdiction, as when the Council of Nicaea pronounced anathema against the 
Sac. hist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 l. c. 5.  Arrians in these words: they that say there was a time wherein the son was not, the Catholic Church anathematizeth them; that is to say, decideth that their Communion ought to be renounced and abhorred, and held for anathema. The anathemas' executory, applicatory, and abiuratory, are those by which every particular person doth protest, and declare, that he will practise the sentence of the Church decreed against those persons, or doctrines which have been by her iudiciarily anathematised, and to abiute, and hold them for anathema. And for this cause, judiciary anathemas, cannot 
〈◊〉.  be pronounced but by persons grounded upon jurisdiction: but executory, 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 2. act. 6.  and abiuratory anathemas; may be made not only by persons destitute of jurisdiction, but by mere lay men: As in the Council of Ephesus, when Cordanepius a lay man returned from the Sect of the 〈◊〉 to the Church, he anathematised all those that followed the Sect of the 〈◊〉; I anathematise (saith he) all heresy, and namely that of the quartodecumans. And to this day when any one returns from 〈◊〉 heresy into the Catholic Church, he is caused to anathematise that heresy from whence he departs. But these anathemas, are but simple abiuratory anathemas; that is to say, they are but bare executions, and applications, of judiciary anathemas; and the word to Anathematise, in such a case, signifies no other thing, but to abjure, abhor, and hold them for anathematised.  
Now it was in this second sort that saint HILARY anathematised Liberius, for having signed and subscribed the communion of the 〈◊〉; to wit, not with a judiciary, but with an abiuratory anathema. For the judiciary anathema had been already pronounced by the counsels of Nicaea, and of Sardica, against the Arrians into whose coummunion Liberius was entered, so as there was no more question to decree the 
Soc. hist. 〈◊〉. 2. c. 5. Theod. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 4. c. 6.  sentence of anathema against him, but to execute it in abjuring and abhorring him, as fallen into the sentence of anathema pronounced against the Arrians in the Counsels of Nicaea and Sardica; and therefore saint HILLARY adds to his anathema this word, for my part, and saith, for my part anathema to thee o Liberius; to show that he spoke not with a judiciary anathema, but with an anathema abiuratory, and abnegatory whereby he did not separate Liberius from the communion of the Church, who had already separated himself, in departing from her to the 〈◊〉, but whereby he separated himself from the communion of Liberius.  
The third answer contains two branches; the one is, that this anathema 
〈◊〉. hist. 〈◊〉. l. 4. c. 14  was not pronounced by saint HILLARIUS, in the time of unity and agreement of Popes, but in time of Schism and duplicity of Popes; to wit, when Liberius and Felix sat concurrently in the Pontifical chair of Rome. Now there is great difference between pronouncing anathema against a doubtful Pope, and sitting in Schism with another Pope; and pronouncing anathema against one only certain and peaceble Pope: for in the first case; to wit, in case of Schism between two Popes, it is an ordinary thing, that those that take part with the one, do pronounce abjuration and anathema against the other; as during the Schism of John 23th. and of Gregory the twelfth and of Bennet the 13th. for whose extinction the Council of Constance was kept; those that took part with any one of these three Popes pronounced abjuration, and anathema against the other two; without pretending notwithstanding to depart from the reverence, and obedience due to the Sea Apostolic. And therefore during the Schism of Liberius and Felix, saint HILLARY might pronounce anathema against Liberius and separate himself from his communion and enter into the communion of the other Pope, without separating himself ever the more from the communion of the Sea Apostolic.  
The other is, that this anathema was not pronounced by S. HILLARY in the time that the Roman Church acknowledged him for Pope, but in the time that Liberius was fallen from the Papacy, and that even the Roman Church abjured, renounced, and disavowed him for Pope, and had withdrawn herself from his communion, and from his obedience, and had ranged herself with Felix his competitor. For the understanding whereof, we must distinguish the time of Pope Liberius Popedom into thee parts; the first before his fall, the second during his fall, the third after his fall. Now during the first part, to wit, before his fall; he was so firm a defender of the Faith of the Council of Nicaea, and of saint ATHANASIUS innocence, and so great an enemy to the heresy, and communion of the Arrians, as the Emperor Constantius 
Theod. hist eccls l. 2. c. 16.  for that cause made him be tiranòusly carried away, and transported by way of banishment into the city of Beroe, in the borders of Thrace; and at the instance of the Arrians, caused Felix the deacon of Rome to be ordained in his steed. During the second part, which began at his banishment, he overcome with the length of two years' exile, and other corporal vexations and persecutions, he suffered himself to be drawn to sign the condemnation of S. Athanasius, and to admit the communion of the Arrians, and entered into Rome with a promise, to continue in that resolution; 
Higher in. 〈◊〉.  & then the Roman Church ceased to acknowledge him for Pope. For Popes that fall visibly, and by their own coufession, or not contested signature into an heresy notorious, & condemned by a precedent sentence of the Church, or into communion with an heretical society, as was that of the Arrians fall from the Papacy, from that time cease from their right of being Popes. And Felix on the other side, who was entered by the pack of the Arrians into his place, made himself so firm a protector 
An. Bar to. 3 ad an. 357. Martirol. Rom. ad quart. Cal. Aug. Martirol. tribute. Bed. e in eodem Die. Anast. Bib. in lib. de vic Pontific. Onuph. in notis. ad. platin. & alij.  of the Catholic Faith and Communion, and so constant an adversary of the Arrians as the Roman Church (if we believe the ancient inscriptions, and the ancient martirologes, where Felix is entitled Pope and Martyr, and the ancient Catalogues of the Popes, where he is put into the rank of the Popes, by the name of Felix the second) making valid by a new election, or an acceptation equivalent to a new election the ordination of Felix, received him for Pope in Liberius steed, I have said, if we believe the ancient inscriptions, and martyrologes, and the ancient Catalogues of the Popes. For many modern authors, and Onuphrius amongst the rest, hold that Felix was never true Pope, and that Liberius never fell from the Papacy, nor ever received the Arrians into his communion; And they believe, that all that saint ATHANASIUS, saint HILARY, and other ancient writers have written, was grounded upon a false rumour, that the Arrians had spread; And they allege for this 
Ruff. hist. eccls l. 1. c. 27.  purpose Ruffinus; that saith, he could never discover the truth of it; I cannot discover (saith Ruffinus) certainly, whether the Emperor Constantius sent back Liberius to Rome, because he had yielded to his will, or because he was pressed to it by the Romans. And Sozomene who reports that the Arrians 
Soz hist. eccls l. 4. c. 14.  spread the rumour, that Liberius had condemned Consubstantiality; The Arrians (said he) spread the rumour, that Liberius had condemned the word consubstantial. Nevertheless for as much as saint JEROM, speakeing of Liberius his exile, writeth, Liberius Bishop of the Roman Church 
Hier. in Chr on.  having been sent into exile for the Faith, all the Clerks swore they would receive no other but Felix, having been substituted in the priest hood by the Arrians; many perjured themselves, and at the end of the year were cast forth, because Liberius overcome with the weariness of his banishement, and signing the heretical impiety, entered into Rome in the form of a Conqueror. And in an other place; Fortunatianus Bishop of Aquilea, is in 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  this reputed detestable, that he first solicited Liberius who was gone into banishment for the faith, and inclined him, and induced him. to sign the heresy. We follow the opinion of those that hold, that during the time interposed between the return of Liberius, and the death of Felix, Liberius remained fallen from the Popedom, and that Felix was then true Pope. For there is no doubt, but that the Clerks which were cast forth with Felix, because (saith saint JEROM) Liberius having signed the heretical impiety, was 〈◊〉 into Rome like a Conqueror, were the orthodoxal and Catholic Clerks of the Roman Church, who did materially perjure themselves because they abandoned Liberius, but not formally because Liberius first abandoned himself.  
And in the third time which began after the death of Felix, which if 
〈◊〉 hist. 〈◊〉. l, 4. c. 〈◊〉.  we believe Sozomene, followed soon after the return of Liberius: Liberius not only abjured that which the Arrians had constrained him to do, but made himself so constant a protector of the Catholic Faith, and cause, and so despised all the persecutions of the Emperor, as the Roman Church after the death of Felix, and all the other Churches of the Catholic communion with her, did receive and acknowledge him with an acknowledgement equivalent to rehabilitation, for Pope. In which appeared two acts of the providence of God, with had appeared in saint Peter's fall: One, that as saint Peter in the rising from his fall, confirmed his brethren; so Liberius in rising from his, confirmed all the Bishops of the Catholic Church, showing them the way rather to suffer a thousand persecutions, then to sign the Council of Arimini: And the other, that as the Fathers noted, that God permitted saint Peter to fall, that he might learn by his own example to use mercy to those that should fall, and not to use that rigour to them, that the Novatians would afterward have introduced: so God permitted that Liberius should fall into the communion of heretics, to the end that being restored, he might learn by his own example, and serve himself for an example to others, not to shut the gates of Episcopal communion from those Bishops that should fall into the same fault, when they should come to repentance, and not to use that rigour toward them, that afterward the Luciferians would have introduced. Now it was in this mean while, to wit, when the Roman Church, abjured Liberius, because he had received the Arrians into his communion, and ceased to acknowledge him for Pope, and had reduced themselves into the obedience of Felix, that saint 〈◊〉 (〈◊〉 as is abovesaid, these parenthesis be his) adhering to the Roman Church, abjured him also, and anathematised him, not with a judiciary, but with an applicatory and abiuratory anathema: and by consequence, the objection which is drawn from it, is not only unprofitable, but impertinent. For what marvel is it, if in this mean while, to wit; when the Roman Church herself, abjured Liberius, and withdrew herself from his obedience, and ceased to acknowledge him for Pope, and took Felix his part; saint HILARY adhering to the Roman Church, did abjure him, and anathematise him also, not with a judiciary anathema, but with an executory and abnegatory 〈◊〉, and took likewise the part of Felix, to whom the orthodoxal Clerks and inhabitants of the city of Rome, had ranged themselves? The great and admirable DAMASUS, who was after successor to Liberius in the Popedom, and whom the greeks, called the diamond of Faith, had not he been one of those that had withdrawn themselves from the communion of Liberius, and had transferred themselves to that of Felix? and so what wonder is it, if Liberius 
Marcel. in lib. deschis 〈◊〉. & Vrcic. apud Baron. Annal. tom. 3. & 4. add an. 357 & 367 & Biblioth Sereniss. Reip. Venet.  own successor, and all the true Roman Church with him, having ceased to acknowledge Liberius for Pope, and having abandoned and anathematised him, that is to say, with an executory and abiuratory anathema, and having acknowledged Felix his Competitor for true, and law full Pope; S. HILARY also in their imitation ceased to account Liberius for Pope, and anathematised him, not with a judiciary, but with an executory and abiuratory anathema, in withdrawing himself from his communion, and passing to that of Felix.  
And finally the fourth and last answer, is, that as in time offchisme and duplicity of Popes, S. HILARY following the orthodoxal and Catholic part of the Clergy of Rome, adhered to Felix, and anathematised Liberius; so in the time of the unity of Popes, the same S. HILARY testifies, that all Catholics acknowledged the Pope for head of the Church. For he reports the epistle of the Council of Sardica, wherein 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. Sard. ad 〈◊〉. in frag. 〈◊〉. p. 15.  the Bishops of the Council writ these words to Pope julius, Liberius predecessor; It shall be esteemed very good and convenient, if from all provinces the Bishops should refer the affairs to their head, that is to say, to the Sea Apostolic of Peter; And thus much of the second objection, there remains third.  
To the third objection then, which is, that Dioscorus in the false Council of Ephesus, did not content himself to excommunicate 〈◊〉 the Archbishop of Constantinople, but went so far as to excommunicate Pope Leo who upeld him, We answer three things; first, that it was not under his own name that Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, decreed this excommunication 
Conc. Chalc act. 1.  but under the name of all the false Council of Ephesus, which had been called in the quality of an Ecumenical Council, and which entitled itself an Ecumenical Council. By means whereof, this instance toucheth not the question, whether another Bishop, Archbishop, or Patriarch may excommunicate the Pope, but whether a Council Ecumenical, pretending that the Pope is fallen into heresy, may excommunicate him.  
The second, that Dioscorus was deposed for this presumption in the 
Id. act. 3. & in relat. ad Leon. Pap.  Council of Chalcedon, and deprived for all eternity, not only of the title of Patriarch, but also of the title of Christian and Catbolicke, in such sort, as this example is so far from making against the Pope, as it falls upon their heads that allege it.  
And the third, that there was so great difference between the enterprise of excommunicating the other Bishops, Archbishops, & patriarchs, and presumption of excommunicating the Pope, as although Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria was an Archhereticke, and that he had approved in a full Council the heresy of Eutiches, and condemned the orthodoxal doctrine, and had excommunicated, and not only excommunicated, but put to death Flavianus Archbishop of Constantinople, who maintained the true faith: Nevertheless, these things were not set amongst the principal causes of his deposition, but the presumption that he had committed in undertaking He and his false Council to excommunicate the Pope; and the contempt that he had added to it, in not coming to yield reason for this presumption to the Council of 〈◊〉. 
evag. hist. eccls l. 2. c. 18.  Dioscorus (saith Anatolius Archbishop of Constantinople, speaking to the Council of Chalcedon) hath not been deposed for the faith, but because 
Conc. Chalc 〈◊〉. 5.  he had excommunicated my Lord the Archbishop Leo, and that having been thrice cited, he would not appear: And the Council of Chalcedon in the 
Conc. Chalc part. 3. in relat. ad Leon.  epistle to Pope Leo, saith; After all these things he hath extended his 〈◊〉 even against him, to whom the guard of the Vine is committed by your Saviour, that is to say, against thy Holiness, and hath mediated an excommunication against him, that strives to unite the body of the Church; or according to the other 〈◊〉; against thee, who makest haste to unite the body of the Church, that is to say, against thee that holdest the body of the Church in unity. For with the Greeks it is a common phrase to say, to haste themselves to do some thing, in steed of saying, to do some thing; As when the Emperor JUSTINIAN 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  writ to Pope john, surnamed Mercury; We have made haste to submit and 〈◊〉 all the Prelates of the east countries to your Sea: instead of saying; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all the Prelates of the East, to your Sea. And as when the Council of 〈◊〉 said; Anthymus made haste, to cast us into a worse tempest, instead of saying; Anthymus hath cast us into a worse tempest.    

CARD. PERRONS REPLY. TO THE KING OF GREAT BRITTANY. THE SECOND BOOK  

CHAP. I. Of Counsels.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
TO this were added always, and as often as they were needful, Counsels truly Ecumenical, and not as we see, they have been often since Ecumenical by name, but indeed assembled only out of some provinces of Europe.   

THE REPLY.  
AND even this also very often when there was no need of them, as the Council of Arimini compounded of more than 400. 
Sulp. Seu. l 2. & Soz. l 4. c. 17. Liberat in breviar. c. 12.  Bishops; the second Council of Ephefus, called from all the Regions of the world, but assembled by heretical Emperors, or governed by the abettors of heretics; and from the unlawful celebration whereof; the one held without the Pope's authority, and the other against 
Theod. hist eccls l. 2. c. 22.  it; the success teacheth us, that as much as Counsels are profitable, when the temporal authority seconds the Ecclesiastical: as much are they pernicious, 
Libera., c. 13. & Conc. Chalc. act. 1.  when temporal authority undertakes to perform the office of Ecclesiastical authority. jointly that as in human bodies, the multitude of medicines is not a sign of health; so in the Ecclesiastical body, the multitude of Counsels, is not a sign of well being; witness the complaints of S. Gregory Nazianz. upon the multitude of Counsels holden 
Greg. Naz. ep. 42.  after that of Nicaea; of which he saith that he never saw good come of them, that is to wit, as much because when the heretical Emperors meddled with the affairs of the Church, the ambition to please them, which was crept in among the Bishops, thwarted the judgements of the Synod, as because the holding subsequent Counsels upon the same matter of those preceding them, was to wound and to weaken the authority of the preceding Counsels. And then how could the celebration of Counsels have been a means, to make men assured of the communion of the true Church, if general Counsels lawfully assembled that is, according to the external solemn and usual ways, might err in faith, as the Protestants pretend, and had not the infallible assistance of the holy Ghost, but that a particular man, esteeming his opinion agreeable to the sense of Scripture, and that of the Council differing from it; might, yea ought to prefer his judgement, before that of the Council.  
For whereas his Majesty saith, that the Counsels holden in the last ages, have been Ecumenical in name, but in effect assembled only from some provinces of Europe, he may observe if he please, that there are two sorts of Ecumenical Counsels; the one Ecumenical indeed, the other Ecumenical in right. I call those Counsels Ecumenical in deed, which have been assembled from all parts, wherein the succession of the Episcopal character is preserved, whether those parts have remained within the Body of the Church, or whether they have been cut of from it. I call those Counsels Ecumenical in right, which are compounded only of those parts which have remained within the body and Society of the Church, and to whom only, as such, belongs the right to judge 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  in matters of Faith: as the Council of Sardica, at the which there assisted not the Bishops of the Patriarkeshipp of Antioch, because they were Arrians. And the second Council of Nicaea, at which the Cophtes (that is, the natural Egyptians and Ethiopians) assisted not, because they were Eutychians. Now both these kinds of Counsels, are of equal authority, as concerning certainty in decisions of Religion; for all the body of the true Church being there representatively, both in the one and the other, the assistance of the holy Ghost is there equally infallible.  
But in regard of evidence, the authority of Ecumenical Counsels in deed, is more powerful and eminent, in the behalf of those men which are divided from the Church, then that of Ecumenical Counsels in right. For in Counsels Ecumenical in right, there are none but Catholics, that are assured, that all the body of the Church is there assembled: whereas in Counsels Ecumenical in deed, each of the parties contesting, is of agreement, that all the Body of the Church is there represented. And the medley of heretical or Schismatical Bishops, that is provided with the only, succession of the Episcopal character, but cut of from the communion of the Body of the Church hinders not, but that in such counsels, the holy Ghost may work by the common note of the Assembly; because, the true Church receiving those Bishops there (for the effect then present) into her charity, and into her communion, while they are joined with her, to the end to seek means to assemblish unity; she re-enables and restores to them for the time of the assembly, the authority of the exercise, and of the jurisdiction of their order whereof before, there remained to them nothing but the character.  
To say then that some of the Counsels of the latter age, have not been Ecumenical, because the greeks or Ethiopians did not assist there, is not a valuable exception, unless it first appear that the greeks or Ethiopians are true and lawful parts of the Church, and have not been justly cut off and divided from the Catholic communion. For it sufficeth to make a Council general and universal in right, that all the parts that remain actual within the Body & communion of the true Catholic church, do concur to it: and it is not requisite, that those that are lawfully separated from her either for Schism or heresy, as are the greeks who err in the Faith of the procession of the holy Ghost, which his Majesty himself holds to be an article of Faith; & the natural Egyptians & Ethiopians who 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  err in the Faith of the hipostaticall union, & in the quality of Eutichians, and Monophysites, are excluded from the Body of the Church from before the fifth Council, should assist to it. And notwithstanding yet even in these last ages, there have been Counsels Ecumenical indeed, and in the sense whereto his Majesty employs this term; when the parts separated froth Body of the Church whould have conspired to some reunion: As that of Lateran under Pope Innocent the third where there where with the Pope, the Patriarches of Constantinople and jerusalem, and the legates of those of Alexandria and Antioch, and more than 400. Bishops and 70. Archbishops, from all the parts of the Church, aswell Greek as Latin: And that of Florence under Eugenius the fourth where assisted the 
Act. 〈◊〉. Florent. Chalcoco. dill. de reb. Tur. Platin. Damian Goes, & 〈◊〉.  greeks with their Emperor and their Patriarch, and the Legates of three other patriarchs, and the Armenians, and the deputies also of the Ethiopians; and in both these they were agreed of all the points of Faith which in these days are again put to question. From whence it appeareth, that the want of General Counsels, could not make the Church to be less acknowledgeable, in the last days, than she was in the first.    

Of the effect of Counsels for the visibility of the Church. CHAPT II.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
AND in the ancient times, it was a firm bond by which all the members of the Catholic Church were bound in the frame of oneself Body, which body for this cause was marvelously noble and eminent, being so constituted in the view and knowledge of all, that none thought they would, could have been ignorant of her. One Faith, one policy, one Body of the Catholic Church, a frequent visitation of the parts amongst themselves, a marvellous consent of all the members, an admirable sim pathie.   

THE REPLY.  
RAther some time these were the means, which heretics, or those Emperors that favoured them made use of to shake and dissolve the mass and frame of the Body of the Church, from whence proceeded the complaints of the Fathers, that after things had been once resolved of in the Church, they should no more hold other new Counsels; that after the Council of Nicaea, every other Council was superfluous, and that they never saw any good effect of all those Counsels, as is by S. GREGORY Nazianzen above said. And therefore these rich and magnificent amplifications of eloquence were no impediments, but that the Church when Luther began might have been not only as much, but more visible, illustrious, and eminent, than she was many times in those ages; witness the objections that the Donatists 
Aug. cont. Vinc. cp. 48.  made to saint AUSTIN of the estate of the Church principally in the East, in saint HILLARYS time, Such was, (said saint AVS.) the time whereof Hillary hath written, from whence thou thinkest to set ambushes for so many divine witnesses, as if the Church were then perished from the Globe of the Earth. And 
Hier. ad Dan. cp 57  saint JEROM because the East striking against herself by the ancient fury of her people, tore in little pieces the unseamed coat of our Lord, woven from above; and that the foxes destroyed the Vine of Christ, in such sort, as it is difficult amongst the dry ponds and which have no water, to discern the sealed fountain, and the enclosed garden; therefore I thought, I ought to consult with the Chair of Peter and the Faith praised by the mouth of the Apostles. For whereas his Majesty adds that the Body of the Church was then set in such an eminence of view and knowledge, that she could not be unknown, Noah not by those that would have been ignorant of her, this was very true, if you took all Catholic provinces together, and compared them with every particular Sect, and it had place in regard of those that were within the bosom of the Church, which neither then nor since could have been ignorant of the Body and Society of the true Church, for as much as they all agreed in the hypothesis, that the Church ought to be discerned by inimitable and indisputable marks, and that those that had them not, could not fain to have them; as the communion 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  with the Sea of saint PETER; the continued and not interrupted Succession of ministry, and Doctrine; the eminency, and universality above all other Christian Sects taken every one a part, and other such like.  
But in regard of those that were separated from it, as heretics, and schismatics who would discern the Church by marks more obscure than the thing itself, and such as all Sects persuade themselves to have, to wit; by the conformity of Doctrine with the scripture, interpreted according to the sentence of every particular man; there was nothing less evident. For to those, the Church how eminent soever she had been, hath always been obscure, & hidden; not for the want of her light & eminency, but because of their darkness and blindness. This, saith saint AVS. is common to all heretics to be unable to see the thing, that in the world is 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  most manifest, and constituted in the light of all nations, out of whose unity, whatsoever they work, although they seem to do it with great care and diligence, can no more profit them against the wrath of God, than the spider web against the extremity of cold. And again The Church is not hidden, for she is not under a 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  bushel, but upon a Candlestick, to give light to all that are in the House. And of her it is said; The City built upon a Mountain cannot be hid, but she is as hidden to the Donatists, who hear so clear and manifest testimonies which demonstrate her to be spread over the whole world, and yet had rather blindfold strike against the mountain, then ascend it. And other where; how can I call those but blind 
Id. in ep. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 2.  that see not so great a mountain, and shut their eyes against the lamp, set upon the candlestick.    

Of the comparison of the Pope, with the other patriarchs. CHAP. III.  

The continuance of the king's answer.  
IF anio one were fallen for heresy or Schism from the communion of one of the Churches (I say not one of the first, which were the Seats of the four Patriarches, but of any other of those, which were much less) as soon as it was known, he was reputed excluded, from the communion of all the Catholic Church.   

THE REPLY.  
IN the time of saint AUSTIN, there was yet but three true 〈◊〉 Seats in the Church; I mean, invested with patriarchal jurisdiction; to wit, Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch; jerusalem having obtained no patriarchal division, till the Council of Chalcedon. For before it was but a simple Bishopric, subject itself in the first instance, to the Archbishop of Caesarea, and by appeal, to the Patriarch of Antioch: and not bearing the title of a Patiarcke, but only as a name of honour to have place in the Counsels after the true Patriarches, but not to exercise jurisdiction over any other diocese.  
This appears both by the Council of Nicaea which perserues the title 
Conc. Hic c. 7.  of honour to the Bishop of Elia, that is, to the Bishop of jerusalem, always saving the dignity of his own Metropolitan, meaning the Archbishop of Caesarea. And by saint JEROM, who asks John Bishop of Jerusalem why he had recourse to the Sea of Alexandria, since the judge of the 
Hiero. ad Damas. con err. joahn. Hie rosol.  Bishop of Jerusalem in the first instance, was the Archbishop of Caesarea, and in the second, he of Antioch. Thou (saith he) which searchest out Ecclesiastical rules and makest use of the Canons of the Council of Nicaea etc. answer me, wherein doth Palestina belong to the Bishop of Alexandria? it is ordained, if I be not deceived, that Caesarea should be metropolitan of Palestina; and Antioch of all the East: then either thou oughtest to have referred they cause to the Bishop of Caesarea etc. or if there were cause to seek a judgement farther, thou shouldest rather have written to Antioch: And a while after; but thou hast rather chosen to importune ears already possessed, then to yield due honour to thy Metropolitan.  
And finally this appear by the Council of Chalcedon which assigns to 
Conc. Chalc act. 7.  Iwenall Patriarch of jerusalem for his first patriarchal territory, the three Palestina's. For that jerusalem in the Council of Constantinople, was called the mother of all the Churches; it was mother in antiquity, and not mother 
Theod hist eccls l. 5. c. 9  in authority: And that in the Council of Ephesus, Iwenall Bishop of jerusalem saith, according to the Latin translation of Rome, that the ancient custom, and the Apostolical tradition was, that the Church of Antioch was to be directed by the Church of jerusalem, it is a mistaking of the translator of Rome, who instead of saying the Roman as Peltanus hath 
Conc. Ep. part. 2. act. 4.  it, hath said the jerosolomitan. For that the last clause of the period, is to have reference to the Roman Sea, as was done by Peltanus, and not to that of jerusalem as the interpreter of Rome hath done, abusing himself with this that the word to obey governs the dative, and not considering that the word, to honour, which is there added altars the rule, is verified by seven undoubted profess.  
First it is verified by this, that the greek text should also have no construction, there being no verb within the period to govern this accusative, the throne Apostolic of great Rome, but the verb to honour. It is secondly proved, because always the Bishops of Rome, and not those of jerusalem have judged of the Counsels of Antioch, as it hath been above specified in the cause of Paul Samosatenus, and of of saint ATHANASIUS. It is thirdly verified, because the nullity propounded against the Council of Antioch in saint ATHANASIUS time, was grounded not upon the absence of the Bishop of Jerusalem who yet was no more there, than the Bishop of Rome, as Socrates' notes, but upon the absence of the 
Soc. hist. eccls l. 2. c. 8.  Pope or his legates It is verified in the fourth place, because the Bishop of Antioch was so far from being subject to him of jerusalem, that chose 
Conc. Nicem. c 7.  the Bishop of jerusalem, as hath lately been showed both by the testimony of the Council of Nicaea, and by that of saint JEROM. 
Hier. cont. error.  was subject in the first instance to the Bishop of Caesarea and by appeal, 
joann. episc Hierosol.  to him of Antioch. It is verified in the fifth place, because the same Council of Ephesus, and in the presence of the same Iwenall, sent back the 
Conc. Ep. p. 2. cp. 5 in relat. add celest.  cause of john Patriarcke of Antioch, to the Pope. It is verified in the sixth place, because in the Council of Chalcedon, where Iwenall was also present, the sentence of Anatholius, Bishop of Constantinople was, that Maximus 
Conc. Chalc act. 10.  Bishop of Antioch should remain, for as much as Pope Leo having received him into his Communion, had judged that he should rule the Church of Antioch. And finally it is verified, because in the general Council of Constantinople against the Monothelites, the cause of Macarius Patriarch of Antioch who had been deposed by the Council, was sent back not to the Bishop of jerusalem but to the Pope. Macarius and 
Imp. Const. Pop in 〈◊〉 Const 6. 〈◊〉. 18.  his adherents (saith the Emperor Constantine Pogonat,) have been deposed by the consent of the whole Council and remitted to the discretion of the most 〈◊〉 Pope.  
The same may be also said of the archbishopric of Constantinople; for as much as although that the Council of Constantinople, holden under Nectarius, had desired to erect it into a Patriarckship, nevertheless this desire had no place till after the Council of Chalcedon. By means whereof, the Church did not acknowledge in the time of saint AUSTIN any more than the three patriarchal Chairs, which had been acknowledged by the Council of Nicaea, to wit Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. 
Soc. hist. ec 〈◊〉. l. 5. c. 8.  For whereas Socrates puts amongst the Patriarchips of the Eastern Empire, the primacy of Pontus, and that of Asia-minor; from whence some infer, that it is an impertinent thing, to go about to restrain the number of the ancient Patriarches, to the only Seas mentioned by the Canons of the Nicean Council, they show their own impertinency, not to see, that Socrates there extends by confusion of language the word 
〈◊〉. ep. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 5. 〈◊〉 Tu. 〈◊〉 hist. Franc. l 5. c. 20. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 in lib. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Titul de Sacrosanct. 〈◊〉.  patriarchs, to all kind of Primates, and employs it not univocallie, and in the same sense whereto we employ it when we speak of patriarchs properly taken; no more than when Cassiodorus calls the primates, and Metropolitans of Italy, Patriarcks, or when Gregory of Tours calls Nicetius 〈◊〉 of Lion, Patriarcke; they intent not to speak of Patriarches properly and strictly taken, but of Patriarches taken largely and generally.  
Now these things were manifestly distinct as Cuias hath plainly noted in these terms, the imperial law separates the privileges patriarchal, and metropoliticke. For not to touch other diversities, which were between the Patriarches specially taken, that Antiquity otherwise calls Archbishops, and patriarchs generally taken, that is between Patriarches and those that were but simply Primates, and Metropolitans, there was this difference between them; that the Seat of the Patriarches properly and especially taken, was fixed, and annexed to the dignity of their Seas, and never varied for any respect of anterioritie, of posteriority, of promotion. In such sort as Patriarches properly taken, never preceded by any primates or Motropolitans, whatsoever anterioritie of promotion the simple primates, or metropolitans had before them; nor amongst the Patriarches properly taken, the third never preceded the second, whatsoever antiquity of promotion he had above him: but their Seats were annexed to the order of their Seas, and not to that of their promotion. Where Patriarches generally and inproperlie taken, that is to say, primates or metropolitans, had amongst them no Seats annexed to the dignity of their Seas, but the ancientest primate, or Metropolitan preceded the others. And therefore whatsoever extension, and communication that the less curious authors have made of the name Patriark 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 123.  to other primates, and metropolitans, yet when there harh been question, to speak of the Patriarches properly so called, the Church never acknowledged more than five Patriarches, three ancient, and originary, Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, and two accessory, and supernumerary 〈◊〉, and Constantinople, as it appears both by the testimony of the Emperor JUSTINIAN, who writes, the most Blessed Archbishops and Patriarches which are, he of ancient Rome, he of Constantinople, he of Alexandria, he of Antioch, and he of Jerusalem; and by the testimony of saint GREGORY the great, who reckons four Patriarches 
Greg. 〈◊〉. ep. l 2. ep. 37.  besides the Pope, when he saith in his Epistle to Natalis. Bishop of Salona; If one of the four patriarchs had committed such a disobedience, it could not have passed without a grievous scandal: And by the testimony of the sixth general Council of Constantinople, which saith to the Emperor CONSTANTINE Pogonat, We pray your imperial wisdom, that the copies of this decree, 
Sext. 〈◊〉. Const. 〈◊〉. 18 Theod. Bals. de 〈◊〉. privilege. apud. l. eun clau.  may be sent to the five patriarchal Thrones. And by the Testimony of Balsamon, who compares the Patriarches to the Organs of the Senses, and affirms, that as there are five Senses in the human Body, so there are five Patriarches in the Church; The Patriarches (saith Salsamon) are as the five senses in one only and selfsame head. And again, We acknowledge the five most sacred Patriarches for the only head of the Body of all the Churches 
Idem. ibid. Conc. Nic. c. 7.  of God. And indeed the seaventh Canon of the Council of Nicaea in saying; Because the ancient Custom and tradition bears, that the Bishop of jerusalem be honoured, the Council or daineth that he have the next place of honour, saving the dignity of his own Metropolitan. Doth it not evidently show two things; the one that the Sea whereof the Council spoke before this Canon had a preeminent rank of honour, both before the Bishop of jerusalem, and before all the other Seas of the Church; And the other that the Bishop of Jerusalem had the next place of honour after them, that is to say; followed them in order of rank and precedency, and had place of all the metropolitans, even his own, to wit; the Arbishop of Caesarea, who was Metropolitan of Palestina, but without any patriarchal jurisdiction; but chose with an obligation to remain subject in the first instance to the jurisdiction of the metropolitan of Palestina, and by appeal to that of the Patriarch of Antioch?  
Now there were but three Seas which preceded that of jerusalem, and after that of jerusalem, there were no more Seas which had fixed places, but all the other Primates and metropolitans changed their Seats, according to the anterioritie, or posteriority of their promotion. And consequently the intention of the Council of Nicaea was not to place in the ranks of Seas truly patriarchal, that is to say; which had patriarchal place, and jurisdiction, but only the three Seas before named there and 
I co. ad Antol. ep. a 51.  in the same rank as they are there named; to wit, Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, as saint LEO the first protests to Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople in these words; I am sorry that thy charity is fallen into this fault to assay to infringe the most sacred constitutions of the canons of Nicaea, as if thou hadst watched a time on purpose to make the Sea of Alexandria lose the privilege of the second 
Conc. Nic. c 6.  honour, and the Church of Antioch the propriety of the third Dignity. And to this it contradicts not that the same Council of Nicaea saith speaking of the Sea of Antioch; Likewise both in Antioch, and in other provinces the privileges to be preserved to the Churches. For he means by the other provinces the 
Innoc. ad Alex. episc. Antioc. ep. 16.  Eastern provinces which he would should be subject to the Bishop of Antioch, saving the right of those, who by reason of the too great distance; or incommodity of the ways, had accustomed to take the ordination 
Hier. ad Pam. Conterror.  of their Metropolitans from their Synods, which hath given subject to Pope Innocent the first to write, that by the Council of Nicaea the Bishop 
joann.  of Antioch was established not over a Province, but over a Diocese; that 
jeros'. ep. 77.  is to say, according to the Style of the ancient lawyers, over a Body and a great number of Provinces: and to saint JEROM to say, that the 
Innoc. ad Alex. Episc Antioc. ep. 16. Conc. Eph.  Council of Nicaea had decreed; that Antioch should be the Metropolitan of all the East: And to Alexander Patriarch of Antioch to complain, that the Cyprians against the Canons of the Council of Nicaea ordained their 
Conc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2. Act. 7.  Bishop without his permission: And to the Cyprians chose to protest, that by the Canons of the Council of Nicaea, the right of the ordination of their Bishops had been preserved to them. The true patriarchs then ancient, and originary, in regard of jurisdiction were the only three Seas of saint PETER, Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch, which were all three, in some sort one Sea, as saint GREGORY the great 
Greg. ep. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 ep. 30.  witnesseth to Eulogius Patriarch of Alexandria in these words; Although (said he) there be many Apostles, yet for principality, the only Sea of the prince of the Apostles hath obtained the authority, which is in three places from one only; for he exalted the Sea, wherein he vouchsafed to set up his rect, and end his present life; he hath adorned the Sea to which he ordained the Evangelist his disciple; and he hath established the Sea, wherein he was resident seven years, although he were to depart from it. which our Hincmarus long after repeated in these 
〈◊〉. in op. 55. ca 〈◊〉. 6.  terms; the Seas of the Roman, Alexandrian, and Antiochian Churches, are one same Sea of the great Prince of the Apostles, Peter.  
And of this ternary number, the reason was, that saint PETER of 
In Chapt. 57  whose authority, and superintendency we will treat else where, willing in his life time to cast the first foundations of the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, which ought to be observed after him, and the other Apostles, judged that the easiest means to establish it, was to settle the principal Seats in those places; where the principal Tribunals of the temporal jurisdiction were constituted, because of the correspondency which the inferior Cities already had to those Seats. Now there were then, three principal Cities Metropolitan and Capital in the Empire, bred from 
〈◊〉 Chrys. 〈◊〉. 32.  the union of the Eastern Empire, that is to say; the Monarchy of Alexander & of his Successors, with the Empire of the west. That of Alexandria which Dion Chrisostome calleth the second City beneath the Sun, which was the Seat of the Empire of Egypt, and of the other neighbour-Regions 
〈◊〉 hell. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 3.  after converted into the prefecture of Egypt: That of Antioch which josephus calls the third City of the Roman world (and which is entitled by 
Chrys. ad. pop. 〈◊〉. hom. 〈◊〉.  saint Chrisostome, the head, and mother-Cittie of the East) which was the head of the particular Empire of the East, that is to say, of the Asian East, after converted into the government of Syria, and other Eastern provinces; and that of Rome, which was the head of the western Empire from whence the ancient jews called Rome the Empire of Edom, that is, the Empire of the West, by allusion to Idumea, which was situate toward the West from the Southern Judea; And they called Titus who sacked jerusalem, Titus the Idumean, a thing which gave occasion to the latter Rabbis, to derive the race of Titus from Idumea; and that the 〈◊〉 Paraphrast turns these words of Jeremias: He will visit thee daughter of Edom into these; I will visit thee, impious Rome. For the division of Alexander's 
Paraphi. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  Empire having been finally reduced to two principal Empires, the one the Empire of Egypt holden by the posterity of Ptolomeus son of Lagus whereof Alexandria was the head; the other the Empire of Asia possessed by the Successors of Seleucus, who after he had conquered Demetrius king of Asia; made (say Eusebius and saint JEROM) of the two 
〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Kingdoms of Syria and Asia, one Empire, whose capital city was Antioch. Then when those two Empires came to be united with that of the common wealth of Rome, which before held the Empire of the West, there where three principal Cities Metropolitan and capital in the Empire, two subaltern, to wit Alexandria, which was head of the Empire of the South, that is the Empire of Egypt: and Antioch which was the head of the Empire of the East, that is the Empire of Asia. And one 〈◊〉, to wit Rome, which was particularly head of the Empire of the West; and besides had the superintendency over the heads of the other two Empires. For I do not reckon Carthage, for so much as she was long before made a member of the Western Empire.  
For these causes then, as the Church cast her first root in Asia, saint PETER also first planted his Episcopal Sea at Antioch, the capital city 
Greg. ep. l. 6. ep 36.  of the East, where he was resident comprehending his voyages into the neighbour provinces seven year, and there founded a successor, or rather a succession, which was after the death of the Apostles, head of all the Ecclesiastical jurisdiction of the Eastern Asia; from whence it is, that in the 
Conc. Chalc act. 7.  Council of Chalcedon, the Patriarch of Antioch intitleth his Sea, the Sea of S. PETER of the great city of the Antiochians: & that S. CHRYSOST. 
Chrysost. homil. in beat Ignat.  citizen of Antioch cries, God showed by the effect, that he had great care of the city of Antioch, for he ordained that Peter the superintendent of the whole world; he, to whom he had consigned the keys of the Kingdom of heaven; he, to whom he had committed the disposition of all things, should be a long time resident there; & that S. INNOCENT the first, of the same time with S. chrysostom, 
Innocen. ad Alexan. Episc. Antioch. ep. 18.  writes to Alexander Patriarch of Antioch; The Sea of Antioch had not given place to the Sea of Rome, but what that obtained only by the way, this obtained absolutely and finally. From whence the same saint PETER seeing that the Church began to grow further, and to spread her roots through all the world, he transported himself to Rome; which was both in particular, head of the West, & in general head of the world, & held there the Episcopal Chair, comprehending many voyages 25. years. Simon Peter (saith saint 
Hier. de script. eccl.  JEROM) son of Jona of the province of Galilee, of the borough of Bethsaida, brother to Andrew the Apostle. and prince of the Apostles, after the Episcopate of the Church of Antioch, and the preaching of the dispersion of those of the Circumcision, who had believed in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, came to Rome the second year of the Empire of Claudius, to overthrow Simon the Magician, and there held 25. years the Episcopal Chair: And S. LEO the first, addressing 
Athan. apol 2.  his speech in the form of Apostrophe to the same S. PETER; Thou hadst (said he) already founded the Church of Antioch, in which the word Christian, first received birth; thou hadst already replenished, Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, with the laws of the evangelical preaching. Then finally having established the superintendencie of the Eastern Church at Antioch, and of that of the West, at Rome, and considering he had still one of the three capital cities of the Empire to provide for; to wit, that of Alexandria, which was the head of the Empire of Egypt, he appointed & placed there his second self, that is to say, his Ghostly child, and well-beloved disciple S. Mark the Evangelist: From whence it is that Julius the first reported by S. ATHANASIUS, writes of Alexandria, it was not a common Church, but of the number of those that the Apostles themselves had instituted. And S. JEROM; The Church of Alexandria doth glory, that 
Hier. ad Theoph. ep. 68 Idem ad Pam. & Marcel. ep. 78.  she partakes in the faith of the Roman: And again, that the Chair of the Apostle Peter confirmeth by his preaching, the preaching of the Chair of Mark the Evangelist: And saint LEO the first, writing to Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria: Since that the most blessed Apostle Peter, hath received from our Lord, the principality of the Apostleship, and that the Roman Church remains in his institution, it is unlawful to believe that his holy disciple Mark, who first governed 
〈◊〉 ad Diosc. ep. 79.  the Church of Alexandria, hath form his decrees upon any other rules of tradition.  
And from thence took beginning these three patriarchal Seas, correspondent to the three Imperial Seats, under which the general union of the Empire was made, but not so yet equal, but that amongst these three first Churches, that is to say, first in regard of the Churches of their divisions, there was one first, of the first & exalted, & superintendent over both the others; to wit, the Roman. From whence it is, that the Council 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  os Sardica, & the Council of Chalcedon, and the Emperor justinian, & S GREGORY the Great, call her the head of all the Churches; & that the Emperor Valentinian entitles the Pope, The Rector of the univer salitie of Churches. And that the Council of Chalcedon qualifies him: him to whom the guard of the vine is committed by our Saviour. And that the Emperor 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Constantine Pogonat, and the sixth Council of Constantinople call him the 
a 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 6. ast. 18. cp. ad Agath.  Protothrone of the universal Church; 
b 〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉. ad 〈◊〉.  the Precedent of the Apostolical height; 
c Ibid.  the Soucraigne Pope; 
d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the Capitaine of the sacred warfare; and the universal Patriarch, and Arch-pastor: and call the other patriarchs, Sinthrones of the Pope, aster the Pope. For I will not add that which some Catholics use to allege of Cassiodorus; to wit, that he attributed to the Pope, the title of Bishop of the patriarchs; as well, because Cassiodorus there speaks not of patriarchs properly taken, but extends the word to Primates, and Metropolitans; as, because I doubt it must be read disiunctivelie Papam vel Patriarchalem Episcopum, and not explicatively Papam vel Patriarcharum Episcopum. It sufficeth me to say, that as the city of Rome besides that she was head of the Empire of the West, a thing which was common to her with the two other cities of Alexandria and Antioch, each in the behalf of their ancient territory, had yet this condition more above the rest, that she was also the head of the universal Body of the Empire, so the final and absolute Sea of S. PETER, which he constituted at Rome besides the patriarchal jurisdiction, and as correspondent to the Empire of the West, in which it agreed with the other patriarchal Chairs; had yet more, the degree of head of the Church, and Prince of the patriarchs, in which he was superior to the other patriarchal Thrones.  
And when there was question of things that went beyond the patriarchal jurisdiction, that is of greater causes, and which concerned the universal Churches, as were causes of Faith, or of the general customs of the Church, or those of the final deposition of Bishops; or those of judging the very persons, of the patriarchs, exercised Ecclesiastical jurisdiction over them, & judged both of their judgements & of their persons. For S. PETER having purposed to follow in the distribution of spiritual jurisdictions, the order already established in the distribution of temporal jurisdiction; it must follow that the same proportion that was between the seat of Rome, & the seats of the other two Empires, in case of politic & secular jurisdiction, must likewise be maintained between the Sea of the Bishop of Rome, and those of the other patriarchs in case of Ecclesiastical & spiritual jurisdiction: & that for two causes, the one occasional & remote, to wit, the secular dignity of the city of Rome which had moved S. PETER to set the spiritual sovereignty of the Church, in that place, where already the temporal sovereignty of the commonwealth was settled: & the other near, formal & immediate, to wit, the spiritual dignity of S. PETER, for the eminency whereof, it was fit, that he that was the head of the episcopal society, should establish his final & absolute Throne, & plant the stock of his direct succession in that place, where the stock & principal Seat of the human & temporal jurisdiction, was already planted: As the Emperors Theodosius and Valentinian 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  note in these words; The primacy of the Sea Apostolic hath been established both by the merit of Peter, who is the Prince of the Episcopal society; and by the dignity of the city, and by the sacred authority of the Synod.  
Now, there was this difference between the seat of the city of Rome, and the seats of the other prefectures, in matter of secular & temporal jurisdiction, that not only the Emperor of the Roman commonwealth, commanded the Prefects and Presidents of the other Seats, but also that the city perfect of Rome, besides the jurisdiction of his ordinary territory which was limited in regard of judgement, in the first instance, to a certain number of provinces, had yet as head of the Senate, and vicar to the Emperor, the right of examining by appeal the causes of all the provinces of the Fmpire. For when Augustus, and the Emperors following, established, or reestablisht the office of Perfect of the city of Rome, they gave him power to judge of the appeals of all the provinces 
Guid. Pan. cirol. come. in notit.  of the Roman circle, as the interpreter of the notice of the Empire; and even the adversaries of the Roman Church do acknowledge, alleging; be it well, be it evil, these words of Maecenas reported in Dion, that the Perfect of 
Imp. Occ. c. 4. l. de Suburbic region. impr Francofurt aun. 1618. c. 1. Dio. Cassi. l. 52.  the city shall judge of the appeals and provocations of all the Magistrates above mentioned: And those of Statius addressed to the city perfect under Domitian.  

Jnque sinum, quae saepe tuumfora turbida quaestu  
Confugiunt legesque, urbesque, ubicunque togatae, 
Stat. Sylu l. 1.   
〈◊〉 longinquis implorant iura querelis.   
And those of an epistle from the Senate to the judges of Carthage reported 
Vopisc. in vita Floria.  by Vopiscus in the time of the Emperor Tacitus: All appeals shall belong to the city Perfect, which shall yet proceed from the 〈◊〉, and ordinary judges. And these of an other epistle of the Senate, to the judges of Treves, 
Vopisc. ib.  and to the Antiochians, Aquileyans, Milaneses, Alexandrians, Thessalonians, Corinthians, and Athenians; The right of appeal hath been universally decreed to the Prefecture of the city: And these of an epistle of Tiberianus; The appeals 
Vopisc ib. Codex Theod. l. 11. tit. 30. l. 13.  from all the powers, and from all the dignities, are returned to the city Perfect. And these from a law of Constantine to julian the city Perfect: We will not that the judges from whom the appeal shall remit the causes to our clemency, but they shall have recourse to the sacred auditory of thy gravity, to whom we have committed our Vicarship; which was after abolished by the translation of the appeals to the Pretoriall Prefects; from whence we have a law of 
1. Codex Theod l. 11. tit. 30. l. 27.  Constantius in the Theodosian-Code, which ordains the Perfect of the Pretory of Italy, to examine the appeals from Sicily, from Sardinia, from Calabria, from Prussia, and from the provinces now called Lombardy, and adds for the city Perfect informed by our answer hath been advertised to depart from it. By means whereof, as the city of Rome, besides that she is head of the Empire of the West, leaves not to have dominion over the heads of the two other Empires; or to reduce the matter into more strict terms; as the Perfect of Rome in the first ages of the Empire, besides the ordinary jurisdiction that he had over the provinces of his territory, yet left not as Vicar to the Emperor and head of the Senate to judge of the appeals os all other provinces: so the Pope, beside the jurisdiction he had in quality of Patriarch of the West, over the provinces of the patriarkship os the West; yet lest not as head os the Church and successor of saint PFTFR, and principal Vicar of Christ to have the supereminence, and general superintendence, over all the other provinces. To the Roman Church (saith saint IRENEUS) because of a more mighty principality; 
Iren. l. 3. c. 3.  that is to say, as hath above appeared, because of a principalitien o'er mighty than the temporal) it is necessary, that all Churches should agree. And saint CYPRIAN; The Roman Church is the Chair os PEPPER, 
Cypr. ad Corn. ep. 52.  and the principal and original of the Socerdotall unity. And Saint Athanasius; They have had no reverend esteem that Rome was the Sea Apostolic, 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  and metropolitan of Romania. And saint GREGORY Nazianzen; The 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  ancient Rome treads rightly in the faith, holding all the West bound by the healthful word, as it is convenient for her to do, that ruleth all the world. And saint JEROM, a priest of the Church of Antioch, and disciple of S. Gregory Nazianzen, writing to Pope Damasus; I know the Church is founded upon that 
〈◊〉. ad Dam. ep. 57  stone: whosoever eateth the lamb out of that house, is profane: And a little after; I know not Vitalis; I am ignorant of Miletius; I reject Paulinus: whosoever gathers 
Aug. ep. 162.  not with thee scatters. And S. AUST. In the Roman Church hath always 〈◊〉, the principality of the Sea Apostolic. And Prosper whom saint 〈◊〉 
Prosp de 〈◊〉. l. 2. 〈◊〉. 6.  reputes his second self, and whom Joseph Scalager calls the most learned man of his age; The principality of the Apostolic priesthood, hath made 〈◊〉 greater by the Tribunal of Religion, then by that of the Empire; & else where changing his prose into verse: 
Prosp. de 〈◊〉.   

Rome, great Apostle Peter's sacred Seat,  
Head, of the Churches-Bodie, here below;  
Hath by Faith's Empire, made herself more great,  
Then she by all her armed powers, could grow.   
And 〈◊〉 the first, in the epistle to Anastasius Bishop of Thessalonica; 
Leo ad Anast Episcop 〈◊〉. ep. 〈◊〉.  It hath been provided by a grand order, that all should not attribute all things to themselves, but that in every province, there should be some whose sentence might hold the first place amongst their brethren: And again; that there might be others constituted in the greater cities, who might use a greater diligence, by whom the care of the universal Church might flow to the only Seat of Peter. And therefore 〈◊〉 the Allexandrians would accuse Dionysius Patriarch of Alexandria their Bishop, they went up to Rome, saith S. ATHANASIUS, & accused him 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  before 〈◊〉 Bishop of Rome. And when the same ATHANASIUS, likewise Patriarch of Alexandria, Paul Bishop of Constautinople; and Marcellus Primate of Aneyra in Galatia, had been deposed by diverse Counsels of the 〈◊〉; The Bishop of Rome (saith Sozomene) restored to each one his 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Church, because to him, for the dignity of his Sea, the care of all things belonged. And when the cause of john Patriark of Antioch, had been propounded to the Council of Ephesus, the Council remitted the judgement to the Pope: And Iwenall Bishop of Jerusalem said, that the anoient custom and 〈◊〉 tradition bare, that the Church of Antioch should be ruled by the Roman.  
And when the Council of Chalcedon disannulled the acts of the false Council of Ephesus, they excepted the creation of Maximus Patriark 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  of Antioch, because saith Anatolius Archbishop of Constantinople; The Pope having received him into his communion, hath judged that he should rule the Church of Antioch. And when Theodoret Bishop of Cyre in the borders of Persia, and subject to the patriarkhip of Antioch, had been deposed in the same Council of Ephesus, he appealed to the Pope, and the Council 
〈◊〉.  of Chalcedon received him; because saith the Senate, The Pope had restored him to his dignity. And when Flavianus Archbishop of Constantinople, had been deposed by Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, and by the false Council of Ephesus, he appealed likewise to the Pope; and that saith the Emperor Valentinian following the custom of the Counsels. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  And when john Patriarch of Alexandria, had been driven from his Sea, by the plot of the 〈◊〉 Zeno, he also appealed to the Pope, & that with the intercession of the Patriarch of Antioch, as Liberatus Archdeacon of 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  a writer of a thousand and one hundred years' antiquity, reports in these words; John (saith Liberatus) having taken Synodical letters of intercession 
Liberat. c. 2.  from Calendian Patriarch of Antioch, appealed to Pope Simplicius. And thus much of the comparison of the Pope, with the other patriarchs: For 
〈◊〉  as for the canon of the Council of Nicaea, which seems to rule the Bishops 
In chap. 32  of Alexandria & Antioch over the Bishop of Rome, it shall be spoken of hereafter.    

Of the difficulties of the Scripture, concerning the time of S. Peter's stay at Antioch, and at Rome. CHAPT. IV.  
BUT against this that we have affirmed of the sitting of Saint PFTER at Antioch, and at Rome; calvin, and the other adversaries of the Church, form twelve principal objections; eight from the Scripture, and four from the Fathers. The first objection is, that S. PAUL found S. PETER in jerusalem the two first voyages that he made thither; the one, three year after his conversion; & the other, when 
Galat. 1. Act. 12. Hier. de script. cccl in Petro. Greg. ep. l. 6. ep. 36. Hier. ibid.  he carried the alms for the famine foretold by Agabus; & then that the Episcopal stay of S. PETER at Antioch, which after S. jeroms' computation between these two voyages, could not be seven years, as S. Gregory affirms it, & as we suppose it; for as much as S. Paul's conversionhappened at the soon, three years after the death of JESUS CHRIST; & S. PETER departed from Jerusalem to go to Rome, the second year of the Empire of Claudius, which was the eleventh year after the death of 
Act. 15.  Christ. The seconde objection is, that S. PETER still assisted at Jerusalem, at the Council held for the legal causes about twenty year, say they, after the death of our Lord and was crucified as we say, the fourteenth year of the Empire of Nero, that is the seven & thirtith year after the death of our Saviour, & then he could not have been 25 year at Rome as we say. The third that S. PAUL addressing the principal of his epistles to the Romans, doth not there salute S. PETER, whom he would not 
Rom. 16.  have forgotten, if he had been there. The fourth is, that S. PAUL writing 
Philip. 2.  from Rome to the Philippians, complained that every one sought his own, & not that which was of Christ. And to Timothy that all had abandoned him: which he would not have done if S. PETFR had been there. The 
2. Tim. 4.  fist, that when S. PAUL came to Rome, the brethren went to meet him, 
Act. 28.  amongst whom there is no mention of S. PETFR, and the jews prayed him to declare to them his opinion of the sect of the Christians, a thing they would not have required, if S. PETER had preached at Rome before him. The sixth; that S. LUKE who writ the history of the Acts of the Apostles, maketh no mention of S. PETER'S voyage to Rome. The seaventh that S. PAUL who hath described the interview between S. 
Galat. 1. & 2.  PETER and him at Jerusalem and Antioch, speaks not of their interview at 
joan. 21.  Rome, which was the most famous city of the world. And the vl, that S. john made mention of the kind of death by which S. PETER should glorify God, but makes no mention of the place of his death. Now let us first dispatch the objections taken out of scripture, and after we will proceed to those taken out of the Fathers.  
To the first objection then from Scripture, which is that S. PAUL still 
Calu. inst. l. 4. c. 6.  found Saint PETER in Jerusalem in the two first voyages that he made 〈◊〉; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one, three years after his conversion; and the other, when 
〈◊〉. 2.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the alms for the famine, foretold by Agabus; and 〈◊〉 
1. Act. 〈◊〉  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the Episcopal stay of S. PETER at Antioch, which was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the two voyages, could not be of seven years: I answer, that the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉. Paul, happened not in the third year after the death of our 〈◊〉, as they pretend, a thing which troubles all the harmony of the history, but the first. And this I prove in this manner. Between the Council of jerusalem, and S. 〈◊〉 departure to go to Rome, S. Paul remained besides the time employed in his 〈◊〉, six year in the East; to wit, a year and a half at Corinth; three months in the Synagogue 
〈◊〉 18.  
〈◊〉 19  of the Jews at 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; two years in the school of Tyrannus, three months 
〈◊〉.  again in 〈◊〉; and two other years finally in the prison at 
Act. 20.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉: for this word, and 〈◊〉 forth two year after, hath reference to 
Act 24.  
〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 time of saint Paul's imprisonment, and not to the time of the institution of 〈◊〉, as it appeared by saint Paul's testimony, who saith, that 
〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 many years. Now saint Paul departed from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 come to Rome the four and twentieth year after the death of 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he came forth of prison, when 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 was 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 steed; and 〈◊〉 notes, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being 〈◊〉 to Rome was absolved from his faults committed 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 the credit that his brother Pallas had with the Emperor Nero: 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tacitus quoteth, that Pallas was fallen from Nero's favour 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Antistius, which was the second year after the 〈◊〉 of Christ; or if we comprehend the year of Christ's death, within 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the siue and twentieth. And to this S. JEROM agrees, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 saith; Paul was sent prisoner to Rome the five and twentieth year after the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 our Lord; that is the second year of Nero, when Festus Procurator 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Felix. From the four and twentieth year then after the 〈◊〉 of Christ, if you subtract the six years interposed between the Council of 〈◊〉, and the voyage of S. Paul to Rome, there will 〈◊〉, that the Council of Jerusalem was holden at the latest, the eighteenth year after the death of our Lord, & not the twentieth as they suppose. Now between the conversion of S. Paul, & the Council of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Paul teacheth us, that there were seventeen years, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 writ to the 〈◊〉; three years after I went to jerusalem to see 〈◊〉. 
〈◊〉.  And again; and then after fourteen years I went up again into jerusalem. For where Calvin will have it that the voyage of jerusalem where of S. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Paul speaks in the Epistle to the Galathians, when he saith, again after fourteen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 went up to jerusalem, should not be the voyage of the Council 
Act. 〈◊〉 12  but the voyage of the alms for the famine is a gross ignorance, since the voyage of the alms for the famine, was made before the death of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, who deceased as it shall hereafter appear, twelve year after the death of Christ. And whereas the same Calvin saith that the fourteen year quoted by S. Paul, should not be added to the end 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before mentioned but should be counted from his conversion, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the greek phrase, which insinuates, that these fourteen years were interposed between the voyage for the visit of S. Peter, & the voyage to the council; which gave Beza occasion to translate it thus: And 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 intervented, I went up again into jerusalem. And to saint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Paul testifies that after seventeen years' 〈◊〉 conferred fully 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Then let us defalk from the four and twenty years' 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Death of Christ, at the end where of saint PAUL went to 〈◊〉, the six years which passed between the Council of jerusalem, and the departure of saint Paul to go to Rome, and from the remainder which will be eighteen years, subtract the seventeen year, which passed between the Conversion of Saint PAUL, and the Council of Jerusalem, it will appear that the conversion of saint PAUL happened the first year after the death of our Lord, as the Chronicon of Eusebius reckons it: and then that the third year after the conversion of saint PAUL, which was that wherein saint PAUL transported himself 
Galat. 1.  first into jerusalem, and from jerusalem, as saith the Epistle, to the Galathians 
Act. 11.  into Syria and Cilicia, that is to say, according to the history of the Acts, to Tharsus and Antioch, was the fourth year after the death of 
Leo ad Anatol. Const. Episc. ep. 51.  Christ, and consequently that the stay of S. PETER at Antioch began the fourth year after the death of Christ. For S. LEO the first saith plainly, that the name of Christian had the original at Antioch, Saint Peter preaching there, which could not have been so, if Saint Peter had not been come to Antioch, within the compass of the same year that saint Paul arrived there, during the which saint Luke testifies, that the disciples were first called Christians at Antioch.  
And against this it can not be said, that saint LUKE toucheth nothing 
Act. 11.  of this voyage of saint 〈◊〉 to Antioch, for saint LUKE doth no more touch the conference of Saint PETER and saint PAUL at Antioch, which nevertheless we learn out of the Epistle to the Galathians; nor that saint PAUL recites, in the Epistle to the Galathians the interview between saint PETER and him at Antioch, after the Council of Jerusalem. For besides that saint 〈◊〉 maintains, that the interview between 
Augep. 19 ep. con.  saint PETER and saint PAUL at Antioch, was before the Council 
Faust. l. 19 c. 17.  of jerusalem, though it be recited after it, saint PAUL doth no where say, that saint PETER and he never met more than once at Antioch. Now the voyage that saint PAUL made into jerusalem when he carried the alms for the general famine foretold by Agabus, & found 
Act. 12.  S. PETER prisoner there, was the cleaventh year after the death of our Saviour. For the Scripture saith, that this famine fell out under Claudius: and Dion reckons the beginning of the general famine, which happened 
Dio. hist. l. 60.  in Claudius his time under the 795.th year of the foundation of Rome which was the second year of Claudius his Empire; that is to say, the 
jos. ant. l. 19 c. 7.  eleventh after the Death of our Lord: And josephus observes, that Herod called Agrippa, author of saint PETER'S imprisonment, deceased the seaventh year of his Reign, which was the third year of the Empire of Claudius. And therefore between the first voyage of saint PAUL to jerusalem, and the second, there was seven year, that is to say, five whole years, and two imperfect years, which is the time that the Fathers, 
Greg. ep. l. 6. ep. 36.  and we after them, assign for saint PETER'S stay at Antioch. For that the Latin Chronicon of Eusebius saith, that he was there twenty siue years, it is a deprawtion of the copies of Bsale in which instead of five, they have set in 25. as it may be seen by the account of the years noted by retail, which, are five, to wit, from the three and twentieth of Tiberius, to the second of Claudius; or possibly (a frequent chance in chronological tables) an entire addition, as it is conjectured by the Armenian copy, and diverse latin manuscripts of the same Chronicon of Eusebius, which are kept in the library of the Vatican; and by the Greek and Latin edition of Scaliger, in none of which, this quotation is to be found. And to this there is no repugnancy in that that the history of the Acts following the custom of the Scripture, which is often to recite immediately things far from that time placeth the voyage of saint PAUL to jerusalem 
Act. 11. verse. 30.  presently after the prophecy of Agalus: for saint LUKE speaking of 
Ibid. vers. 28.  the famine foretold by Agabus, adds, which also happened under Claudius' 〈◊〉, to show that the prophecy had been long before the Empire of 〈◊〉: by means whereof between the prophecy of Agapus, and the time of the famine which began but the second year of the Empire of 〈◊〉 there were passed many years: nether that the same history notes, that PAUL and BARNABAS conversed a year at Antioch: for 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  that should not be taken from their arrival until the voyage of the 〈◊〉; which was executed many years after the prophecy of Agabus; 
〈◊〉 verses 26 &. 27.  but it is meant, that they stayed a whole year at Antioch, without departing from it, and then came again: nor that it saith that Agabus came at the same time to Antioch; for this note of time is referred in general to the time before the Empire of Claudius; and it is put to discern the time of the pronunciation of the prophecy, which was under the Empire of 〈◊〉, from the time wherein it was accomplished, which was under the Empire of Claudius.  
To the second objection, which is, that Saint PETER assisted at the 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 4 c. 6 The author of the 〈◊〉 upon the Church c 8.  Council of jerusalem which was celebrated twenty year after the Death of Christ; and consequently could not be arrived at Rome the second year of the Empire of Claudius, which was the eleventh after the Death of Christ; neither could then have, been Bishop there twenty five year; 〈◊〉 answer there is nothing incompatible between these two histories For Suetonius writes, that Claudius drove the jews out of Rome which moved 〈◊〉, said he, at the instance of Christ. Now Orosius notes, and that as he saith, after josephus, that this banishment happened the ninth 
〈◊〉 hist. l. 7. c. 〈◊〉.  year of the Empire of Claudius, which was the eighteenth year after the Death of our, Lord; that is to say, as we have demonstrated in the solution last passed, the same year of the Council of jerusalem. And saint LUKE consirmes, who writes, that saint PAUL being come to Corinth, 
Act. 19  a little after the Council of Jerusalem, found Prisca and Aquila there, who were, said he new returneed out of Italy, because Claudius had commanded all the jews to go forth of Rome. And therefore what wonder is it that saint PETER beiug arrived at Rome the second year of the Empire of Claudius, and having been constrained to avoid Rome with the other jews seven year after; that is to say, the ninth year of the Reign of Claudius, because of the Edict published by him against the jews; were in the East at the Council of Jerusalem, which was celebrated that same year, and afterward, the heat of the Edict being cooled, returned to Rome? 
Rome. 16.   
To the third objection, which is, that saint PAUL writing to the Romans, saluted not saint PETER, which he could not have forgotten to do, if he had been there: we answer, that the Epistle to the Romans, was written in the time of the jews exile from Rome, and during saint PETER'S being in the East, to wit, between the Council of jerusalem, 
Rome 15.  and the death of Claudius, for it was written at Corinth, when saint PAUL 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  passed by there, to make his last journey to Jerusalem. And therefore although 〈◊〉 and Aquila, and some other less notable jews, were already returned to Rome, nevertheless it follows not that saint PETER, who was the principal author of the jews conversion, for which their nation was banished, should so soon return. jointly that if this argument 
Heb. 13.  were of weight, we must withal conclude, that Timothy was not Bishop of Ephesus, for S. PAUL writing to the Ephesians, makes no mention of him: and that saint, James was not Bishop of jerusalem, for in the Epistle to the Hebrews, written in saint james his life time as appears by these 〈◊〉, know that the brother Timothy hath been licenced, with whom, if he return 〈◊〉. I will visit you: there is no mention made of saint James. And therefore so far is Theodoret (an author of the same time, with the Counsels of Ephesus and Chalcedon, and one of the most famous writers of the Ecclesiastical history) from takeing one argument from the Epistle to the Romans, as the Pope's adversaries do, to call in question S. PETER'S stay at Rome; as chose, commenting the Epistle to the Romans, he saith, that saint PAUL there useth the word, to confirm, for as much as S. Peter had already founded 
Theod. in p. ad Rome c. 1. c  the Gospel amongst them. Because (saith Theodoret) that the great Peter, had already declared to them the evangelical doctrine, therefore saint Paul necessarily adds, to confirm you.  
To the fourth objection, which is that S. PAUL writing from Rome, not only toucheth no word of S. PETER, but also in the epistle written to the Philippians from Rome saith; that all sought that which was of themselves, 
Phillp. 2. 2. Tim. 4.  and none sought which was of Christ: And in the second to Timothy, written from the same place, that all had forsaken him. We answer, that in the one he speaks of those that he might have sent to the Philippians, and 
Chrys. in 2 Tim. c. 4  that in the other he speaks, either of his familiars, as S. CHRYSOST. saith, and of those which were accustomed to follow him, or of those that had power to defend him, at the Imperial Tribunal of which number S. PETER was like to be none. And besides we maintain, that S. PAUL speaks by Synecdoche saying, all, instead of saying, many, as S. JEROM 
〈◊〉 in ep ad Eph. c. 1. Bulling. in 2. Tim. c. 4  acknowledgeth in these words; For as much as saint Paul had been forsaken by many, he therefore writes, that all had forsaken him: And Bullinger minister of Zurich, In these; I doubt not, but the Apostle used a Synecdoche, in this passage, saying he had been forsaken of all, when as, only some had sorsaken him. And finally we will add, that if from the silence of S. PAUL, it be permitted to infer, that saint PETER was not at Rome, when saint PAUL writ these epistles; we must then also conclude by the same argument that saint PAUL was not there. For in any one of the epistles, that S. PAUL hath written from Rome, he neither makes mention of the city, nor Church of Rome; and we only know that he writ them from Rome, because in the epistle to the Philippians, he speaks of Caesar's house; and 
Ahilipp. 4.  because in the epistle to the Ephesians; and to the Colossians; and in the second to Timothy, he speaks of his prison.  
To the sift objection, which is, that when saint PAUL arrived at Rome, 
Act. 18.  the brethren went to meet him, amongst whom there is no mention of S. PETER; We answer, that all the Roman Church, went not to meet S. PAUL, but some particular Christians, the Church than not being so free and quiet at Rome, as they could make those public demonstrations; but contrarily so oppressed & enclosed, as the most part of the faithful, were constrained to hide themselves in caves, and places under ground, to avoid the persecutions & tyrannies of the infidels. jointly that we say not, that S. PETER remained always fixed and tied to Rome, while he was Bishop thereof, but that he went from time to time, planting the Gospel in the lesser cities, and placing Bishops over them, and that during these voyages he administered the Roman Church, by the ministry of Linus and Cletus, whom he had there establisheth for his Coadjutors; which is the cause for which (if we believe Russinus) they are sometimes 
Ruffi. praef. in Clem.  reckoned in the order of the Bishops of Rome, before S. CLEMENT, and sometimes after him. And whereas the jews prayed S. PAUL when he 
Act. 28.  came to Rome, to inform them of the sect of the Christians, which they 
Calu. inst. l. 4 c. 6.  object to us they would not have done, if saint PETER had already been Bishop there; We answer, that they prayed S. PAUL to inform them, 
The author of the trea. upon the Church. c. 8.  not of the sect of the Christians, but of the opinion that he (whom they reputed to be greatly versed in the jewish doctrine) had of them. Otherwise, how could S. PAUL say in his epistle to the Romans, above four year before his arrival at Rome; your faith is declared through the whole world? 
Rom. 1.   
To the sixth objection; which is, that S. LUKE, who hath written the history of the Apostles, speaketh not of the voyage of S. PETER to Rome; we answer, S. LUKE purposed to write particularly the acts of saint PAUL his master, and not these of the other Apostles. For except that which passed between the death of our Lord, and the conversion of saint PAUL, where he treats the history of the Apostles in common, to make it serve for a foundation to the particular relation of the acts of S. PAUL, and except the discourse of the conversion of Cornelius, which he adds there, for as much as this conversion, was the overture of the Gospel to the Gentiles, for whose vocation S. PAUL had been called; S. LUKE doth not, after that to the end of his book, make mention of any other Apostle, unless in as much as he was in the place where S. PAUL was; and yet he omitts the voyage of S, PAUL to jerusalem, to visit S. PETER, & S. PETER & S. PAUL'S meeting at Antioch, and the right hand of association given by S. PETER, S. JAMES, & S. JOHN to S. PAUL; & the voyage of the same S, PAUL into Galatia, which caused Beza to say, Luke hath omitted many things, and principally S. PAUL'S voyage to the Galathians. And 
〈◊〉 annot. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ep. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  therefore so far is S. JEROM from making use of S. LUKE'S silence, to weaken the credit of S. PETER'S stay at Rome, as chose he argues the stay of S. PETER at Antioch and at Rome, to show how S. LUKE hath passed many things under silence, and takes this foundation for a certain and 
〈◊〉 ep. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 2  undoubted principle of history. Finally (saith S. JEROM) we have learned, that Peter was the first Bishop of the Church of Antioch, and that from thence, be was transferred to Tome, which Luke hath utterly omitted.  
To the seaventh objection, which is that S. PAUL speaks of the interview between S. PETER and himself, both at jerusalem and Antioch, but speaks of no meeting, between S. PETER and him at Rome, which was the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. of 〈◊〉, upon the 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 8.  famousest city of the world; we answer, that the epistle to the Galatians, which is the only place where S. PAUL speaks of the interviews between S. PETER and him, to dissipate the reproaches that they that would seduce the 〈◊〉, laid upon him, that he had not been instituted Apostle by Christ, but by S. PETER, & by the other Apostles who gave him their right hands for association; was written (if we believe S. chrysostom before 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom.  the epistle to the Romans; and then we must not think it strange that S. PAUL touched nothing there, of the interview of S. PETER & him at Rome; since it was written, before the voyage of S. PAUL to Rome.  
To the eighth objection, which is that S. JOHN makes mention of the kind of death of S. PETER, but makes no mention of the place of his 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 8.  death: we answer two things; the one, that S. JOHN makes mention of the kind of S. PETER'S death, & not of of the place where, because the kind, and not the place of the death of S. PETER, belongs to the explication of this prophecy of our Lord; When thou shall be old, thou shalt stretch forth thy 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  hands: And the other, that so far is this clause of S. JOHN from weakening the belief of S. PETER'S death at Rome, that it fully confirms and authoriseth it. For S. JOHN having writ his Gospel many years after the martyrdom of S. PEEER, and having explained, and proved this 〈◊〉 os our Lord, thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, by the kind of S. PETER'S death, without specifying it particularly; it must be, that when S. JOHN 〈◊〉 his Gospel, the kind of S. PETER'S death was known and evident to all parts of the Church. Now, the kind of S. PETER'S death could not be known to all parts of the Church, but the place of his death must likewise be known to them, nor could the place of S. PETER'S death be known to all the Church, & be any other then Rome. For how could it 
Dión Cor  háppen, that not only all the ancient authors, yea those that writ in the next age after S. JOHN as 
apud Eus. hist. eccls l. 2. c. 25.  S. DIONYSIUS of Corinth, 
b Iren. adverse. 〈◊〉. l. 3. c. 3.  S. IRENEUS, 
c Caius apud Eus. hist. eccls l 2. c. 25.  Caius, 
d Tert. de praescrip.  Tertullian, & infinite others, but the very stones also, & the inscriptions of the sepulchers of S. PETER & S. PAUL, which were yet preserved, and publicly showed at Rome in the time of Caius, should witness with a common voice, that S, PETER had been martyred at Rome, & that no other Church but the Roman, did ever glory in his Relics, and his martyrdom, if from the time wherein S. john writ his Gospel, the place of S. PFTERS death had been known to all the parts of the Church, & had been any other then Rome? And therefore, what remains in all the texts objected to us from scripture, which agrees not perfectly with the Chronology of the Church, concerning the history of S. PETER? Saint PAUL affirms that three year after his conversion, he traveled to jeru. 
Galat. 1.  salem to visit S. PETER; consents not that exactly with our computation, which reckons the conversion of S. PAUL, the first year after the death of our Lord; & the voyage of S. PETER to Antioch, the fifth? S. LUKE reports, that S. PAUL being come to jerusalem for the distribution of the alms during the famine, which began the eleventh year after the death of Christ, found S. PETER there prisoner; doth not that wholly agree 
Act. 12.  with our Chronologie, which supposes, that the Episcopal Seat of saint PETER at Antioch, was seven year, five complete, & two imperfect? The same S. LUKE writes, that S. PETER withdrawing himself from jerusalem at his delivery, which was the second year of the Reign of 
Ibid.  Claudius, went into an other place; that is to say, into an other place proper to go out of judea; & from the jurisdiction of Herod, such as was joppa, where those used to embark, that would sail to Rome, & into the west: doth not that excellently agree with S. JEROMS' computation, who 
Hier. de script. eccls in Petro.  reports that S. PETER came to Rome, the second year of the Empire of Claudius? For that S. LUKE saith only, that he went into an other place, & expresses not whither, but leaves him seven year after without mention, it is not to abandon the history of S. PAUL his master. The same S. LUKE testifies, that S. PETER was again at the Council at jerusalem 
Act. 15.  holden for legal causes. fits not that just with that, that Suetonius saith, 
〈◊〉. in Claud.  that Claudius drove the jews from Rome, which raised tumults for Christ's 
Oros. hist. l. 7. c. c. 6  cause, & to that, that Orosius notes, that this banishment was in the ninth year of Claudius; that is, the eighteenth year after the death of Christ, which was the very year of the Council? S. JOHN expounds this prophecy 
Ioann. 21.  of our Lord to S. PETER; Thou shalt stretch forth thy hands, and aen other shall gird thee, by the kind of S. PETER'S death; and adds, that our Lord foretelling enigmaticallie the martyrdom of S. PETER, said to him, follow me; doth not this agree, with that Tertullian saith, speaking of 
Tert. de prescript. Amb. Orat. in Auxent. de non trad Basil. ep. l. 5. 1. Pet. c. 5. Exemp graec. Oecum. & alia.  the Roman Church: Happy Church, in which the Apostles have shed all their doctrine, with their blood, in which Peter is equalled to the passion of our Lord: And with what S. AMBROSE writes that S. Peter being come forth of Rome to fly persecution, our Lord appeared to him, and said; I go to Rome to be crucified again?  
S. PETER insinuates in his first epistle, that he writ it from Babylon; & many greek copies contrarily date it from Rome: Is not this solued by that, that Eusebius and S. JEROM say, that S. PETER calls Rome allegorically 
Euseb. hist. eccls l. 2. c. 14.  Babylon, for as much as Rome was then in regard of the jews, the same as the Asian Babylon had been in the time of the Prophets? He adds the salutation of MARK: The Church (said he) which is in Babylon, and Mark my son, salute 
Hieron. de script. eccls in Marc. 1. Pet. ibid.  you: doth not that agree, both with the use of the word Marcus, which was a Roman name, and not a Babylonian; and with these words of Papias auditor of S. JOHN, reported by Clemens Alexandrinus; Mark being requested 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  at Rome by the brethren, writ a short Gospel which Peter having read approved? For whereas Erasmus saith that S. JEROM attributes the name of ` Babylon to Roms in choler, for as much as he had been evil entreated 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  there; and will have that Babylon, whereof S. PETER speaks, to be the Asirian-Babylon; These are two childish ignorances, the one not to know that S. JEROM had already interpreted that Babylon, whereof S. PETER 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  speaks to be Rome, both in his commentary upon Esay, and in his catalogue of the Ecclesiastical Authors, written long before the evil entreaty 
〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉. c. 47. 〈◊〉. de 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. Antony's l. 17. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. The author of the 〈◊〉. upon the Ch. c. 8.  that he received at Rome, which happened under Syricius: And the other, not to know, that when S. PETER writ this epistle; josephus witnesseth, there were then no Jews in Babylon. But this is enough of the instances of scripture; let us proceed to those of the Fathers, which consist in four principal objections.  
The first, that Clemens Comanus writes to JAMES brother of our Lord, Bishop of jerusalem, the death of S. PETER at Rome, a thing repugnant (say the obiectors) to scripture, which witnesseth that JAMES was martyred long before the death of PETER. The second, that S. JEROM writes, that S. PETER was crucified in judea. The third, that S. AUST. affirms, that the history of the battle of S. PETER and Simon Magus at 
〈◊〉.  Rome, proceeded from an opinion, or as they say, from a fabulous narration: And the fourth, that in the order of PETER'S successors, some place 
〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 & 〈◊〉 before Clement, & some after: to which they farther add for the banquet and confectes after the Feast, that Eusebius and the Legend; upon which they charge us, that we found the Papacy contradict one another; for as much as Eusebius saith, that S. PETER was crucified; and the Legend saith, he was beheaded.  
To the first of these objections; which is, that Clement writing to JAMES brother to our Lord, declares to him, the martyrdom of S. PETER; We answer three things; first, that that epistle is apocryphas and supposed; for 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  though it was translated from Greek into latin by Ruffinus, & that it is cited by the first Council of Vaison which was holden under the Emperor 〈◊〉 the third, containing many good doctrines, nevertheless it is certain, that the Greek original of the recognitions of Clement, to which it was annexed & relative, was apocryphas, & had been either supposed or corrupted by the Hebionites. The second, that the Bishop of jerusalem, to whom this epistle is addressed, was not JAMES the Apostle, brother to our Lord, but Simon brother & successor in the Bishopric to JAMES the 
〈◊〉. count. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 30.  Apostle entitled the brother of our Lord; whom this epistle calls JAMES brother of our Lord, according to the custom the Hebrews had to bear many names, & sometimes to inherit names one from an other; as it appears both by the repugnancy of the time of the death of the Apostle JAMES brother of our Lord, which Ruffinus interpreter & advocate for his epistle, who had translated the Ecclesiastical history of Eusebius, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  could not be ignorant of; & by the inscription, in the which the author of the epistle entitles him, to whom he addresses it, JAMES brother of our Lord, and Bishop of jerusalem, & entitles him not Apostle, which he could not have forgotten to do in that place, if it had been the Apostle JAMES brother to our Lord. And the third, that those that object this, straining forth a gnat, swallow a Camel; that is, in thinking to tax the ignorance of others in the matter of the Chronologie of the Fathers, discover their own in the history of the Scripture; for the Apostle S. JAMES, whose martyrdom they say, the Scripture reports, was the Apostle JAMES, brother of JOHN, martyred by Herod, in the twelfth of the Acts, & 
〈◊〉. 8  not the Apostle JAMES brother of our Lord, who was ten years after still in Jerusalem, and of whose death, the Scripture never speaks in any 
Hegesip. hist. l. 5. apud Eus. hist. eccls l. 2 c. 22.  part of it, the Church having learned what she knows of it, not from the Scripture, but from Josephus, and from Hegesippus, and from Clement Alexandrinus, & from Eusebius, & from S. JEROM, who testify that JAMES the 
Clem. Alex l. 7. Hypotyp. apud. 〈◊〉. de scrip. eccls Eus. hist. eccls l. 2. c. 22.  Apostle, brother of our Lord, died under the Pontificate of Ananus the young, and in the seaventh year of the Empire of Nero.  
To the second objection, which is, that S. JEROM writes, that S, PETER was crucified in judea; we answer that S. JEROM doth no where write, that S. PETER was crucified in judea, but contrarily he plainly affirms, 
〈◊〉. de 〈◊〉. eccls in jacob.  that he was crucified at Rome: PETER (said he) held the Sacerdotal Chair at Rome, till the fourteenth year of Nero, by whom he was crucified. And again; He was buried at Rome, in the Vatican, near the triumpball Street, where he is celebrated 
The auct. of the trea. upon. the Ch. c. 8. in the old edi tions  by the veneration of all the City. Only after he hath reported the words of our Lord; Behold, I send you prophets, and wise men and Scribes, and you will kill them, and crucify them, and whip them, in your Synagogues: he adds, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that there are diverse Gifts in the disciples of Christ, according to the Apostle to 
Hier. de scrip eccls in Petr. Idem ibid. Hier. in Matth l. 4. c 23.  the Corinthians; Some are Prophets, who foretell things to come; some are wise men, who know when they should pronounce the word; others Scribes well learned in the law; whereof Steven hath been stoned, Paul beheaded, Peter crucified. But that S. PETER was crucified in judea, he hath, no where said; and if he had been crucified by the jews, he had intended it (in the same sense wherein S. PAUL 
Cor. c. 2.  cries, that the Jews crucified the Lord of Glory, that is to say,) the Jews caused him to be crucified, but not that he had been crucified in judea; otherwise, they must also have concluded, that S. PAUL was not beheaded at Rome; but in judea, for S. JEROM saith it equally of the one, and of the other, whereof PAUL hath been heheaded, and PETER Crucified.  
To the third objection, which is, that S. AUGUSTINE writ, that the history of the combat of S. PETER, and Simon the Magician at Rome had 
The auct. of the treat of. thevoc. of. Ministers.  taken ground from an opinion. We answer that S. AUGUSTINE saith no such thing. And indeed how should he say it, that had for surety and forerunners in this history, not only S. JUSTIN Martyr, an author of the next age after Simon Magus, who writ thus to the Pagan Emperors, from, and in the name of all the Christians: One Simon a Samaritan, having by the Devil's art, done works by enchantment, under the Emperor Claudius, in your 
Iust. Martyra 〈◊〉. 2.  imperial City of Rome, was accounted, a God, and, honoured by you with a Statue as a God; And 
a Iren. adverse. 〈◊〉. es. l 1. c. 20.  S. Ireneus, and 
b Tert. in apol. adverse gent.  Tertullian, which writ the like, but also 
c Arnob. count. gent. l. 2  Arnobius, 
d Eus. hist. eccls l. 2 c. 14.  Eusebius, 
e Cyrill. Hier. catich 6.  S. CYRILL of jerusalem, 
f Epiph. haeres. 21.  S. EPIPHANIUS, 
g Philastr. Brix. in Simon.  〈◊〉 
h 〈◊〉. de script. eccl.  S. JEROM, 
i Sulp. Seu. hist sacr. l. 2 Aug. ep. 86 Aug. in Cat haeres. haeres 1.  Sulpitius severus who all affirm, that Simon, having undertaken, by art magic to fly at Rome, was hindered from it, and caused to fall by S. PETER? he saith only that whereas some held, that the particular custom observed by the Roman Church to forbear dinner on Saturdays, proceeded from a fast celebrated by S. PETER the Satturdaie before this act, was an opinion. Behold his words; It is (said he) the opinion of many, although many Romans hold it to be false that the apostle Peter being on the Sunday to combat against Simon the magician for the peril of so great a temptation, fasted the day before, both he and the Church of the same City, and that having obtained so prosperous and glorious a success, he continued the same custom, and that some Churches of the west imitated him. But that the history of the conflict of S. PETER and Simon Magus at Rome, was grounded upon an opinion, he saith nothing near it, contrariwise he sets it down for the first principle in his book of heresies in these words: Simon would have made it believed that he was Jupiter, ad that a common woman, whose names was Helen, with whom he had joined himself for a complice of his crimes, was Minerva, and gave the images of himself and his Copesmate to be adored to his desciples, and had obtained that they might be constituted by public authority, amongst the images of the Gods at Rome, in which City the blessed Apostle Peter extinguished him, by the power of God Almighty. Which it seems, the profane authors themselves, though curious to bury the memory of all the miracles of Christianity, have obliquely pointed at, when 〈◊〉 saith, that there was a spectacle exhibited in a full theatre in Nero's time whereby they should have made the 〈◊〉- flight appear, but the Icarus fell against 
Sucton. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 6  Nero's chamber, and watered it with blood: and when Dion Chrisostome saith, that Nero had a long time near him in his palace, a certain man who promised to 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 de 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 1  fly.  
To the fourth objection, which is, that amongst the Successors of S. PETER, some place Linus and Cletus before Clement, and some after: we 
The auct. of the trea. upon the 〈◊〉 8 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 27.  answer, that S. EPIPHANIUS hath prevented and solued it, 1250. years agone, in these word: At Rome were first Apostles and Bishops Peter and Paul, and then Linus, than Cletus, and then Clement etc. and let none wonder that others received the Bishopric before Clement. And a little after; whether that the Apostles being still alive, Clement had received the ordination of the Bishopric from Peter, and having resused it, abstained from it; for he saith in one of his Epistles; I go my ways and withdraw myself, till the people of God be erected, etc. or whether after the decease of the Apostles, he have been instituted by Cletus, we do not evidently know, but it may be, that having been promoted to the Bishopric, & having refused it etc. he was again constrained, after the death of Linus and of Cletus to accept of it. For that which the obiectors add for the banquet, and to make up their mouths, that Eusebius saith that S. PETER was crucified, and that the Legend, where upon we ground the Papacy saith, he was beheaded, there are two ridiculous ingredients in this last Service; the one to impute to us, that we ground the history of S. PETER'S seat at Rome, which is testified by all the first ages of the Church upon the Legend, which is a book written in the last ages by a Jacobin called Jacobus de voragine: And the other, not to discern, that, that S. PETER, that the Legend said was beheaded, is S. PETER the jacobin Martyr; who was beheaded for the Catholic faith, in the time 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 Petr Mart 〈◊〉. Aur 〈◊〉.  of the Albigeses. about 400. year agone, and not S. PETER the Apostle, whom it assirmes to have been crucified.  
But now let us leave the objections of the Pope's adversaries, and let us hear the testimonies of the Fathers. S. DIONYSIUS Bishop of Corinth, 
Apost. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 2. c. 25. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 3. c. 3.  writing to be Church of Rome in the next age after the Apostles; you have (said he) mingled the plant of the Roman & Corinthian Church made by PETER and PAUL: And a little after; for having taught together in Italy, they were both martyred at one and the same time. And S. IRENEUS; We represent the tradition apostolic, of the greatest and most ancient Church, founded at Rome, by the two glorious Apostles PETER and PAUL: And again; The blessed Apostles then founding and instructing the Church, consigned the Episcopat of the administration 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  of the Church to Linus. And TERTULLIAN; Happy Church wherein the Apostles have shed all their doctrine with their blood, in which PETER is equalled 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 2. c. 15.  to the passion of our Lord. And CAIUS of one time with Tertulian; If thou wilt giue to the Vatican, or to the way of Hostia, thou shalt find the trophies, (that is the Sepulchers) of those, which have founded this Church. And CLEMENT Alexandrius, & before him Papias the hearer of S. JOHN; Mark 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 3. c. 1. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ep. 〈◊〉.  being entreated at Roman by the brethren, writ a brief Gospel, which PETER having read, approved. And ORIGEN; PETER was crucified at Rome, with his head downwards. And saint CYPRIAN; The Rome Turrian Church, is the Chair of PETER, and the principal Church, from whence proceeded, the Sacerdotal unity. 
〈◊〉. hist. ec 〈◊〉 l. 2. c. 14.  And EUSEBIUS; Under the Empire of Claudius, the providence of God, brought the great Apostle Saint PETER to Rome: And again; the histories bear, that PAUL was beheaded, and PETER crucified at Rome, under Nero; and the titles 
Lactan inst l. 4. c. 21.  of PETER and PAUL preserved to this day in their sepulchres, confirm it. And LACTANTIUS; PETER and PAUL preached at Rome, and their 〈◊〉 remained written for memory. And S. ATHANASIUS; though it were declared 
Athan. apo 2.  to PETER and PAUL, that they should suffer 〈◊〉 doom at Rome; yet they 〈◊〉 
Cyril. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 6.  not to travel thither. And S. CYRILL of jerusalem; PETER and PAUL precedents of the Church, came to Rome. And saint EPIPHANIUS; At Rome were first Apostles and Bishops, PETER and ` PAUL, and then Linus, and then Cletus, and then Clement. And saint AMBROSE; PETER is our warrant for this custom, who hath been Bishop of the Roman Church: And again; Christ 
Amb. de Sacram. l 3 c. 1. Cod. l. 1.  having answered PETER, I go to Rome to be crucified again; PETER understood, that this answer belonged to his Cross: And the Emperors GRATIAN, and VALENTINIAN, and THEODOSIUS; We will that all the people ruled by the Empire of our clemency, live in such Religion, as the Religion insinuated hitherto by the diviue Apostle PETER declareth, that he gave to the Romans. 
Opt. cont. Parm. l. 2.  And OPTATUS Milevitanus; Thou canst not deny, but that thou knowest, that in the City of Rome, the Episcopal Chair was first conferred to Peter, wherein Peter head of the Apostles sat. And saint JEROM; Simon PETER, Son of 
Hier. de 〈◊〉. eccls in Petr.  Jona, of the Province of Galilee, of the Borough of Bethsaida, brother to the Apostle Andrew, and Prince of the Apostles, after the Episcopat of the Church of Antioch, and the preaching of the dispersion of those of the Circumcision, which had believed in 
Idem. ibid. in Hegesippo.  Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and 〈◊〉, came to Rome the second year of the Empire of Claudius, to overthrow Simon Magus, and held the Sacerdotal Chair twenty five years there. And again, Hegesippus affirms; That he 
Id in dial. advers. Lucis.  came to Rome under Anicetus, who was tenth Bishop of Rome after PETER. And else where, Cyprian addressed the Council of affrica, to Steven Bishop of the Roman 
〈◊〉. invect.  Church, who was the twenty sixth after the Blessed Peter. And RUFFINUS; 
Sulp. Scu. hist. sacr. l. 2.  Peter ruled the Roman Church, for the space of twenty four years. And SULPITIUS Severus; The Christian Religion had then taken root in the City of Rome Peter being 
Chrys. in ep. ad Rome hom. 32.  Bishop there. And S. CHRISOSTOME: What spectacle shall Rome, see in the day of judgemeut, Paul coming forth of his grave, risen again with PETER. And OROSIUS; Nero 〈◊〉 PETER to death by the Cross, and PAUL by the sword. 
Oros l. 7. c. 7.  And saint AUGUSTIN; We see the most eminent height of the thrice noble Empire, 
Aug. ep. 42. Id cont. jul Pelag l. 1. Id. cont. Petil. l. 2. c. 51.  submitting his diadem, bend his knee to the supulcher of the fisherman PETER: And in an other place; I think this part of the world ought to suffice thee, wherein our Lord would crown, with a most glorious martyr doom, the first of his Apostles. And else where; What hath the chair of the Roman Church done to thee, wherein 
Id. ep. 165.  PETER hath been set, and wherein now Anastasius sits? And again To PETER hath succeeded Linus, to Linus Clement; to Clement, Anacletus, to Anacletus Euaristus.   

Of the Canon of the Council of Nicaea, touching the government of the patriarchs. CHAPT. V.  
Having dispatched the difficulties of the Scripture, and of the Fathers, concerning S. PETER'S stay at Antioch, & Rome; there remains to solve the objections, that the adversaries of the Church, make against what we have said of the Pope's superioritle, over the other patriarchs: whereof the principal is taken from one of the Canons of the council of Nicaea, which ordains, that the ancient customs observed in Egypt, Lybia, and Pentapolis, should go on; to wit, that the Bishop of Alexandria, should have the power of all those things, because it was also so accustomed to the Bishop of Rome. Now the adversaries of the Church, do more willing lie make use of the Council of Nicaea in 
Conc. Nic. c. 6.  such like cases, then of any other; because the acts of the Council of Nicaea, (which, if we had them, might clear the sense of the Canons of the same Council) are lost; & that there remain to us of the acts of the first four general Counsels no more but those of Ephesus, and of Chalcedon. And therefore we must supply what wants in the brevity and omission of this Canon, by conferring it with the acts of the other counsels, or by the examination of the histories of their ages.  
To this objection than we bring two Answers, the first is, that it hath already been above showed in the Chapter of the patriarchs, that the pope had two distinct qualities, the one of patriarch of the West, & the other of head of the Church, universal, as the Perfect of the City Presecture; by which the adversaries of the Church, would measure the spiritual jurisdiction of the Pope, who had 2. distinct qualities, the one of pre: 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  prefect of the City Prefecture, in which he was equal to the perfect of the other provinces; & the other, of head of the senate, & Vicar of the Emperor, 
〈◊〉 1618. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. 〈◊〉. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 1. 〈◊〉 1.  in which he was superior to the prefects of provinces, and judged by appeal, of the cause of all their jurisdictions By means whereof, although in things that concerned but the patriarchal jurisdiction as were the celebration of provincial, or national counsels; the corrections of manners, of the simple priests or deacons; the confirmations either mediate, or immediate, of the Bishops of the Patriarkship, and the subaltern judgements of the causes even of Bishops. All the other patriarchs were squared out by the model and pattern, of that of Rome; nevertheless, when there question of things that went beyond the limits of patriarchal jurisdiction, that is to 〈◊〉, of Mayor causes, and which converned the universal Church; as were causes of Faith, or general customs of the Church, or those of the final depositions of Bishops, or that of the judgements even of the persons of the patriarchs, the Bishop of Rome as head of the Church, and superintendent of the other patriarchs, exercised Ecclesiastical jurisdiction over them and judged of their judgements and persons. And therefore when the council of Nicaea ordained that in Egypt, Lybia, and Pentapolis, the Bishop of Alexandria should remain in possession of the authority he had for all the causes, whereof the council then spoke; that is to say, for the celebration of Provincial and national Synods; for the correction of minor, and particular causes; & for the confirmation either mediate or immediate of the Bishops of the same provinces; & addeth, for as much as this also is accustomed to the Bishop of Rome; it is certain that the intention of the council was not, by 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. c. 6.  that to square the Bishop of Alexandria by him of Rome, in things that wét beyond the limits, and authority of patriarchal jurisdiction, and concerned the jurisdiction of the head of the Church, and the government of the universal society but in those things only, that were withim the bounds, and within the faculty of patriarchal jurisdiction. No more than when they measured the power that the other Prefects of the Empire had within the compass of their provinces by the power that the prefects of the city of Rome had within the provinces of his Prefecture, they pretended not by that, that in matters that when forth by appeal from the other provinces, the city prefect, as head of the Senate and Vicar to the Prince, was not Superior to all the others: nor that when in a national Council, they square out the power that the Archbishops have over the Bishops of their provinces to the model of that which the Primate of the nations, hath, as particular Archbishop over the Bishops of his quarter they pretend not by that, that in things which go beyond the jurisdiction of the provinces, & regard the general interest of the nation, the Primate should not be superior to the other Archbishops; nor finally, when in a regiment of men of war, they measure the power that every particular Captain hath to command his company, by the pattern and model that the Campe-Master of the Regiment hath over his; they intent not by that, in things which are not in the particular command of every company, but have regard to the order, the disposition, and government of the Regiment in general, the Campe-Master should not be superior to all the other captains. For both before the Council of Nicaea, when the Churchmen of Alexandria, would accuse Dionysius the Patriarch of Alexandria their Bishop, who was the first Patriarch of the Church after the Pope, they transported themselves 
Ath. de sent. Dionis. see above in Chap. 25.  (saith Athanasius) to Rome, & accused him before Dionysius Bishop of Rome; & presently after the Council of Nicaea when the council of Antioch, Sea of the third Patriarkeship had been celebrated, it was argued of nullity, because saith SOCRATES, the Ecclesiastical law forbade, to rule the Churches without 
Soc. hist. ec cl. l. 2. c. 8.  the sentence of the Bishop of Rome. And when the same Council of Antioch, & the other counsels of the East, had deposed S. ATHANAS. Patriarch of Alexandria, and Marcellus Primate of Ancyra in Galatia, and Asclepas Bishop of Gaza, in Palestina a city of the Patriarkeship of Antioch; The Bishop of Rome 
Soc hist. ec cl. l. 3, c. 7.  (saith Sozomene) restored them every one to his Church, because to him, for the dignity of his Sea appertained the care of all things. And when the Council of Sardica within twenty year of that of Nicaea, and holden for the Confirmation of that of Nicaea and composed of the like or a greater number of Bishops than that of Nicaea, and at which assisted the same Osius Bishop of Corduba; the same saint A THANASIUS then Patriarch of Alexandria, & the same Protogenes Bishop of Sardica, which had assisted at that of Nicaea, proceeded to the direction of ecclesiastical causes; it did not only authorise the appeals, from the Bishops of all the Earth to the Pope, but also declared that it was a very good and convenient thing, that from all 
Conc. Sard can 5. See Balsamon upon this Canon.  the Provinces, the Bishops should refer the affairs, to their head; that is to say, to the Sea of the Apostle PETER. And when the Council of Capua which the third Council of Carthage calls a general council, deputed Theophilus Patriarch of Alexandria, because of the neighbourhood of his 
Conc. Sard. ep. ad jul. in fragm. Hilar.  Patriarkship, to examine the cause of Flavianus Patriarch of Antioch; saint AMBROSE writ to him, that after he had judged it, he must get the Pope 
Amb. ep. 78  to confirm his judgement. And when the general council of Ephesus passed to the cause of john Patriarch of Antioch; Iwenall Bishop of jerusalem said that the ancient custom bare, that the Church of Antioch was always governed by the Roman: and the council in the Body of it, remitted the judgement of the Patriarch of Antioch, to the Pope. And when Dioscorus, 
Conc. Eph. part. 2. act. 5. in relat. in Caelest.  Patriarch of Alexandria, had in the false Council of Ephesus condemned and deposed Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople; Flavianus appealed from him to the Pope; and that, saith the Emperor Valentinian following the custom 
Valent. apud Theod. in ep. pradm. Conc. Chalc  of the Counsels And when the Council of Chalcedon disannulled the false Council of Ephesus it was voted by Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople, that of all the acts of that council, none should remain in force, except the creation of Maximus Patriarch of Antioch, because the Pope having 
Conc. Chalc act. 10.  received him into his communion, had judged that he should govern the Church of Antioch, & when Theodoret Bishop of Cyre neighbour to Persia, and one of the Subjects of the Patriarkship of Antioch, who had been deposed by the same council of Ephesus, & had, from it appealed to the Pope, presented himself at the council of Chalcedon; the senators, to cause order 
Conc. Chalc act 1.  to be observed there, commanded he should come in, for as much as the Pope had restored him to his Bishopric. And when the Pope's Legates bore the first word in the Council, not only they entitled 
Ib. & Euag. l. 2. c. 4.  the Pope the head of all the Churches; but also when the Fathers of the council in their Body, sent their Relation to the Pope, they entreated him as the head of the universal Church; Thou hast guided us (said 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  they) by the legates, as the head doth the members. And again; As in this, which is for the 〈◊〉, we have brought correspondency to our head, so thy Sovereignty may fulfil, in the behalf of thy Children, that which concerns decency: and they treated Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, as ghostly vassal to the Pope; 〈◊〉 (said they) hath extended his felony even against him, to whom the 
〈◊〉.  〈◊〉 of the Vine hath by our Saviour been committed: that is to say, against thy Holiness. Evident and manifest arguments, that the Pope had two qualities distinct; the one of Patriarch of the West and the other of Sovereign Vicar of Christ, and head of the universal Church; and that when the other patriarchs were compared to him, it was in quality of Patriarch of the West; and not in the quality of Sovereign Vicar of Christ, and head of the universal Church.  
The second Solution is, that the Council of Nicaea speaks of the 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 c. 6.  Bishop of Alexandria with restriction; and of the Pope without restriction; from whence it is, that the Senators assisting at the Council of Chalcedon, to cause order to be observed there, after they had heard the lecture of the sixth Canon of the Council of Nicaea, and of the third Canon 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 act. 16.  of the Council of Constantinople, inferred thereupon; thus it appears from hence, that all primacy, and principal honour, hath always been 〈◊〉 to the Bishop of Rome: a thing that amazes, me that the Greek schismatics, and 〈◊〉 amongst the rest, did not perceive it. For Nilus' 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  Archbishop of Thesalonica, disputing against the Pope, saith: If the Canon of 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l 2.  the Council of Nicaea, had distributed the Climates of the earth to every one of the Bishops-Generall, (so he calls the patriarchs) and had determinately settled nothing upon the Sea of the Pope, but had contented itself with saying, that he had received the primacy, there had been some reason to esteem that all the earth had been under him. And nevertheless, not only the Council of Constantinople ordains that the Bishops should not exceed their limits, but that 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 2.  according to the Canons of the Council of Nicaea, the Bishop of Alexandria governed only, the affairs of Egypt; And the Bishops of the East, that is, of the Patriarkship of Antioch, only the affairs of the East, And the Council of Chalcedon ordains, to the Bishop of jerusalem, the three Palestina's; And to him of Constantinople; Asia minor, Pontus, and Thracia, and the 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 7.  Barbarous provinces, that is to say, Russia and Muscovia; without ever going about, either that or any other Council, to set out a part to the 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  Bishop of Rome, nor prescribe limits, out of which he might not exercise his authority: But even the Council of Nicaea speaks of the Bishop of Alexandria with restriction, assigning him the provinces of Egypt Libya and Pentapolis, and of the Pope without restriction, leaving him the way free, 
Conc. Nic. 〈◊〉 6.  and assigning him no limits; nor any determinate number of provinces. The customs said the Canon observed from antiquity in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, are to be maintained, to wit, that the Bishop of Alexandria, have the power, of all those things, for as much as this is also accustomed to the Bishop of Rome. By means whereof, it remains in the liberty of the Reader to supply the word, over all the Church, and to express the Canon in this sense; that the customs observed from antiquity in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, should be maintained; to wit, that the Bishop of Alexandria, have the power of all those things, for as much as this is also accustomed to the Bishop of Rome, over all the Church. For what was this 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  custom practised by the Bishop of Rome, but that whereof saint IRENEUS 
〈◊〉. l. 3. 〈◊〉 3.  speaks, when he saith to the Roman Church; because of a more 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 262.  mighty Principality, it is necessary that all the Church should agree. And saint AUSTIN when he writes; In the Roman Church hath always flourished, the principality of the Sea Apostolic: And Socrates when he affirms; that the Ecclesiastical law bare, that vo decrees might be made in the Church, without the 
Soz. hist. cc cl. l. 3. c. 8.  sentence of the Bishop of Rome. And Sozomene when he notes, that to the Bishop of Rome, because of the dignity of his Seat, the care of all things apportained?  
And so who sees not, that the intention of the Council, was net to compare the Bishop of Alexandria with the Pope formally, but anologically; that is to say, that the intention of the Council, was not to compare the authority of the Bishop of Alexandria, over the provinces of Egypt; Libya and Pentapolis, with the authority of the Pope, over any determinate territory; but to compare the authority of the Bishop of Alexandria over the provinces of Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, with the authority of the Pope over the whole Church? It is certain that in this clause; for as much as this is also accustomed to the Bishopof Rome, there is an omission 
Conc. hist. c. 6.  which should be supplied, either by the extent of an universal word, of particular restriction. Now that the design of the Council was not to compare the Sea of Alexandria as head of the particular Prefecture of Egypt, with the sea of Rome as head of an other particular prefecture, but to compare the Sea of Alexandria, as head of the particular prefecture of Egypt, with the Sea of Rome, as head of all the Empire; the decree of the Council of Chalcedon, which shall be spoken of hereafter, shows it, 
In chap. 34  when it says, designing the temporal cause of the privileges of the Church of Rome, The fathers yielded the privileges to the Sea of the ancient Rome, for as much as that City held the Empire: And the Confronting of these 
Conc Chalc act. 16. can 18.  words of Socrates, The Ecclesiastical rule bare, that no laws should be introduced into the Church, without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome: with these of the Bishops of Egypt, to the Council of Chalcedon: Permit us to attend the 
Conc. Chalc act. 4.  ordination of our Archbishop, to the end, that according to the ancient customs, we may follow his sentence: And again: It is the custom in the provinces of the prefecture of Egypt, to do no such thing, without the sentence and ordinance, of the Archbishop 
Ib.  of Alexandria, confirmeth it. For to say, that there could be nothing established in the universal Church without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome, and to say there could be nothing established in the provinces of the Prefecture of Egypt, without the sentence of the Bishop of Alexandria, was it not to make the Bishop of Alexandria that in the prefecture of Egypt, that the Bishop of Rome was over the whole Church? And therefore the Council saying simply, for as much as this is also accustomed to the 
Conc. Nic. 〈◊〉. 6.  Bishop of Rome, and not specifying where, nor bringing in 〈◊〉 restriction, what should hinder us from supplying, over all the Church, and from answering, that the intention of the Council was, to ordain, that the Bishop of Alexandria, who in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, was as Vicar bred from the Sea of saint PETER, who had there established his second self; that is to say, his son, and well-beloved disciple, the Evangelist saint MARK, should have the superintendency of the Ecclesiastical affairs in all these provinces; for as much as the Bishop of Rome to whom 
〈◊〉. l. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 8  (as Sozomene saith) because of the dignity of his Seat, the care of all things appertained; had it generally over all the Church? or if they will press us to reduce the enthymeme of the Council into the form of a complete syllogism, what can hinder us from reducing it into this: The same privileges that the Bishop of Rome hath in regard of the whole 
Soz. Ibid.  Church; the other patriarchs have proportionably every one, in rearguard of his Patriarkship: Now the Bishop of Rome hath this privilege that to him, because of the dignity of his Sea, the care of all things pertains, and that without him, nothing can be decided, of things which concern the government of the universal Church: the Bishop of Alexandria then ought to enjoy by proportion, the same privileges in the provinces 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l 2. 〈◊〉. 8  of his Patriarkship; that is to say, in the provinces of Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis; to wit, that to him, because of the dignity of his Sea appertains the superintendency of the Churches of the same Provinces; and that without him nothing should be decided in causes which concern them. For that the patriarchs in their divisions were as images and models of the Pope's authority, and as Vicars borne from the Apostolic Sea; that is to say, were, every one in the extent of his Patriarkship, that, that the Pope was universally over the whole Church. And then, that as the River Melas in Greece produced the same kinds of animals and plants, as Nilus in Egypt, but lesser and proportionable to the quantity of his course, so the same authority, that the Pope had over all the Church; to wit, that without him nothing might be decided, in things which had regard to the universal Church; the Bishop of Alexandria had it, proportionably in his division; to wit, that without him, nothing could be decided of the Ecclesiastical causes of Egypt, and of all the division of Alexandria, it appears by ten means besides many others.  
It appears first by the diversity of the conditions under which the Pope, and the other patriarchs participated to the succession of the Sea of Saint PETER, who was the head and superintendent of Episcopal jurisdiction; for the Pope only bore the title of absolute successor, and ordinary Vicar to saint PETER, as being constituted in the Tribunal, where saint PETER had established his final and absolute Sea, & where he had planted the stock of his direct Succession: from whence it is, that saint CYPRIAN calls the Roman Church, the Chair of Peter, and the principal 
Cyp 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  Church, and the original of the Sacer dot all unity; and that the council of Sardica exhortes the Bishops of all the provinces, to refer the causes to their head; that is to say, to the Sea of the Apostle PETER: and that 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 p 15.  saith, that the Death, of Pope Felix, was the providence of God, lest the Sea of PETER might be dishonoured, being governed by two 〈◊〉: and that saint JEROM writes to Pope DAMASUS; I am joined 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 58 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  in communion with thy 〈◊〉; that is to say, with the Chair of PETER: and that Pope Innocent the first reported and approved by saint AUSTIN, writ to the Bishops of Africa; I conceive that all our brethren and colleagues, can refer causes, and principally concerning faith, to none but to PETER; that 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  is to 〈◊〉; to the author of their name and dignity; and that the Legates of Pope 〈◊〉, in the oration that they made to the Council of Ephesus, and which was confessed and registered by the ordinance of the Council called the Pope, the Successor, 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 2 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  and ordinary Vicar of saint PETER; And that the council of Chalcedon entitled the Epistle of the Pope saint LEO the first; The Sermon of saint PETER'S 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  Sea: whereas the part that the other patriarchs had to the Successjoin of saint PETER, was an oblique and collateral part, and founded upon subaltern and particular causes; to wit, that of the patriarch of Antioch upon the passing and transitory Sea of saint PETER at Antioch; from whence it is that saint chrysostom saith; Peter the superintendet 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  of the whole world, he to whom Christ had consigned the keys of the kingdom of heaven, to whom he had committed the disposition of all things, was a long time resident at Antioch: And that the Pope Innocent the first, time sellow to the same 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  saint 〈◊〉, writ to Alexander the Patriarch of Antioch: The Sea of Antioch had not given, place to Rome, had it not been, that what that 〈◊〉 but by the way, this hath obtained absolutely and finally: And that of the patriarch of Alexandria, upon the commission that saint PETER gave to his second-selfe; that is to say, to his dear, and well-beloved disciple saint MARK, to go found the Church of Alexandria, the Metropolitan city of Egypt, and of the provinces adjacent; from whence saint GREGORY the great cries out; The sea of Peter in three places, is of one alone; for he 
Greg.  had exalted the Sea, wherein he vouchsafed to stay, and finish his present life: he 
Magn. l. 6. ep. 37.  hath adorned the Sea, to which he hath ordained the Euaugelist his disciple; he hath established the Sea, wherein he was resident seven year, though he were to depart from it. By which means, as the Pope represented the Stock of the direct succession of saint PETER; and the other patriarchs represented the branches of the oblique and collateral succession of saint PETER; so what the Pope was in regard of the universal Church, the other patriarchs were in the behalf of their particular Patriarckships; and reciprocally what the other patriarchs were, in the behalf of their particular Patriarkships, the Pope was, in regard of the universal Church.  
It appears secondly by the analogy of the ancient order of the Church, which bore that the same privileges that the patriarchs, Primats, and Metropolitans had, to wit, that without them nothing could be decided, of the affairs of their devisions; and that the Provincial, national, or patriarchal Counsels, which were held in their territories, could not be esteemed perfect, if they assisted not there, the Popes had then for the affairs which regarded the government of the universal Church, and for the celebration of general Counsels; and reciprocally that the same privileges that the Popes had, as that the care of all the Church pertained to them, and that without them nothing could be decided of points concerning the universal Church, nor general Counsels be celebrated; the patriarchs, Primats, and Metropolitans, had them proportionably in their limits, to wit, that the care of all the affairs of their devisions, belonged to them, and without them nothing could be decided, in the affairs of their jurisdictions, nor the Counsels of their territories be celebrated. For as the Council of Antioch, which I allege because it borrows this decree, not from the discipline of the Arrians, 
Conc. Antioch. c. 9  but from the ancient form of the Church, saith, that the care of all the Province belongs to the Metropolitan. So Sozomen saith that the Bishop of Rome restored Athanasius, Patriarch of Alexandria; Paul Bishop of Const antinople; Marcellus primate of Ancyra in Galatia, for that to him because of the dignity of 
Soz. hist. eccls l. 3. c. 7  his Sea; the care of all things appertained. And as the same Council of Antioch saith, speaking of particular Counsels; That Synod is perfect, at 
Cone. Antioch c. 16.  which the Metropolitan assists; So Socrates witnesseth; That General Counsels, and which were to provide for the General laws of the Church, could not be celebrated without the Pope. JULIUS, (saith he) had not assisted at the Council of Antioch; nor had sent any in his place, although the Canon of the Church forbids to make 
Soc. hist. eccls l. 2 c. 8.  Ecclesiastical laws without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome or according to the translation of EPIPHANIUS, followed by Cassiodorus, to celebrate 
Soz. hist. eccls l. 3. c. 8.  Counsels without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome: And Sozomene; There was an eccclesiastic all law, which annulled all things that were instituted in the Churches, 
Const. nou. Theod. tit. 24.  without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome. And the Emperors Theodosius and Valentinian; We decree, that according to the ancient custom, nothing shall be innovated in the Churches, without that sentence of the reverend Pope of the City of 
Ibid.  Rome. Now, how was this any other thing, but to make the Pope what 
Conc. Chalc apud. Leon.  the same law of Theodosius and Valectinian calls him: to wit, the Rector of 
Conc Sard. in fragm.  the univer salitie of Churches: and what the Council of Chalcedom entitles him, to wit, the Guardian of the Lords Vine: and what the Council of Sardica, 
Hil. Conc. Chalc in. ep ad Leon. Cod. l. 7.  the Council of Chalcedon, and the Emperor justinian qualify him; to wit, the head of Bishops? For if as the Provincial, national; or patriarchal Counsels, could not be reputed perfect, nor decide the affairs of the 〈◊〉, or of the nation, or of the Province, without the Metropolitan 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the general Counsels could not be general, nor decide 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which concerned the universal Church, without the assistance and 〈◊〉 of the Bishop of Rome: And if as S. JEROM saith that the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Council of 〈◊〉 had ordained, that Antioch should be the metropolitan, 〈◊〉 spiritual of all the East; so not only saint ATHANASIUS calls Rome, the Sea 〈◊〉 and metropolitan of Romania; that is, of all the Roman Empire, & beats the Arrians with the epistle which they had written 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  to the Pope, in the which, though feignedly, irronically, they had called the Roman Church, the School of the Apostles, and the Metropolitan of religion; but also S. GREGORY Nazianzen cries out; the ancient Rome marcheth right in the saith, 〈◊〉 all the west tied by the healthful word, as it is convenient that 〈◊〉 should do, which rules all the world: And if, as the Bishops of Egypt protested at the Council of Chalcedon, that it was the custom in the provinces 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  of the 〈◊〉 of Egypt, to do nothing without the sentence & ordinance of the Archbishop of Alexandria; So Socrates saith, that the Coucell of Antioch, was argued of nullity, for as much as the ancient Ecclesiastical law bare, that the Churches could not be ruled, without the 〈◊〉 of the Bishop of Rome how is it that the Bishop of Rome was not metropolita of the universal Church, & such in regard of the whole Church, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Patriark & Metropolitan was, in regard of his division? And if 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  the Pope reciprocally, as heir to the principal Sea of S. PETER, & Metropolitan of the universal Church, was Rector of the universality of Churches; how could it be that the original Patriarches, which were heirs of the 〈◊〉 Chairs of S. PETER, & the Metropolitans of the second 〈◊〉 of the Empire, were not by proportion in the behalf of their divisions, that which the Pope was over the whole extent of the Church?  
It appears thirdly by the proceeding of the same Council of Nicaea, and in the same Canon. For what cause had the Council of Nicaea to repress the rebellion of Meletius Bishop of Sycopolis in Egypt, who refused to obey the Bishop of Alexandria his Patriarch, alleged the custom of the Pope, & not that of the Patriarch of Antioch? The Patriarch of Antioch, was in person at the Council, which the Pope was not, he was nearer both to the city of Nicaea wherein the Council wae holden, & to the Sea of Alexandria, in whose favour this Canon was made, than the Pope: he had the 〈◊〉 over fifteen great provinces, where of the least contained more countries, than the Protestants attribute to the Patriarkship of the Pope. For what cause doth the Council to suppress Meletius, allege the custom of the Bishop of Rome, and not that of the Bishop of Antioch, but because the Bishop of Antioch his authority, was of positive right, as well as that of the Bishop of Alexandria; by which means, the same 〈◊〉 that carried Meletius to deny the one, might likewise have carried him to deny the other; where the Pope's authority was of divine right; that is to say, as S. AUSTIN & the Mileu. Council speak; drawn 
Aug. 〈◊〉. 92  〈◊〉 the authority of the holy scriptures? Moreover for what cause did the Council of Nicaea confirm the custom of the Patriarch of Alexandria, & that of the Patriarch of Antioch, & not confirm that of the Pope, but because the Pope's authority depends not of the authority of Counsels, but proceeded 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  from the very mouth of our Lord, as Pope Gelasius whom S. 〈◊〉 the second S. AVS. or rather the second Oracle of the African Church calleth the Reverend Prelate of the Sea Apostolic, hath since expressed it in 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  there words: The holy Roman Catholic Apostolic Church, hath not been preferred before other Churches, by any synodical constitutions, but hath obtained the primacy Evangelicall voice of our Lord and Saviour, when he said; Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church? Now, this being so, how is it not manifest, that the intention of the Council was not to restrain the authority of the Pope, to the limits of a simple particular Patriarkship, as that of the other patriarchs; but to propound the authority that the Pope had in regard of the universal Church, for a type and pattern of the authority of the other patriarchs, in regard of their patriarkships; for either the law divine gave nothing to the Pope over the other Bishops; or if it gave him any thing, it was given him over all the Earth, although for the commodity of the universal government of the Church, the Pope abstained from the immediate administration of the other Patriarkships, & contented himself, with the only immediate government of the patriarkship of the West; and with the mediate & general superintendency over the rest.  
It appears fowthly, by the possession wherein the Pope remained, after the Canon of the Council of Nicaea, of judging the persons and judgements of the other patriarchs, and that in the view, & with the applause, even of those that had made the canon, & of their successors, & without that any ever murmured, that this practice contradicted it: for how had Pope julius the first, who was created Pope five years after the Coúcell of Nicaea, restored those great Champions of the Council of Nicaea saint ATHANASIUS Patriarch of Alexandria; Marcellus Primate of Ancyra in Galatia, & Asclepas Bishop of Gaza in Palestina, because to him (saith Sozomen) 
Soz. hist. eccls l. 3. c. 7.  for the dignity of his Sea, the care of all things appertained; if the intention of the Council of Nicaea, had been to restrain the authority of the Pope into the only limits of a particular Patriarkship, as well as that of the other patriarchs? And how had those great Champions, & defendors of the Council of Nicaea, made use of the Pope's restitution, to re-enter their Seas, if it had been contrary to the canon of the Council of Nicaea, the which themselves had helped to compose, & S. ATHANASIUS amongst the rest, who had been the soul and pen thereof, & was then heir & successor to Alexander Patriarch of Alexandria, in whose favour and upon whose particular the article had been set down? And how could Pope Julius have reproached the Arrians, that they had altered the decrees of the Council of Nicaea, if himself, in restoring S. ATHANASIUS Patriark of Alexandria, 
Ibid.  Paul Bishop of Constantinople, Marcellus Primate of Ancyra in Galatia, Asclepas Bishop of Gaza in Palestina, Lucius Bishop of Andrinopolis in Thrace; & in disannulling the Counsels of Tyre, Antioch, & Constantinople, which had been holden against them; had violated the canon of the council of Nicaea? And why did not the Arrians reply to him, that it was himself that infringed the decrees of the Council of Nicaea, if the intention of the Council of Nicaea had been to restrain the Pope's authority, to the only limits of a particular Patriarkship, as well as that of the other Patriarches? And how had the Council of Sardica, wherein the Council of 
Conc. Sard. c. 5.  Nicaea was again put to the trial; & which was holden twenty two years after the Council of Nicaea, & to defend the authority of the Council 
Conc. Sard 〈◊〉. ad jul. in frag. 〈◊〉. p. 15.  of Nicaea, & by many of the same Fathers that had assisted at the Council of Nicaea reduced into a written law; that Bishops deposed by the Counsels of their provinces, might appeal from them to the Pope: & declared that it was a very good & fit thing, that from all the provinces, the Bishops should refer the affairs to their head; that is to say, to the Sea Apostolic of S. PETER; if the intention of the Council of Nicaea had been, to restrain the Pope's authority, into the only limits of a particular Patriarkship, as well as that of the other patriarchs? And how had the general Council of Ephesus reserved the cause of John Patriark of Antioch, to the judgement of the Pope? And how had Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople, after he had beme deposed by Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, & by the second Council of Ephesus; appealed from them to the Pope, and that (saith the Emperor Valentinian the third) according to the custom of the Counsels? And how 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  finally had Theodoret, one of the Bishops of the Patriarkship of Antioch, having been deposed in the same second Council of Ephesus; and having thence appealed to the Pope, been received into the Council of Chalcedon, because the Pope had restored him to his Bishopric, if the intention of the Council of Nicaea had been, not to propose the authority of the Pope, in regard of the universal Church for type and pattern of the authority of the other patriarchs in regard of their Patriarkships, but to restrain the Pope's authority, into the only limits of a particular Patriarkship, as well as that of the other patriarchs.  
It appears in the fifth place, by the title of universal Patriarch, and universal Pope, that the Churchmen of the other Patriarkships, and particularly those of Alexandria, who had more interest in the observation of the sixth Canon of the Council of Nicaea, than any other, as having been made in favour of their Church, yielded to the Pope. For when the Priests and deacons of the patriarchal Church of Alexandria, presented their requests to the Council of Chalcedon, from which the person of the Pope was as far distant, as it is between Rome and Asia, they couched them in these terms; To the most holy, and most blessed universal Patriarch of 
〈◊〉 Chalc 〈◊〉. 3.  great Rome, 〈◊〉 and to the holy and universal Council.: And this they did, all the Council seeing and approving it, and ordaining that they should be inserted into the Acts, and consequently not holding them for strange new, and unwonted things. And when the Religious men of Antioch, presented in Constantinople their requests to Pope Agapet, they couched them, and made them to be inserted into the Acts of the Council of Constantinople, holden against Anthymus, and celebrated under the Emperor 
Conc Constant lib. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 80.  justinian, in these words; To our most holy and blessed Lord Agapet, Archbishop of the ancient Rome, and universal Pairiark. And when the great scourge of the Novatians, Eulogius Patriarch of Alexandria, and heir of the Rights conferred upon the patriarkship of Alexandria by the Council of Nicaea, set hand to pen, he did not only say (disputing against the Noua●ians) that PETER only had received the keys, that is to say, originally; but also writing to the Pope S. GREGORY; he called him 
〈◊〉 l. 7 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  universal Pope. Now how is this any other thing, then to protest, that what the other patriarchs were every one, in the behalf of his own Patriarkship the Pope was the same in the behalf of the world? For as 
Chap. 7.  for the part that the Bishop of Constantinople challenged in this title afterward, it shall be hereafter showed, that it was by virtue of the right of the Bishop of Rome, that he pretended it to be communicated to him, by the erection of Constantinople into the title of the second Rome: And as for the refusal, that the Pope S. GREGORY made of the use thereof; it shall be answered in the same chapter.  
It appears in the sixth place, by the proceeding of Theodosius, the second Emperor of the East, who resolving at the instance of Atticus Bishop of Constantinople, to make the city of Constantinople enjoy the title 
C●●p. 6.  of Patriarkship, which he pretended had been attributed to him in the Council of Constantinople, published a law, which hath always (as shall hereafter appear) remained without effect; by which he alleged, that Constantinople had the privileges of the ancient Rome; and ordained that she should exercise them, not only in all the provinces of Pontus, Asia minor, and Thracia, but also in all the provinces of Illiria. The one of the heads of this law, we learn from Socrates, who said, the Bishop of Cyzica being dead, Sisinnius Archbishop of Constantinople, ordained Proclus Bishop of Cyzica; but the Cyzicenians, that is to say, the Bishop of the division 
Soc. hist 〈◊〉. l. 7. 〈◊〉. 28.  of Cyzica, seeing he went about it prevented him, and ordained a religious mancalled Dalmatius, and this they executed, despising the law, which forbade to ordain Bishops without the sentence of the Bishop of Constantinople; alleging, it had been made only for the person of 〈◊〉: And the other we learn from the law omni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which is a fragment of that where of Socrates makes mention, which forbids that even in all the provinces of the Eastern Illyria, any thing should 〈◊〉, but with the knowledge of the Bishop of Constantinople, 〈◊〉 (saith the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  law) that all innovation ceasing (so speaks the Emperor, because 〈◊〉 abusing the simplicity of his youth, had ginen him to understand falsely, that the refusal that the Bishops of Illeria made, to acknowledge him for Patriarch, had begun but since the schism of Arsacius his 〈◊〉) the antiquity, and the precedent Ecclesiastical Canons, which have been observed hitherto (he means the Canons of the Council of Constantinople, holden under Nectarius, which had attributed to the Sea of Constantinople, even in spiritual causes, the title of the second Rome; and it had been admittted in some provinces of Pontus, Asia Minor, and Thracia) shall also have place through all the provinces of Illiria; that is to say, of the Eastern Illiria; to wit, thae if there do any controversy arise, it may not be reserred to the holy judgement and sacerdotal council, without the knowledge of the most holy, and right Reverend the Bishop of the city of Constantinople, which hath the privileges of the ancient Rome. And Photius Patriarch of Constantinople reporting the same 
Phot. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. tit. 8.  law; The sixth constitution (said he) of the second title of the first book of the code ordaineth, that all the Canonical questions, that shall arise in all Illiria, may not be, decided without the sentence of the Bishop of Constantinople, and of his Synod, which hath the privileges of the ancient Rome. Now, what was this privilege of the ancient Rome, to whose imitation nothing could be decided, not only in all the provinces of Thracia, Pontus, and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but also in all the provinces of the Eastern Illiria, without the knowledge, or according to the text of Socrates and of Photius, without the sentence of the Bishop of Constantidople, and of his Synod, but that which we now come from speaking of with the same 〈◊〉, that the Ecclesiastical 
Soc. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 8.  law gave the Pope through the whole earth; to wit, that without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome, there might be made no new definition 
Const. nou. Theod. tit. 24.  in what part of the world soever: and which the law of Valentinian inserted into the new constitutions of the same Theodosius renews in these words: We decree, that according to the ancient custom, nothing shall be innovated in the Churches, without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome? And therefore, what other thing was it to grant to the Bishop of Constantinople in Ecclesiastical matters, the privileges of the city of Rome, but to make the Bishop of Constantinople, particularly in his division, what the Bishop of Rome was, over all the Earth?  
It appeaaes in the seaventh place, by the possession wherein the Pope continued notwithstanding the erection of the Patriarkship of 〈◊〉, to judge of the judgements, and of the persons of the patriarchs of Constantinople, and to receive the appeals in mayor causes from their divisions. For not only the Popes, as well after the Council of Constantinople, wherein the erection of the Patriarkship of Constantinople was attempted; as after that of Chalcedon, where it was again set upon, remained in perpetual possession to judge of the judgements, & of the persons of the patriarchs of Constantinople; and to receive the appeals of the mayor causes from their divisions; but also the patriarchs of Constantinople remained in perpetual profession of obedience and of subjection to the Pope. The one of these points shall be seen hereafter, both by the appeal that SCHRYSOSTOME 
In chap. 7. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ep. 〈◊〉.  Archbishop of Constantinople cast in, from the Council of Constantinople to Pope Innocent the first; and by the appeal that Eutiches' Abbot of Constantinople cast in from Flavianus Patriarch of Constantinople to Pope Leo the first; & by the appeal that the same Flavianus Patriarch of Constantinople cast in, from the second Council of Ephesus to the same Pope Leo the first; & that saith the Emperor Valentinian the 3rd. according 
Valent. ep. ad Theod.  to the custom of Counsels, & by the condemnation that Pope Felix the third made of Acacius Patriark of Constantinople; in virtue whereof he was razed, yea after his death, out of the records of the Church of Constantinople; 
Marcell. come. in Chron 〈◊〉. l. 5. ind. 〈◊〉 ep. 24. & 64. In chap. 7.  and by the deposition that Pope Agapet made of Anthymus Patriarch of Constantinople; & by the judgement that the Pope S. GREGORY the Great, gave in the causes of john priest of Chalcedon, and Athanasius a Regular of Lycaonia appealing to him from the tribunal of the Patriarch of Constantinople. And the other shall appear in the same chapter, by the protestations that 
a 〈◊〉. Const. ep. ad Horm.  john the second 
b Concil. Const sub Men. act. 4  Anthimus, 
c Ibid.  Menas, & 
d Gregor. 〈◊〉. l. 7. ind. 2. ep. 63.  john the fourth patriarchs of Constantinople, every one in his time made, to acknowledge themselues submitted & subject to the Pope, & to the Roman Church. Now how was this any other thing, but a perpetual testimony, that the Patriarch all dignity exempted not those that were thereof provided, from the jurisdiction & superiority of the Pope; & then, that the intention of the Council of Nicaea, had never been, to restrain the Pope's authority, within the simple limits, of a particular patriarkship, as well as that of other patriarchs, but to propose the Pope's authority, in regard of the universal Church, for a type and pattern of the authority of the other patriarchs, in regard of their patriarkships?  
It appears in the eight place, by the proceeding of the Emperor justinian the first, who desiring to erect the first justinianea of Bulgaria the city of his Birth, into the form of a supernumerary patriarkship, over the six Archbishoprickes of the six provinces, near to that town, ordained, that in those six provinces, she should hold the place of the Sea Apostolic of Rome, following the definitions of Pope Vigilius: 
Iust. 〈◊〉. 131.  We decree (saith the Emperor) that the blessed Bishop of the first justinianea, shall have under his proper jurisdiction, the Bishops of the Mediterranean Dacia, of Dacia Rypensis, of Triballea, of Dardania, of upper Misia, and of Pannonia; and that they shall be ordained by him, and by his proper Synod; and that in the provinces subiest to him, he shall hold the place of the Sea Apostolic of Rome, following the things defined by the holy Pope Vigilius. For that the intention of the Emperor justinian, was to erect by this law, the Bishopric of the first justinianea of Bulgaria, into the form of a Patriarkship of honour, although this honour remained to him but in shadow and smoke we learn from two cases. The one, that in the Council of Constantinople surnamed Trullian holden under justinian the second, before Bulgaria was possessed by the Infidels, john Bishop of justinianopolis, signed in 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. Trull.  the rank of the patriarchs in this order; Paul of Constantinople, Peter of Alexandria, Anastasius of jerusalem, George of Antioch, and john of justinianopolis. And the other, that ever after the return of Bulgaria to be Christian, the latter greeks did in some sort, continue this title to him, as Curopalates a Greek Author acknowledgeth, when he coupleth the Archbishop of Bulgaria, with the patriarchs in these terms; The designation of the other patriarchs, is made without any diversity, as well of him of Alexandria, of him of Antioch, of him of jerusalem, as also of the Archbishop of the first justinia 
Mich. Codin. dictus vulgo 〈◊〉 c. de Patr. designat. Barlaam ep. Gyrac. ep. 1.  nea called Achrida, and of all Bulgaria: And as Barlaam a Greek Author, native of Peloponosus confirms it in his disputations against the Greek schismatics, when he writes, that in the part separate from the Pope, there were five patriarchs; on the other part, saith he, the are five patriarchs, reckoning him of Bulgaria. And that this privilege to hold the place of the Sea Apostolic in the six provinces near the first justinianea, was not by co-ordination with the Pope, but by subordination to the Pope; that is to say, it was not by form of exemption from the authority of the Pope, but by form of submission and substitution to the authority of the Pope. We learn from the epistles of S. GREGORY the Great, which testify, as it shall appear in the chapter following, that the same S. GREGORY 
Greg. l. 4 ep. 6. & 15.  confirmed, yet fifty year after this law, the election of the Bishop 
Item l. 2. ep. 6.  of the first justinianea, sent him the archiepiscopal mantle, renewed to him the Vicarship of the Sea Apostolic, judged by appeal of the Bishops of his division; & chasticed himself, when he had judged amiss.  
It appears in the ninth place, by the proceeding of the Bishop of Constantinople, who having obtained in the Council of Constantinople, holden under Theodosius the Great, a decree which ordained, that his Sea should be the second after Rome, because Constantinople was the second Rome; and having made this decree to be explained by a surreptitious Canon, in the Council of Chalcedon, in such sort as he was permitted to enjoy the 
Conc. Chalc act. 15 can. 28.  same privileges with the Pope, after the Pope; attempted to participate with the Pope, the title of universal Patriarch, and to inscribe himself universal Patriarch, not in regard of the Pope, but under the pope, and in regard of the other patriarchs, and to this the other patriarchs, & the Emperors themselves, and the Counsels of the East, consented, & communicated to him this nomination. For in the Council of Constantinople holden against Anthimus, not only the title of universal Patriarch was 
Conc. Const sub Men. act. 1.  attributed to the Pope, but also to the Bishop of Constantinople. And in the seaventh law of the Code, the Emperor justinian called Epiphanius Patriarch 
Ibid. act. 5.  of Constantinople, Oecumenic all Patriarch but under the Pope, whom he 
Cod. l. 1. tit. 1. l. 7.  calls in the same law, the head of all the holy ministers of God. And in 
Cod. Paris Antuerp & Gen. tit 1. l. 7.  the sixth general Council, not only the Emperor Constantine Pogonat, entitles the Pope, General Arch-pastor, and the Protothrone of all patriarchs; but also the epistle of Cyrus' Patriarch of Alexandria, read in the same 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 ep. ad Synod. Apost. Conc. Const 6. act. 18. epist. ad Agath.  Council, qualifies Sergius Patriarch of Constantinople, with the title of Oecumenic all Patriarch. Now how was this any other then to presuppose, that the Pope had always been universal & Oecumenic all Patriarch? For if the Patriarch of Constantinople, by virtue of the erection of Constantinople into the title of second Rome, made as he pretended for spiritual Rights in 
Conc Const 6. act. 13.  the first Council of Constantinople, attributed to himself jointly with the Pope, though under the Pope, the title of universal Patriarch; & that all the other patriarchs, & the Emperors themselves, & the Council of the East, consented to it, & communicated to him, this nomination; how doth it not appear manifestly, that they then acknowledged, that before the holding of the first Council of Constantinople, the Bishop of Rome was universal and Oecumenic all Patriarch; and by consequent, that the intention of the Council of Nicaea had not been to restrain the Pope's authority to the only limits of a particular patriarkship, as that of the other patriarkships, but to propound the Pope's authority, in regard of the universal Church, for a type and pattern of the authority of the other patriarchs, in regard of their patriarkships?  
It appears in the tenth place, by the epistle of Innocent the first, whom 
Aug. ep. 106.  S. AUSTIN calleth Pope of happy memory, to Alexander Patriarch of Antioch, wherein he writes to him, that the Council of Nicaea had established 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Alex 〈◊〉 Ant. 〈◊〉. 18. Ibid.  the Patriarkship of Antioch, not over a Province, but over a Body, and a mass of Provinces; and adds, that Antioch had not yielded to Rome, but that what Antioch had transitorilie (to wit, S. PETER'S Sea,) Rome had it finally and absolutely: and by the testimony of S. JEROM priest of the Patriarkship of Antioch, who saith that the Council of Nicaea had 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Idem ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 57 & 58.  ordained that Antioch should be the metropolitan of all the East; and nevertheless cries, that the Church is built upon the Pope's communión, and upon the chair of S. PETER, and that he will not acknowledge the Patriarches of Antioch, but whiles they communicate with the Pope: from whence it ariseth, that the intention of the Council of Nicaea had not been to make the Pope's authority, and that of the Patriarch of Antioch, equal.  
And finally it appears by the difference that the Council of Chalcedon, (where this very decree of the Council of Nicaea was read,) put between Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, who possessed the Sea, in whose favour the Canon had been made, and the Pope; accounting the Pope for Guardian of our Lord's Vine, & the Patriarch of Alexandria for one of his subguardians. For not only the Coucell of Chalcedon writing to the Pope, calls him the head of Bishops: We beseech thee (saith the Council) to 〈◊〉 
Cont. 〈◊〉. ad. l 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 3. c. 2  our judgement with thy decrees, that as we have brought consent in matters of weal to our head, so thy Sovereignty, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, or according to the other copies; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, the Sovereignty may fulfil in the behalf of thy children, that which is for decency. But also speaking of the presumptions of Dioscorus Patriarch of 〈◊〉, adds for the last, to make his insolence complete, that he 〈◊〉 set upon the proper person of him to whom our Lord had committed the guard of the Vine; he hath (said they) extended his felony, even against him, to whom the 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 ibid.  guard of the vine, was committed by our Saviour, that is to say, (added they) against thy Holiness. Now was not this to protest, that what Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, was over the Churches of Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, the Pope was the same over all the Churches of the world; and to authorise what the Emperor Valentinian the third had said but a while before, that the Pope 
Ad 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. Theod. no 〈◊〉. const. 〈◊〉. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 22  was Rector of the universality of Churches. And what the Bishop of Patara in Lycia, one of the Provinces of Asia, said afterward to the Emperor justinian, that there was no king in the world, which was over all the world, as the Pope was over the Church of all the earth? For this occasion then; to wit, that the Patriarkships, and namely those of Alexandria, and Antioch, which had been founded from the time of S. PETER, and by S. PETER himself, were as Vicarships (I mean Vicarships borne and perpetual, and not Vicarships delegate and arbitrary) of the Sea of S. PETER; or rather to repeat S. GREGORY'S words, one same Sea of S. PETER with that of Rome; when the Fathers of the Council of Nicaea confirmed the privileges of the Bishop of Alexandria, troubled by Meletius head of the Schismatics of Egypt, they decreed that the Bishop of Alexandria in the Provinces of his Patriarkship, should evioy the Rights of the Bishop of Rome, as the Sea of Alexandria in Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis, being an originary and perpetual Vicarship of S. PETER'S sea, but not that they thereby pretended in things that exceeded patriarchal authority, either to equal him with the Pope, or to exempt him from the Pope's jurisdiction. Otherwise how could Pope 〈◊〉 the first in the view of the Fathers of the same council of Nicaea, who were still for the most part living & breatihng have reestablished S. ATHANAS. Patriarch of Alexandria; Paul Bishop of Constantinople; Marcellus Primate of Galatia; and Asclepas Bishop of Gaza in Palestina, Prelates who had all assisted at the Council of Nicaea, could not be ignorant of the Canons thereof, since they helped to compose them: for that (saith 
Soz. l. 3. c. 8  Sozomene) to him, because of the dignity of his Sea, the care of all things appertained? 
Athanas. apol. 2.  And how could S. ATHANASIUS have alleged for his 〈◊〉 these words of the same julius; Are you ignorant that the custom is, that you first write to us, and so from hence must proceed the just decision of all things; and therefore, if there were any suspicion raised against the Bishop there; that is to say of Alexandria, you must have written of it to the Church here; that is to say, the Church of Rome? And how could Peter Patriarch of Alexandria, and S. ATHANASIUS successor, having been driven from his Sea, have been restored upon the letters that he brought from Pope DAMASUS, which confirmed (saith Socrates) the saith of 
Soc. l 4. c. 37.  Moses, and the ordination of PETER? And how, when Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople, having been deposed in the false Council of Ephesus by Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, could the Emperor Valentinian 
In epist. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  have said; Antiquity hath yielded to the most holy Bishop of Rome, the Priesthood over all, etc. For this cause the Bishop of Constantinople, according to the custom of the Counsels, hath appealed to him? And how could Pope Leo the first, have written to Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople, that if Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, and Iwenall Bishop of jerusalem, should come to repentance, and accompany their conversion with such satisfaction, 
Leo 1. ep. 44.  as it should seem ought not to be despised, the thing should be reserved to the more mature deliberation of the Sea Apostolic? And how could the Fathers of the Council of Chalcedon, addressing their relation to the Pope, and speaking of Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, and of the false Council of Ephesus, have said; He hath extended his frenzy even against him, to whom the guard of the vine was committed by our Saviour; that is to say, against thy Holiness? And when a little after the celebration of the same Council, Peter surnamed Mongus, and john surnamed Talaia, having been created by diverse factions, patriarchs of Alexandria, how could the 
Gelas. ep. ad Episc. Dardan.  Pope have committed the care of the provinces of Egypt to Acasius Patriarch of Constantinople? And how could john having been deposed from the Patriarkship of Alexandria by the Synod of Egypt, and by the complot of the Emperor Zeno, and appealed to the Pope, and taken with him Synodical letters of intercession from Calendion Patriarch of Antioch 
Liberat. in breviar. c. 12.  to favour his appeal? And the same john Patriarch of Alexandria, having appealed to the Pope, how could the Pope have deposed Peter his adversary, and with him Acacius Bishop of Constantinople who adhered to 
Euag. l 3. c. 15.  him, & that with such effect, that even after their death, they were razed 
〈◊〉. Imp. epist ad Hormisd.  in Constantinople & in Alexandria, out of the Catalogue of the patriarchs of Alexandria and Constantinople, and their names blotted out of the records of their Churches, and excluded from the recital of the mysteries.   

Of the addition of the word Church's suburbicary made by Ruffinus, in the latin translation of the Canons of the Council of Nicaea. CHAP. VI  
Against these things, nevertheless the Pope's adversary's object the translation of Ruffinus priest of Aquilea, who adds to the Epilogue that he hath made of the latin translation of the Canon of the Council of Nicaea, the word Church's suburbicary, which is neither in the Greek text, nor in the ancient complete and formal latin editions, & turns the article in these terms, that the Bishop 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 l. 2.  of Alexandria, should have the care of the Churches of Egypt; and he of Rome, of the Church's 〈◊〉: from whence they draw this impertinent conclusion; that the Pope had there no jurisdiction, but over the Church's neighbouring to this 〈◊〉; and they triumph so upon it, as after a thousand writings which they have published upon this subject, they have even this last year caused to be imprinted a topographical map of the ancient 〈◊〉 of the Pope, & have accompanied it with a discourse, 〈◊〉; Of the 〈◊〉 suburbicarie; where they have assigned him for all jurisdiction, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 16. 8.  a 〈◊〉 thousand paces about the city of Rome; that is to say, about as much Ground, as is between Paris, and Orleans: But I hope soon to set a Catastrophe to their Tragedy, and to turn their triumph into obsequies;  

Superbos 
〈◊〉. 1. 〈◊〉. 35.   
Vertere funeribus triumphos.   
For who sees not, that it is a wilful blindness, having the greek text, and the ancient latin editions complete, and in form, of the Canon of the Council of Nicaea in their hands, to tie themselves to the Epilogized translation of a man, that S. JEROM avoucheth to have been, a very 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2.  evil translator; and who bsides for his errors, had been excommunicated, and noted (saith the same S. JEROM) with the brand of heresy by Pope Anastasius, and by the Roman Church?  
There are three things which principally make a Translator unfit to be credited, passion, ignorance, and rashness. Now, as for passion, who hath ever better deserved to be reproached in this regard, in matters that concern the Roman Church, than Ruffinus, who had been excommunicated for his errors in faith by Pope Anastasius, and by the Roman Church, and that before he writ his history, which was written after Alaricus coming into Italy; that is to say under the Popedom of Innocent successor of Anastasius? Russinus (saith Pope Anastasius) is so excluded from our 〈◊〉, 
Russin. ep ad Chrom 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ep. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 Hier. all 〈◊〉. Russin l. 2.  as we are not curious to know, neither what he doth, nor where he is; let him look to himself, where he can be absolved. And S. JEROM; Pope Anastasius in the epistle he writ against thee to john Bishop of jerusalem, hath taxed this desault, justifying me, me that did it, and condemning thee, thee I say that wouldst not do it. And again speaking of the confession of Russinus faith, which he salslie assirmed to have been approved by the Bishops of Italy; How should Italy (said he) have approved that which Rome hath rejected. how should 
Id. 〈◊〉.  the Bishops receive that, which the Sea Apostolic hath condemned? And a little 
Id. 〈◊〉.  after; Thou dost so avoid the judgement of the city of Rome, that thou choosest rather to support a siege of Barbarians, (this he spoke because of the coming of Alaricus to Aquilea, whither Ruffinus had retired himself) than the sen tense of a peaceable city. For whereas Gennadius, placeth Ruffinus amongst the Orchodoxall Authors, it was because Gennadius was of the Sect of one of the branches of Pelagius beresie, whereof Ruffinus had cast the roots; but not, that Ruffinus did not dye an heretic, and anathematised by the Roman Church, as saint JEROME insinuates when he saith, describing enigmaticallie the revolt, anathema, and the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  sepulchre of Ruffinus, who was dead in Sicilia; The Scorpion is pres 〈◊〉 under the Sicilian earth, between Enceladus and Porphirus, it must be read, between Enceladus and Porphirion, who were two of the Giants that the Poetical fables had said to be revolted against Jupiter, and had been strucken dead with thunder bolts, and covered with the Mountains of Sicilia. With what faith then can they allege the words of Ruffinus, when the authority of the Roman Church is in question, by whose Tribunal he had been condemned and excommunicated? you can scarce light upon a place in Ruffinus translations, where there is an occasion presented to speak of the Pope and of the Roman Church, but he sharpens and enuenoms it as particularly when Eusebius reporting the history of Pope Victor, who had excommunicated the Church of Asia, be cause of the question about keeping the pasch; saith, There are yet to be found letters of the Bishops, which handled Victor some what roughly, (Ruffinus 
Eus. hist. ec. cl. l. 〈◊〉. c 24  adds of his own,) as providing unprofitably for the affairs of the Church; and 
Id ibid.  in the verse following, where Eusebius writes; Ireneus exhorted Victor not to cut off all the Churches of God which held the tradition of this ancient custom. Rufsinus turns it; Ireneus reprehended him that he had not done well to cut off from the body of unity so many and so great Churches of God: and sees not, that in thinking to calumniate Pope Victor, he callumniates the council of Nicaea, who renewed the same excommunication, a thing possibly pardonable in Eusebius; who besides that he was an Arrian, writ his histories before the Council of Nicaea: but inexcusable in Ruffinus, who made his translation afterwards. With what colour then, would they square the intention of the original Greek of the canons of the Council of Nicaea, by the addition that Ruffinus a passionate translator, incensed against the Church of Rome, hath made thereto?  
And as for ignorance what translator was ever more worthy to be refused in that regard than Ruffinus, whose clauses are almost as many prooffs of ignorance and impertinency? for what could be imagined more unapt, then to make of, james, Bishop of jerusalem; james, Bishop of the Apostles: of the Greek word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signfies Blessed or happy a Saint called Macarius: of Eusebius Pamphilus, an heretic and an Arrian, Pamphilus, a Catholic 
Ruff in hist. eccls Euseb. l. 1. c 1.  and a Martyr: of Xistus a pithagorian and Pagan Philosopher, XISTUS Pope and Martyr. An error that S, IEROM bitterly reproves, and which gave occasion to saint AUSTIN to stumble and retract upon the same 
Ibid. l. 5. c. 24.  matter: of question which comes of quaero, a verb active, querimony, which 
Hier. ep. ad Ctesiph.  comes of queror, a verb deponent, of Corepiscopus, whereof the Nicaea Council speaks, the vacant place of a Bishop, and so of infinite others, which 
Ibidem.  
Ibidem.  moved saint JEROM to say, that Ruffinus was so unapt, in both tongues, 
Aug. Retr. l 2 c. 42.  as the Romans took him for a Grecian, and the greeks for a Roman?  
And as for boldness and rashness, what interpreter ever showed less 
Hier. ad verse. Ruff. apol 2  Religion or Faith in observing the text of his Authors then Ruffinus, who hath always taken liberty to add, or diminish, as it seemed good to him? 
Conc Nic. 〈◊〉 Apol. con. Rust l. 2.  Thy conscience (saith saint JEROM, speaking to Ruffinus of the translation he had made of Origen) knows what thou hast added, and what thou hast taken away, and what thouhast changed from one place to an other, as it hath pleased thee. 
Idem. Ibid.  And Erasmus in his preface upon saint HILARY; Ruffinus hath 〈◊〉 
Erasm. Rot 〈◊〉. in Hilat. jos. Scal. annot. in Chro. Eus. num.  to himself, the same authority, in the translation of all the books which he hath translated, and principally in that of origen's writings, and in that of Eusebius history, but this is not the liberty of an interpreter, but the licence of a defiler of an others works. And Scaliger in his annotations upon the Chronicle of Eusebius: It is the custom of Ruffinus (saith he) to omit, to pervert, and to change the texts as 
MMLXV. Ruff hist. eccls l. 10. c 6.  he list. With what face then, can they now leave the Greek text of the Council of Nicaea, to have recourse to Ruffinus translations, a perpetual corrupter of the translations of antiqultie, and particularly of that of the Canons of Nicaea, where of he Suppresses some; divides others; mangles some; adds to others; depraves some, mistakes the sense of others? I have said Suppresses some; for he suppresses the twentieth Canon of the Council of Nicaea, which contains the Ordnance to adore standing in the Sundays service and during the fifty days of pentecost: And that in hate of the resurrection of the very flesh, which as an Origenist he opposed, no more remembering what he had written of it, when he was yet a Catholic. I have said divided, and multiplied others; for he divided the vl and the ninteenth Canons, into two others, and of either of them made two different Canons. I have said mangles some, for he mangles the sixth, and eclipseth from it, the Rights of the Bishop of Antioch, in favour of john Bishop of jerusalem whom he pretended to be an Origenist as himself was; And maims the end of the thirteenth. And that which the fathers say of Dying penitents, to whom the Councellregrauntes the communion of the Sacrament, after the examination of the Bishop, with condition notwithstanding, that if they chance to survive, they shall be admitted but to the communion of prayers: he interprets it, of the examination of the Bishop for penitents recovered. I have said, adds to others; for he adds to the eighteenth this whole clause, That Deacons in the absence of Bishops and priests, might distribute the Eucharist. And to the ninth 〈◊〉; or have been convinced thereof by others: which are no more within the Greek text of the Council, than this of the Church's suburbicary. I have said depraves some; for he depraves the ninteenth and saith of Deaconesses in general, that which the Canon only saith of the Paulianist deaconesses. I have said mistakes the sense of others, for in the vl he is ignorant of the sense of the word Corepiscopus, and turns it, the vacant place of a Bishop. And in the ninth that of the word, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and interprets, of confession of priests after promotion, That, which the council saith, of the Confession of Priests before promotion; that is to say, of the Confession made in the trial of those that were to be promoted to priesthood.  
For whereas some to warrant the clause of the Church's Suburbicary allege, that Pope Gelasius, writing about the end of the same age, approved the works of Russinus, excepting those things that saint JEROM had 
Lib de 〈◊〉. Reg. Impr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1618. 〈◊〉. 2. c. 6. 〈◊〉, Pap 1. in. decret de 〈◊〉. script Id. ibid.  reprehended. It is a vain and frivolous warranty; for as much as Pope Gelasius intended to speak of the works, or dogmatic translations of Russinus, as was the Commentary upon the Creed, and the translations of the treatises of some Greek divines, and not of his historical works or translations: Otherwise how could Pope Gelasius in the same decree have condemned the ten books of the recognitions of Clement, which had been translated by Russinus? and how could he have written in the same place, the holy Roman Catholic and Apostolic Church hath not been preferred before other Churches by any Synodical Constitutions, but hath obtained the primacy by the evangelical voice of our Lord and Saviour, saying; Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church? And how could he have written elsewhere speaking of the ancient canons 
Id in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. Id. ep. ad. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. I 〈◊〉 de 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  of the Church: These are the Canons which ordain, that from all parts of the world, the appeals shall be brought to the Sea Apostolic? And how could he have said, that the care of the Regions of Egypt, and of Antioch, had been by Pope Felix committed to Acacius Patriarch of Constantinople? And whereas they add that saint CYRILL sending the Canons of the Council of Nicaea, to the Bishops of Africa, writ to them, that they might find them in the Ecclesiastical history; which they pretend must be understood of the history of 〈◊〉; for as much as those of Socrates, Theodoret, and Sozomene, were written since, and besides contain nothing of the canons of the Council of Nicaea this is yet a more feeble and deceitful caution. For besides that many others had made collections of the Ecclesiastical history (as amongst the Catholics, saint ATHANASIUS Bishop of Alexandria, who had composed a volume entitled, Synodica. 
Soc hist. eccls l. 1. 〈◊〉. 13.  Theodorus Bishop of Mopsvestia, not yet then noted for heresy, who had framed a particular history of the Council of Nicaea, Philip of Sida, who had compiled an universal Ecclesiastical history: And amongst the heretics 
Theod: Mopsuest. apud. Nicet 〈◊〉. l. 5. c. 7. & 9 Philip. sid. apud. Soc. hist. eccls l. 7. c. 27.  Philostorgius the Arrian; and Sabinus the Macedonian) where is the article of the Bishop of Antioch, and the precept to adore standing on the sundays, and during the fifty days of pentecost, which were contained in saint Cyrills' Copy, to be found in Ruffinus edition? and chose where are the permission to deacons to distribute the Eucharist in the absence of priests and Bishops: and the restitution of the communion to penitents, before the accomplishment of their penance: and 
〈◊〉. apud. Niceph. l. 9 c. 19 & l. 〈◊〉. c 29. & Nicet. l. 5. c. 7. & 9  the extension of the canon of the Paulianict deaconesses to all deaconesses in general: and the equivocation and mistaking of the confession of priests after promotion, which are all in the edition of Ruffinus to be read in the copy of saint CYRILL? contrariwise, if saint CYRIL'S intention had been to approve the edition of Russinus by this remittment; 
Sabin Maced apud. Soc. hist. ec cl. l. 1. c. 7. & alibi.  why did not the Africans which turned, or caused to be turned, from Greek into Latin, saint CYRIL'S Greek Copy, follow Ruffinus in their translation, and put in the Clause of Church's Suburbicarie? And saint CYRILL himself, if he had believed that the clause of, Church's 
Conc. Eph. p 1. 〈◊〉 ep. Celest. Pap Conc. Eph. act. 3.  suburbicary, should have been added to the Canon of the Council of Nicaea, how could he have taken, a Vicarship and commission from Pope Celestine, to execute the sentence of the Sea apostolic against Nestorius' 
Ibid.  Archbishop of Constantinople? And how could he and the other Bishops 
Conc. Eph. p. 2 act. 5. in relat. ad 〈◊〉.  of the Council of Ephesus; have approved of the oration of the Pope's Legates, by which they called the Pope, the head of the Church, and the Vicar and ordinary Successor of saint PETER? and why had they reserved the judgement of the cause of john Patriarch of Antioch to the Pope?  
And then, what proof is there, that Ruffinus by the word suburbicary, did intend the Churches within a hundred thousand paces of the City of Rome, and not the Churches of all the City's subject to the Empire of the City of Rome, Is there any likelihood, that the Bishop of Alexandria, should have had Egypt Libya, and Pentapolis, under which were yet intended many other great provinces, either annexed or subaltern as Ammoniaca, Maroeotides, Thebaidis; and besides the immense Region of 
Epiph. Hier. Milet Leo imp: in. vit. Chrys.  Ethiopia from whence the Greek Emperor Leo, surnamed the Philosopher, saith in the life of saint chrysostom, that the Emperor Arcadius caused Theophilus Patriarch of Alexandria to cometo Constantinople, accompanied with Indian and Egyptian Bishops; And that the Bishop of Rome by whom they squared him, had no more but those only Churches, that where near the 〈◊〉 of Rome: Theocritus writeth, that Ptolomeus Philadelphus, king of Egypt, of whose Empire the Provinces since attributed to the Patriarkship of Alexandria made the principal part, commanded 33339. cities.  

Of towns, thirty three thousand, three hundred thirty nine;  
Under the yoke of his decrees; their servile heads incline. 
〈◊〉. Idyl. 17. Strab. geogr. l. 17.    
And Strabo, and Diodorus Siculus, and the interpreter of the notice of the Empire after them say, that the ancient division of Egypt, was divided 
Diodor. sicul. bibl. l 2.  into thirty six provinces whereof Delta in Egypt contained ten; and the 〈◊〉 Theodosius the second writing to Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria to cause him to come to the false Council of Ephesus, sent to him 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  to bring his ten metropolitan Bishops, or ten of his metropolitan Bishops; that is to say heads of Provinces with him. And the Bishop of Antioch who was but the third Patriarch, had under him the two Syria's, the three 
〈◊〉. de 〈◊〉. Pap. & 〈◊〉  〈◊〉, the two Cilicia's, the three Arabia's, the Region of Euphrates, Mesopotamia, Jsauria, and Osrhoene. and more as he pretended the Isle of 
〈◊〉. Eph part. 2. act. 7.  Cyprus, without reckoning many other provinces, which though he 〈◊〉 not their metropolitans, yet nevertheless acknowledge him. For there were many provinces which acknowledged their Patriarches, and were obliged to appear at their patriarchal Synods, although they took not from them the ordination of their metropolitans; from whence it is that Balsamon writes, that the Council of Antioch holden under the 
Balsamon. in Conc. Const. 〈◊〉 c 〈◊〉  patriarch Peter, Jberia Asiatica otherwise called the province of the Georgians was made Autocephalus, that is to say, exempt from takeing the ordination of their Metropolitan, any other where, then from the Synod of the province, and nevertheless still remained subject to the patriarch 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 28.  of Antioch. And when the Council of Chalcedon would erect Constantinople into a patriarkship, they assigned him for his patriarchal Division the provinces of Trace, pontus, Asia minor, with the Barbarous provinces; 
〈◊〉. in Terpsichor.  that is to say, Russia and Muscovia, which together contained more ground than all Europe; principally if we give Credit to Herodotus, who saith, that the Thracians were the greatest nation of the world next the Indians. And the Pope who was the first patriarch, and the pattern and model of all the patriarchs, to have been restrained to the only Churches near the City of Rome, what a Birthright had that been? For to say that the Pope had in his portion the City of Rome, which recompensed in splendour and dignity, the extént of the other patriarkships; and besides that the provinces near the City of Rome were much more peopled, than the provinces near the other patriarchal Cities: who knows not first, that the City of Rome being under the Pope's government, is not because of his dignity of patriarch, but because of his quality of Bishop? 
〈◊〉 Sic bibl 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ibid. l. 17.  And secondly, who knows not, that Diodorus Siculus writes, that many placed Alexandria the first or second of all the Cities of the world; and assirmes, that in his time, there were above three hundred thousand. 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 4. 〈◊〉 le 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Freemen inhabitans in Alexandria: and that Herodian saith, that Geta esteemed, that Alexandria and Antioch, were not far short of Rome: and that 〈◊〉 calls Constantinople equal to Rome? And as for the provinces near Constantinople and Alexandria, who knows not that they were no 
jos de Beil 〈◊〉. 2.  less peopled than the provinćes near and contiguous to Rome; and principally; if we believe Josephus, wherein 〈◊〉 saith, that Egypt contained 
〈◊〉, Sic. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 〈◊〉  seventy five hundred thousand of men, without accounting the inhabitants of Alexandria: And Diodorus Siculus who saith; that the ancient Egypt contained above eighteen thousand Cities or famous Boroughes?  
The word Suburbicary being derived as Grammar teacheth us, from the word urbs, the laws of Etymology will, that the variety of the signisications, should be ruled according to the difference of the acceptions of the word urbs the primitive: Now the word urbs precisely taken for the 〈◊〉 of Rome, had two Offices; the one, to distinguish her from all Citties contained under the Empire of the same City of Rome, which was Called by excellency and absolutely urbs; from whence it is that S. 
〈◊〉 40 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 18.  CYPRIAN calls the Clerks of Rome, Clerks of the City, and the first Council of Arles, entitles the Deacons of Rome, the deatons of the City. And Optatus Milevitanus calls Zepherinus Bishop of Rome, Zepherinus of the 
Oped Mil. con. Parm. l. 1.  City. And GREGORY of Tours, saith, Papam Vrbis, intending the Pope of Rome; and that conformably both to the eminency of the City, and 
Greg. Tour. hist. Franc. l. 2 Dio hist. Rom. l. 52.  to the Council that Maecenas, reported by Dion, gave to Augustus, to make all other people take their Cities, but for Country houses and Villages and to believe that there was but one City, truly a City, to wit, Rome: And the other, to distinguish it from the only Cities, subject to the Provostship of Rome, which they called the Prefecture of the City, which contained the next hundred thousand paces to the City of Rome. And therefore as the word urbs, taken precisely for the City of Rome, had two uses; one relative to the Imperial territory of the City of Rome, and the other, relative to the provostall territory of the City of Rome: so the word suburbicary taken according to the reason of the etymology, aught to have two offices; the one general, to wit, to design all the Cities situate within the imperial territory of Rome, that ancient writers called Romania: from whence it is that saint ATHANASIUS said, that Rome was the Sea Apostolic and Metropolitan of Romania: the other particular, 
Epiph. 〈◊〉. 46. 〈◊〉 49.  and more proper to lawyers; to wit, to design the only Cities, situate within the provostall territory of Rome; that is to say, within a hundred thousand paces about Rome, which they called suburbicary, to distinguish them 
Possi l in vita. August. c. 30. & 〈◊〉.  from the Cities of Italy, subject to the Pretoriall perfect of Italy, who held his Seat at Milan; the which, and principally since the time of Constantine, 
Athanad Solit. vit. agent.  was particularly called Italy; for before Constantine's time, the pretoriall Prefecture was not yet divided into four Pretoriall Prefectures, of Italy, of Gallia, of Illiria, and of the East, but consisted in one only Prefecture though it were sometimes solidarily administered by two persons. Now to pretend that it were in this second sense; to wit, not by relation to the Imperial territory of Rome; but by relation to the Provostall territory of Rome, that Ruffinus hath translated, that the Bishop of Rome should have the care of the Church's suburbicary; what were this but to find the Readers some what to laugh at? For besides that this term was not in use but in the authors that have written since Constantin, and the Council of Nicaea, who ever heard of shutting up the Pope's authority within the next hundred thousand paces of the City of Rome? is there so simple a scholar that knows not, that the Pope setting aside his quality, of head of the Church, was Patriarcke of the West; 
Bas. ep 10. jer. ad. Marc. presb. Ce. led. ep. 77.  whence it is, that saint BASILE considering him as Patriarch, calls him the Corypheos of the western people, And that S. JEROME speaking of him in the same quality, cries out, let them condemn me of heresy with the west; let them condemn me of heresy with Egypt; that is to say with Damasus 
Soc. hist. eccls l. 4. c. 37.  and with PETER, understanding by Damasus, Pope Damasus, and by PETER, Peter Patriarch of Alexandria; whom Socrates saith, Pope Damasus had newly then restored. And even the Greek schismatics; did not they anciently acknowledge, that the Patriarkship of the Pope, did anciently contain all the provinces of the Empire of the West, that is to say, all the Provinces of Italy, Africa, Spain, France, and the Germanies, England, & the Western Illiria, under which was understood Dalmatia, Hungaria, & the neighbouring provinces? Thou Seest, saith Nilus' Archbishop of Thessalonica, disputing against 
Nil. de 〈◊〉. Pap.  the Latins, that the Canon of the Council of Nicaea esteems, that the rules of the Fathers ought to be confirmed, which have distributed to every Church their privileges, to wit, that some of the Nations should be submitted to the Bishop of Alexandria, others to the Bishop of Antioch, as those of Syria, & the two Cilicia's, Coelosiria, & Mesopotamia: And to the Bishop of Rome is given the same, to wit, that he have the superintendency of those of the West. And Zonarus a Greek commenter and a Schismatic, expounding 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  the sixth Canon of the Coucell of Nicaea long before Nilus; The Council (saith 〈◊〉) ordains, that the Bishop of Alexandria, should have the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉, of Libya, and Pentapolis etc. as the ancient custom had given to the Bishop of Rome, to command in the provinces of the west. yea, doth not the same Zonarus write, that the patriarkship of Rome, comprehended not 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  only all the provinces of the Empire of the West, but also almost all the western provinces of the Empire of the East? To the Roman Church (saith 〈◊〉 comenting the fifth Canon of the Council of Sardica) were then 〈◊〉 almost all the western Churches; to wit, those of Macedonia, those of Illiria, those of 〈◊〉, those of Peloponesus; those of Epirus, which have since been attributed to the Sea of Constantinople. For those provinces that Zonarus calls western, were all of the Empire of the East; but they were called western, and appertained to the Patriarkship of the west, for as much as they had been 〈◊〉 the ancient Empire of the West, such as it had been possessed by the commonweal of Rome, before the Empire of Asia, holden by the Seleucides & other neighbour-Princes, & that of Egypt were united to it, & such 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  as it had been limited by the Emperors Antonius and Geta, when they 〈◊〉 to divide the Roman world, and set the Bosphorus for a bar between the two Empires: and such as it remained in the portion of the Emperors of the West, when the heirs of Constantine shared the body of the State, and assigned the mountain of Thuscis in Trace, for a bound be 'tween both Empires. From whence it is, that saint ATHANASIUS 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishop of Thessalonica amongst the Bishops of the West. And that Socrates saith that Paul Bishop of Constantinople was banished from the Empire of the East, and confined to Thessalonica. And therefore when in the last division of the Empire they added the eleven provinces of the Eastern Illyria, to the forty nine provinces of the Pretoriall Prefecture of the East, to make thereof the Empire of the East; they remained within the Pope's patriarkship, though they were become parts of the Empire of the East, and were called the Western provinces of the Empire of the East, to distinguist them from those of the same Empire, which were under the pretoriall prefecture of the East.  
And it is not to be objected, that the law Omni innovatione cessante, made by Theodosius the second at the instance as it hath been abovesaid of Atti cousin Bishop of Constantinople, attributes to the patriarkship of Constantinople, not only the provinces of Thracia, Asia minor, and Pontus, but also those of the Eastern Illyria. For it appears by a thousand testimonies, that this law remained without effect, and had no place after the death of Atticus. It appears first by the testimony of Socrates, who saith, first that the inhabitants of Cyzica a City of Hellespont, would not receive Proclus, that the Bishop of Constantinople had ordained Bishop of Cyzica, alleging that the law of the Emperor Theodosius the second where of the law Omni 〈◊〉 cessante is but a paragraph inserted into the Code by the heedlessness of Triboniam, had been made but for Atticus, his life tyme. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  They ordained (saith Socrates) Dalmatius, despising the law which commanded that the ordination of Bishops should not be made without the sentence of the Bishop of Constantinople and slighted this law, as having been granted to Atticus only for his life. It appears secondly by the testimony of the Pope sainr LEO, who was created Pope, eighteen years after this law, who teacheth us, that the causes of the Eastern Illyria went even then to the Archbishop of 〈◊〉 Vicar of the Sea Apostolic, in the Eastern Illyria, and that with the good liking, and the strong hand of the ministers of the Empire of the East; and reprehends Anastasius Archbishop of 〈◊〉 his Vicar in Illyria, because having sent for Atticus the Metropolitan of the old Epirus, Atticus having excused himself upon his sickness, and upon the extremity of the winter, he had employed the arms of the Empire of the East, to bring him by force. Thou hast (said he) had 
Leo ad Anast. ep. 82.  recourse to the Tribunal of the Prefecture of Illyria, and hast moved the Sovereign power, amongst all worldly powers, to make an innocent Bishop appear, and to pull him from the sacred grates of his Church: and neither for the indisposition of his person, nor for the sharpness of the winter, could he obtain any 〈◊〉, but hath been constrained to put himself into ways full of perils, and through impenetrable snows: And again; We have in such sort committed our Vicarship to thy Charity, as thou art called to a part of the care, but not to the 
Ibid.  fullness of power.  
It appears thirdly, by the testimony of the Council of Chalcedon, holden thirty years after this law, which decrees that the Bishop of 
Conc. Chalc act. 15. c. 28.  Constantinople, shall ordain but only the Metropolitans of Pontus, Asia minor and Thracia; that is to say, declares that the law of Theodosius the second and particularly the Paragraph Omni innovatione cessante, should have no place; and that the provinces of the Eastern Illyria, thould remain to the Patriarkship of Rome, and not to that of Constantinople. It appears fowrthlie, by the testimony of the Emperor Justinian the first who erecting the Bishopric of the first justinianea into the form of a Primacy, or supernumerary Patriarkship; and attributing to him many of the Provinces of the Eastern Illyria; yields for a reason of this attribution, the definition of Pope Vigilius, and not that of the Patriarch of Constantinople; and ordains, that the Bishop of the first justinianea, shall there hold the place, of the Sea Apostolic of Rome, and not of the Sea of Constantinople. We 
Iust. novel 131.  ordain (said he) that he shall have under his jurisdiction, the Bishops of the Mediterranean Dacia, Dacia Dypensis, Triballea, Dardania, upper Mysia, Pannonia, etc. and that in the provinces subject to him, he shall hold the place of the Sea Apostolic of Rome, following the definition of the holy Pope, Vigilius. It appears fifthy by the testimony of saint GREGORY the great, who writes to the Bishops of Illyria: 
Greg. Magn. ad Episc. per. Illyr. l. 4. ep. 9  Following the desires of your demand, we confirm by the consent of our authority, our brother John in the Bishopric of the first Justinianea. And in the Epistle to himself; The relation of our brethren and fellow-Bishops, 
Idem. ad joamn. episc. prim. justin. l. 4. ep 15.  hath declared to us that thou art called to the Episcopal dignity, by the unanimous consent of all the Council, and by the will of the most Excellent Prince; that is to say, of the Emperor Mauricius, third Successor to Justinian; whereto we also give our consent in the person of thy fraternity, &c: and send thee the Pall according to custom, and decree by a reiterated innovation, that thou exercise the Vicarship of the Sea Apostolic: And elsewhere, judging the appeal from the sentence of the same john Bishop of the first justinianea against Adrian Bishop of Thebes, one of the Bishops of his primacy; because (said he) that 
Idem. l. 2. ep. 6.  we see, that under the shadow of our Vicarship, thou presumest to do unjust things; we reserve with the help of Christ, to determine again of this quality; &c: and the while, abrogating and disannulling the decrees of thy sentence, we ordain by the authority of the blessed Prince of the Apostles, that thou remain deprived of the sacred Communion for the space of thirty days?  
It appears in the sixth place, by the testimony of John Bishop of Thessalonica, who in the third general Council of Constantinople, which we call the sixth general Council signed with the title of Vicar of the sea Apostolic of 〈◊〉, in these words: john by the mercy of God, Bishop of Thessalonica, and 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  vicar, and native Legate of the Sea Apostolic of Rome, have subscribed. It appears in the seaventh place, by the testimony of Leo the Learned the Greek Emperor, who reckons amongst the Churches eclipsed, a little while before him, from the Sea of Rome, and submitted to the Sea of Constantinople; that of Thessalonica, Metropolitan of Macedonia; 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  that of Nicopolis metropolitan of the ancient Epirus, that of Patros, that of Corinth, and that of Athens: The Metropolitans (said he) which have been subtracted from the Patriarkship of Rome, and which are now subiest, they and their Bishop to the Sea of Constantinople are these: the Archbishop of Thessalonica; the Archbishop of Syracuse the Archbishop of Corinth; the Archbishop of Rhegium; the Archbishop of Nicopolis; the Archbishop of Athens; the 〈◊〉 of Patros. And finally it appears by the testimony of Zonarus, the most famous Canonist of the greeks, who interpreting the words of the Council of Chalcedon, 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 c. 28.  that the Bishop of Constantinople should ordain but only the metropolitans 
〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉 Chalc c. 28.  of Pontus, Asia, and Thracia, adds, for the Dioceses, to wit; those of Macedonia, Thessalia, Hellada, Peloponesus, Epirus, and Illyria, were at that tymestill subject to the Bishop of Rome. And then if the law Omni innovatione cessante, had been executed, and that the Provinces of the Eastern Illyria should have remained after that disposed to the Bishop of Constantinople would not the consequence have been yet worse for the Pope's adversaries? for that Pope Leo the first, who was made Pope eighteen year after this law, reproves the Archbishop of Thessalonica his vicar in Illyria (because having called Atticus Metropolitan of the ancient Epirus, and he excusing himself upon his sickness, and upon the winter's cold, he had employed the arm of the Eastern Empire, to make him come by force) and writ to him; We have in such sort 
〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 28.  committed our Vicarship to thy charity as thou art called to a part of the care, and not to the fullness of power: And that the Emperor justinian being willing to exalt the Bishop of the first justinianea of Bulgaria over 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 131.  diverse Provinces of the Eastern Illyria, allegeth for a reason of his ordinance, the definition of Pope Vigilius, and not that of the Patriarch 
Cyp. ad 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 67.  of Constantinople, and constitutes him vicar of the Apostolic Sea of Rome in these very Provinces; doth it not necessarily show, 
Id. ad 〈◊〉. & pleb. Hisp. ep 68  that either the law of the Emperor Theodosius the second had remained without effect, or that the Pope had jurisdiction out of his Patriarship? and that before the Council of Nicaea, saint CYPRIAN 
Sulp. 〈◊〉. hist. 〈◊〉. l. 2  solicited Pope Steven to write to the Gauls, that Marcian 
〈◊〉. hist. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 3. c. 23.  Bishop of Arles might be discharged; and reproved the same Steven, for that he had upon a false report restored Basilides and Martial 
Ep. 〈◊〉.  Bishop of Spain, deposed for having abjured in the persecution 
〈◊〉. apud.  
Theod. hist. 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 8.  time: And that a while after the Council of Nicaea, Valens Bishop of Murses in Pannonia, and Vrsatius Bishop of Singidon in Mysia, asked 
Soc. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 6. c. 36.  the Pope's pardon for the slanders they had published against saint ATHANASIUS: and that Socrates saith, that Perigenes Bishop 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  of Patros in Achaya was by the Pope's commandment made Bishop 
〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉. ep. 82.  of Corinth: And that saint PROSPER writes, that Pope Celestine, sent Germanus Bishop of Auxera, his vicar into Scotland: and that the Bishop of Thessalonica had been from time to time, till Pope Leo the first; and from Pope Leo the first, to the time of Pope GREGORY the great, vicar's of the Sea Apostolic in Macedonian, Achaya, Epirus, and other Greek Provinces, and not vicar's of simple negotiation as Balsamon pretends; 
a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  but Vicars of jurisdiction as Zonarus, and the Greek Emperor Leo, 
c Leo Imp. de ordin. 〈◊〉. throne. Const. subiectar.  more learned and more ancient than he, 
b sext. in Trull. Zon. in Conc. Sard. c. 5. & in Coc. Chalc c. 28.  and the very Epistle of Pope Leo 
d Leo ep. 82.  bear witness: show they not plainly; either that the Pope had jurisdiction out of his Patriarkship; or that his Patriarkship extended further, than the Provostship of Rome? For as for the new Critics that object, that the Emperor Valentinian the third commanded by one of his laws the perfect of the City, that he should banish those which were not in the Pope's Communion from the space of an hund red thousand paces about the City of Rome, and infer from thence, that the Pope's authority, did then extend but an hundred thousand paces about Rome; they show themselves blind with two more than Tiresian 
Lid de 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. Franc. an. 1618. dissert. 2 c. 3.  blindnesses: the one not to see that there was difference between this, that the Emperor Valentinian the third did; which was to bear so great a respect to the Popes, as not to permit to those, that were out of their Communion, the very temporal dwelling within the Provostships of the City of Rome; and the consequence that they infer from 
Cod. Theod l. 16. 〈◊〉. de 〈◊〉 l. 62.  it; which is to say; that the Popes had not power to exclude those which were not in their communion, from the spiritual communion of all the Church: And the other not to perceive, that the bound of an hundred thousand paces, is fitted to the law, not because the Pope's jurisdiction extended no further; but because the ordinary jurisdiction of the Provost of the City of Rome, to whom the law was directed, extended no further then over the next hundred thousand paces to the City of Rome. Otherwise, how could saint PROSPER have said, speaking of Pope Celestins proceedings against Coelestius: he commanded 
Prosp. Acquit. l. count. Collat. Aug. ad.  Coelestius should be driven from the utmost ends of Italy? and how could saint, AUSTIN have written, that Pope Innocent and Pope Zosimus, condemned Pelagius and Coelestius, through all the Christian 
Opt. ep. 1. 57  world? and how should the same Emperor Valentinian the third have 
Theod. nou. Const. tit. 24. ad calcem Cod. Theod.  said in an other law; We ordain by a perpetual sanction, that neither to the Bishops of the Gauls, nor to those of other provinces, it shall be lawful against the ancient custom. to attempt any thing, without the authority of the Reverend Pope, of the eternal City; but that to them, and to all, that be for a law, that the authority of the Sea Apostolic shall have ordained? But why should we have recourse to reason, to confute that which ruins and destroys itself by the proper hippothesis thereof? for had not the City of Constantinople been form and made, by the pattern of the ancient Rome? had she not the same offices, privileges, and politic orders with the ancient Rome? from whencet he ancient Rome saith by the mouth of Claudian; 
Claud. de Bell. Gild.   

Cum subito par Roma mihi, divisaque sumpsit  
Aequales aurora togas.   
Had she not a Senate as Rome had? had she not one of the Consuls as Rome had? had she not a Provost of the City, whose ordinary jurisdiction was enclosed within the next hundred thousand paces to the City of Constantinople, as Rome had? and when they would honour her with spiritual privileges, and erect her into the title of a Patriarkship; did they not rule her, by the square and by the model of the Patriarkship of Rome, alleging, that as she was honoured with like temporal privileges as Rome was; so it was 
Conc. Chalc act. 15. 〈◊〉. 28.  reasonable to honour her that is to say, in a patriarchal degree) with like Ecclesiastical privileges? If then the Patriarkship of Constantinople, were squared by that of Rome; and Constantinople had her Provost of the City, whose ordinary jurisdiction was contained within the next hundred thousand paces to the City of Constantinople, as well as that of Rome; who sees not, that either the patriarchal jurisdiction of the Pope, must not be restrained, within the ordinary territory of the Provostship of the City of Rome; that is to say, within an hundred thousand paces next the City of Rome; or that the patriarchal jurisdiction of the Bishop of Constantinople must likewise be restrained within the ordinary territory of the provost of the City of Constantinople, that is to say; within an hundred thousand paces next the City of Constantinople? for that Constantius Son of Constantine attributed to the Provost of the City of Constantinople, 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the appeals from the divisions of Thrace, of Pontus and Asia, it was not of the ordinary jurisdiction of the Provostship of the City of Constantinople, no more than the appeals of all the Provinces of the Empire, that the ancient Emperors had attributed to the Provost of Rome, were of the simple and precise ordinary jurisdiction of the Provostship of the City of Rome. By means whereof, to form and mould the spiritual authority of the Bishop of Constantinople, by the pattern and model of that of the Bishop of Rome; it was necessary, either that the spiritual authority of the Pope; should be extended over all that which was of the extraordinary jurisdiction of the Provost of the City of Rome; or that the spiritual authority of the Bishop of Constantinople should be enclosed within the only bounds of the ordinary jurisdiction of the Provost of the City of Constantinople, that is to say; within the next hundred thousand paces of the City of Constantinople. Now, so far was this from being so, that the patriarchal territory of the Bishop of Constantinople was confined within an hundred thousand paces next the City; as contrary wise the Patriarckship of Constantinople had for division, the provinces of Pontus, Thracia; Asia minor; and the barbarous Provinces; that is to say; Russia and Muscovia; which 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  contained more ground, than all Europe?  
And against this it is not to be said, that Constans son of Constantine, and brother to Constantius had deprived the Provost of the City of Rome from the right of examining by appeal, the causes of 
Cod. Theod. l. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 27.  all the provinces, and had attributed it to the pretoriall Provosts. For if the Pope had been squared by the pattern of the provost of the City of Rome, it had been by the pattern of the provost of the City of Rome, not such as he was since the Empire of Constantine, but such as he had been under the Empire of the Predecessors of Constantine: Otherwise how had the Council of Nicaea confirmed the ancient prerogatives 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  of the Bishop of Alexandria in Egypt, Lybia, and Pentapolis; for as much rs they were grounded upon the custom of the Bishop of Rome?  
Moreover, the same law of Constans son of Constantine, which took away the appeals of the provinces of Italy from the provost of the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  city, and attributed them to the pretoriall provost of Italy comprehended by names Sicilia, Sardinia, Campania, Calabria, and Brusse. And nevertheless it is certain, that these provinces, and particularly Sicilia, remained always in the Pope's patriarkship, as long as the Latin and Greek Churches were united. For those that say that Sicilia was added to the patriarkship of Constantinople, when justinian attributed the Secular appeals of Sicilia to the praetor of Constantinople, commit two gross ignorances; the one, not to know that the spiritual jurisdiction of Sycilia, was not transferred to the Patriarkship of Constantinople, till after the Greek Emperors infected with the heresy of the Iconoclasts, had been driven from Rome, and in revenge had deprived the Pope, not only of the exercise of spiritual authority, but also from the temporal revenue that he had in Sicilia, which remained to them: and the other, not to perceive, that seeing Sicilia (which was out of the ordinary territory of the Provost of the City, and belonged before the usurpation of the Vandals, to the Pretoriall Provost of Italy; and since the expulsion of the Vandals to the Praetor of Constantinople, to whom justinian had attributed it; for as much as when he reconquered Sicilia, the Goths still held Italy) was of the Pope's Patriarkship, the Pope's authority was not then restrained to the only territory of the Provostship of the City of Rome; for that Sicilia both before and after justinian, had been and remained under the Patriarkship of Rome, till the time of the Iconoclast Emperors, we learn both from the Epistles of saint LEO, the first, written near a hundred years bofore justinian which ordained the Bishops of Sicilia, to send every year three Bishops of their provincial Synod to Rome the third of 
Leo ad Episc. Sicil ep 4.  the Calends of October: and from the Epistles of saint GREGORY the Great, written fifty years after justinian, whereby 
Greg. Magn. l. 2. indict. 10. ep. 4. & alibi.  he made Maximian Bishop of Syracuse, his Vicar over all the Churches of Sycilia: and from the sixth general Council, where the Bishops of Sicilia signed amongst the Bishops of the Pope's Patriarkship: and from the Council Trullian, celebrated under justinian the second 
Conc. Const. sext. act. 4. Conc. Trull c. 36.  where the description of the Patriarkship of Constantinople was repeated without any mention of Sicilia: and finally from the very confession of the Greek Emperor Leo, surnamed the Learned, who placeth 
Leo. Imp. in ordin. ec cl. throne.  amongst the Churches subtracted from the Sea of Rome, and attributed to the Sea of Constantinople, the metropolitan Church of Syracuse 
Const subject. apud. Leunclau. in iur.  and all her subaltern Churches?  
And so what remains but that Ruffinus an author that saint JEROM saith is full of impiety of language; and that joseph Scalager 
oriental. Acyrologus. Hier. advers.  calls a slanderous and ignorant interpreter; and who was so little curious in the stile of the lawyers, as he employed (with Lampridius and the other authors of the declination of the latin tongue; 
Ruff. apoll. 2.  yea, as saint JEROM reproacheth it to him, with the vulgar) 
jos. Scal. ano. in chro. Eus. num.  the word parents, to signify Kinsmen, sets therein the adjective Suburbicary, not according to the special use of the lawyers, but according to the etymology of the word? and than that as the 
LXXXIIII  general office of the word urbs absolutely taken, and by excellency 
Hier. a luers. Ruff. appol. 2. Opt. Milivit. cont. Parm. l. 1. & Greg. Turon. hist Franc. l. 2. Ath. ad Solit vit. agent.  for the City of Rome, was to distinguish her from all the City's subject to the Roman Empire, from whence it is, that they called the Bishop of Rome for distinction from all other Bishops; the Bishop of the City; so Ruffinus, by the Church's Suburbicary, intends not the Churches within an hundred thousand paces of the City of Rome; but the Churches of all the Cities, subject to the Empire of the City of Rome; which saint ATHANASIUS calls the Sea Apostolic, and Metropolitan of Romania? And indeed, that Ruffinus in translating, or rather in epilogizing the Canon of the Nicean Council omitts the clause of the Patriarkship of Antioch; and translates only, that the Bishop of Alexandria shall have the care of the Churches of Egypt; and 〈◊〉 of Rome, that of the Church's Suburbicary: is it not a manifest proof that he useth these words, not in form of division, but in form of Subordination; and that this which he saith, that the Bishop of Rome, should have the care of the Suburbicary Churches, and that which Socrates and Sozomene say, 
Soc. hist. ec cl. l. 2. c. 8.  that to the Bishop of Rome, because of the dignity of his Seat; 
Soz. hist. eccls l. 3. c. 7.  〈◊〉 care of all things belong, is one and the same language: or rather that this that Ruffinus saith here, that the Bishop of Rome is to have the care of the Suburbicary Churches; and this that he saith elsewhere; Rome by the grace of God, is the head of all the Christrians; is one and the same thing? But grant that Ruffinus by the 
Rust. in Hier. 〈◊〉. 2.  word Church's Suburbicarie doth intend in generalll all the Churches of the provinces, subject to the Empire of Rome; nor in particular, the only Churches of the City, subject to the Provostship of Rome; but intends the Churches of the Provinces or Nations, where the Metropolitans or Primats acknowledge the Pope immediately without the intermeddling of any the Patriarches; to wit, the Churches of the Patriarkship of the west, would that hinder that besides the immediate superintendency that the Pope hath over the provinces of his Patriarkship, he might not have a mediate superintendency over all the provinces of the others?  
Hemer, if it be lawful to compare things sacred to profane, doth not he teach us, that besides the Command Agamemnon had, as a particular King over the companies of his own subjects; and the other kings like him, every one over their own; he had yet beyond that, as head and Captain general, over the Army of the greeks, the universal authority and superintendency over the other kings, and over their Companies? And will not the adversaries 
〈◊〉. de 〈◊〉. reg. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 1618. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  of the Pope have it, that the Provost of the City of Rome, to whose temporal proportion they pretend to square the Pope's spiritual authority, besides the ordinary jurisdiction of his Provostship, wherein they equal him to other Provosts had besides in the first ages an other extraordinary jurisdiction, by which as head of the Senate, and Vicar of the Emperor, he was superior to other Provosts, and judged of the appeals of all the Provinces? And 
〈◊〉. ep. 〈◊〉.  saint BASILL that great Archbishop of Cappadocia did not he consider the Pope some times as Patriarch of the west, where he calls him the Corypheos of those of the west; and sometimes as head 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 77.  of the universal Church, when he writes to those of the west; Be it that you repute yourself head of the universal Church; the head cannot say to the feet, you are not necessary to me: be it that you place yourselves, in the rank of the other members of the Church; you cannot say to us, that are constituted in one same body with you, you are not necessary to me? for that he useth this disiunctive particle (be it) it is not there to cast any doubt, but to distinguish the address of his speech into two branches; whereof the one, to wit, be it that you repute yourself head of the universail Church; had regard to the Pope: and the other, to wit; be it that you place yourselves in the rank of the other members; had regard to the other Bishops of the west. And doth not he himself report, that Eustathius Bishop of Sebaste in Armenia having been deposed by the Council of Melitina in Armenia, a Catholic and orthodoxal Council and having brought letters of restitution from Pope Liberius, was received without form of process into the Council 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  of 〈◊〉 in Cappadocia? And doth not saint JEROM, who was priest of Antioch and creature to Paulinus the Bishop of Antioch, and resident within 
Hier. cont. joan. Hier.  the division of the Patriarkship of 〈◊〉, say; What should the Churches of the East do, and those of Egypt, and that of the Sea Apostolic? designing by the Churches of the Sea Apostolic, those which were subject immediately, 
Id. contra Vigil.  without acknowledging any other Patriarch between, to the Patriarkship of the Pope: And by the Churches of Egypt, those which answered to the Patriarkship of Alexandria: & by the Churches of the East, those which were submitted to the Patriarkship of Antioch? And yet for all that, doth he not write to Pope Damasus about the contention of Vitalis, 
Id. ad Dam 〈◊〉. 57  Meletius, and Paulinus, Competitors in the Patriarkship of Antioch; I am joined in communion with thy blessedness; that is to say: with the Chair 
Ibid.  of PETER; I know the Church is built upon that rock. And a little after; I know not Vitalis, I reiest Meletius, I am ignorant of Paulinus; whosoever gathers not with thee, scatters? That is to say, doth he not teach us that the distinction of the Pope's patriarkship, from the other patriarkships, hindered not the Pope's superiority over the others? And did not Flavianus Archbishop 
In ep. 〈◊〉. Conc. Chalc Ibid.  of Constantinople write to Pope Leo; We have given advertisement to your Holiness, of the excommunication of Eutyches, that you may make his 〈◊〉 
Ibid. & Lib. in 〈◊〉. c. 12. See chap. 7 Vict. Tun. in Zen. & Euag. hist. eccls l. 3. c. 18.  known to all the Bishops, resident under your piety? And yet for all this, did he not, when Eutyches pretended to have appealed to the Pope, submit his judgement to that of the Pope? And did not himself in the second Council of Ephesus, appeal to the Pope? And john the second, and Anthimus, and Menas, and john the fourth his successors, did they not acknowledge and protest, that they were subject to the Pope? And the Popes that came after Leo, did not they depose Acacius, and Anthimus, patriarchs of Constantinople, and judge by appeal the causes of John & Athanasius subjects to the patriarchs of Constantinople? And did not the Pope S. GREGORY 
Greg. Mag. l 4. ep. 82. & l. 5. ep. 64.  the great, call the Bishops of the West his Bishops? If the causes (said he) of the Bishops, which are committed to me, are treated by the religious Emperors, by 
Id. e. l. 4. ep. 64.  the intercessions of strangers; miserable man that I am, what do I in this Church? but that my Bishops despise me, and have recourse to secular judges against me, I thanke God almighty for it, and I impute it to my sins. Yet did not he say of all the Bishops in general; If there be any fault in the Bishops, I know no Bishop, but is subject to the Sea Apostolic? And julian the former, who lived 1050. years past, did he not turn the hundred thirtieth one new constitution into 
jul. ante. cess. nou. 119. in ver. nou. Iust. 131.  these words; yet more raw, than those of Ruffinus; That the Bishop of the first justinianea should have the same right over the Bishop's subject to him; as the Bishop of Rome had over the Bishops submitted to him? And yet by this doth he pretend to equal the Bishop of the first justinianea to the Pope, or to exempt him and his Bishops from the Pope's jurisdiction? Nothing less; but by the Bishops submitted to the Pope, he intended, the Bishops submitted immediately to the Pope without the interposition of other Patriarches, as 
Iust. nou. 131.  it appears both by the original greek of the law, which bears this: We ordain, that in all provinces subject to him, he hold the place of the Sea Apostolicle 
Cod. tit. 1. l. 8.  of Rome, following the things defined by the most holy Pope Vigilius: And by the law of the same justinian to Epiphanius, which saith; We will suffer nothing to pass, concerning the state of the holy Churches, which shall not be also referred, to the blessedness of the most holy Pope; for as much as he is the head of all the most holy 
Greg. Mag. l. 4. indict. 13. cp. 9 & 15. Item. l. 2. indict. 11. cp. 6.  Ministers of God: And by the places above cited of saint GREGORY the great, which witness that the Pope confirmed even then; that is to say, fifty year after julian the former, the election of the Bishop of the first justinianea; and sent him the archiepiscopal mantle, and the revocation of the Vicarship of the Sea Apostolic, and judged by appeal of the causes of his Bishops, & chasticed him himself, when he had misjudged. But in sum whatsoever the sense of this addition of Russinus be, it imports little to know it. For having been excommunicated for his errors in saith, by the Pope and the Roman Church; who doubts but if he could insert into his translation, any thing to the Pope's prejudice, he hath done it?  
It 〈◊〉 before the Council of Nicaea, which wills that to every Church the prerogatives thereof, be preserved; the Roman Church was 
Conc. 〈◊〉. c. 6.  she, whereof S. IRENEUS cries out, to this Church because of a more mighty principality; that is to say, because of a principality more mighty than 
〈◊〉. l. 3 c. 3.  the temporal, it is necessary that all the Churches should agree. It was she, that 
Cypr. ad 〈◊〉. ep. 〈◊〉.  S. CYPRIAN called the Chair of Peter, and the principal Church, from whence the 〈◊〉 all unity proceeded. It was she of whom S. JEROM writ; I 
〈◊〉. ad 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  know the Church is built upon this stone; whosoever eats the lamb out of this house, is profane. It was she of whom S. AUSTIN said, In the Roman Church hath always 〈◊〉 the principality of the Sea Apostolic. It sufficeth that before 
Aug. 〈◊〉. 162.  the Council of Nicaea which ordaineth that the ancient customs should remain entire; the law Ecclesiastical sorbad, to canonize Churches; that is to 〈◊〉, to make canons touching the generality of Churches, without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome: that the Ecclesiastical custom bare, that the final depositions of Bishops, could not be proceeded to without attending the decision from Rome, and that from the time of the Emperor Gallienus, that is to say, more than sixty years before the Council of Nicaea, the Churchmen of Egypt, desiring to accuse Dionysius Bishop 
〈◊〉. apol. 2.  of Alexandria their Patriarch, went up saith saint ATHANASIUS Patriarch of the same Sea of Alexandria to Rome, and accused him before 〈◊〉 Bishop of Rome. It sufficeth that presently after the same Council 
Athan. de 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉 nod. 〈◊〉. Socr. hist. 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 〈◊〉.  of Nicaea, when S. ATHANASIUS Patriarch of Alexandria, Paul Bishop of Constantivople, Marcellus Primate of Galatia, Asclepas Bishop of Gaza in Palestina, had been deposed by diverse Counsels of the East; julius Bishop of Rome, restored to every one his Church, because to him (saith Sozomene) for the dignity of his Sea, the care of all things appertained. It sufficeth, 
Soz. hist. 〈◊〉 l. 3. c. 〈◊〉. Soc. hist. 〈◊〉 l 4. c. 〈◊〉.  that after the death of ATHANASIUS, Pope Damasus confirmed the ordination of Peter Patriarch of Alexandria, successor to the same saint ATHANASIUS, and restored him to his Sea of Alexandria, It sufficeth, that in the Council of Sardica holden for the defence of the Council of 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 12.  〈◊〉, & whereat assisted besides more than three hundred other Bishops, the same Osius, that was Precedent at the Council of Nicaea; the same saint ATHANASIUS which had helped to frame the acts of the Council of Nicaea; the same Protogenes Bishop of Sardica, which was at the Council of Nicaea, the Episcopal appeals to the Pope, were authorized by a written law, and the Bishops of all the provinces exhorted to refer the affairs to their head that is to say, to the Sea of the Apostle PETER. It sufficeth that in the Council of Lampsacus in Asia the Macedonians purposing to return to the Catholic Church, sent their Legates from Asia to Rome, to protest obedience to the Pope, & to oblige themselves to come up to his Tribunal, or to the judge's delegated by him in all causes that should be attempted against them. It sufficeth, that in the Council of Tyana in Cappadocia, Eustachius Bishop of Sebastia in Armenia, who had been deposed by the Council of Melitina, the Metropolitan city of 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 70.  Armenia, bringing letters of restitution from Pope Liberius, was received without form of process, and had place as a Bishop in the Council. It 
〈◊〉 hist. 〈◊〉 2 c 36 & 〈◊〉. l. 4 c. 8.  〈◊〉, that when the Emperor Constantius had caused S. ATHANAS. Patriarch of Alexandria, to be deposed in a Council of more than three hundred Bishops of the East and West, he thought he had not satisfied his desire; if the thing (saith Amianus Marcellinus) were not confirmed by the authority 
Amian. Marc. 〈◊〉. l. 15.  whereof the Bishops of the eternal city are superiors. It sufficeth that when the same Canon of the Council of Nicaea, which is now in question, was renewed in the Council of Constantinople, the other patriarchs and Primats 
Conc. Const c. 2.  were forbidden to meddle, beyond their divisions: Let the Bishop of Alexandria (said the Synod) govern only what belongs to Egypt; and let the Bishops of the East, that is to say, of the patriarkship of Antioch, admister only to the East; where never Council interdicted the Pope from meddling in matters which were out of his patriarkship: Contrariwise the Pope in important occasions, hath always taken notice of the ecclesiastical affairs of the Empire of the East, & judged by appeal the causes of other patriarkships, the Catholic Counsels of the East themselues, yielding to be solicitors & executors of his sentences: & oppositely never any of the other Patriarchs once attempted, to examine the Ecclesiastical causes of the Empire of the West, and of the patriarchal division of the Pope. It sufficeth, that in the 
Aug. ep. 92.  Milevitan Council holden by the Bishops of Asrica; and by S. AUSTIN amongst others, it was affirmed, that the Pope's authority was of divine right, 
Cod. Theo nou. Theo. & Valent. tit. 24.  and drawn from the authority of the holy Scriptures: and then not to be restrained to the simple patriarkship of Rome, but universal; and such as the law of the Emperor Valentinian the third describes it, when it calls the Pope, the Rector of the universality of Churches. And the Emperor justinian when 
Cod. Paris. Antuerp. & Gen. tit. 1. l. 7.  he writes, that the Pope is the head of all the most holy ministers of God. And the Bishop of Patara in Lycia, one of the provinces in Asia, when he saith to the same Emperor justinian, that there were many kings and princes in 
Lib. in breviar. c. 22.  the world, but there was no one of them, that was over all the earth, as the Pope was over the Church of all the world. It sufficeth, that in the general Council of Ephesus, when the Fathers had executed the sentence of deposition, that the Pope had pronounced at Rome against Nestorius; when they should 
Conc. Eph. p. 2. act. 5. in relat. ad Cael.  have passed to the cause of john Patriark of Antioch, the Council reserved the judgement thereof to the Pope, and that according to the ancient custom and tradition Apostolical. It sufficeth, that in the false Council 
Ibid. act. 4.  of Ephesus, after Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, and his pretended general Council, had deposed Flavianus Archbishop of Constantinople, and Theodoret Bishop of Sire; Flavianus (saith the Emperor Valentinian) 
Valent. 3. Imp. in ep. praeamb. Conc. Chalc Theodor. ep. ad Leon. Ibid.  according to the custom of Counsels, appealed from him to the Pope; and Theodoret did the like: & that the Pope upon these appeals, replaced Flavianus already dead, into the Catalogue of the Bishops of Constantinople, and restored to Theodoret his Bishopric, and annulled all the acts of the false Council of Ephesus, except the creation of Maximus Patriark of Antioch, which remained in force, because said Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople, the Pope having received him into his communion, judged that he 
Conc. Chalc act. 10.  should rule the Church of Antioch. And finally it sufficeth, that when the greek text of the same canon of the Council of Nicaea, translated by Ruffinus, had been read in the Council of Chalcedon, a Council composed of above six hundred Greek Fathers, who understood both Greek, and the Greek Canons better than Ruffinus, who was so unapt and barbarous in both the tougues as S. JEROM saith; the Latins took him for 
〈◊〉. ad. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. apol. 2.  a Grecian, and the greeks for a Latin: so far were the Fathers of that Conncell from inferring from thence, any equality between the Pope and the Patrirake of Alexandria, that chose in their Synodical relation, they protested they held the Pope for the head of their society; 
Conc. Chalc part. 3. in relat. ad Leon. Ibid.  Thou rulest over us (said they) as the head doth over the members. And again, We pray thee to honour our judgement, with thy decrees, and that as in what concerns the weal, we have brought correspondency to our head, so thy 〈◊〉 would 〈◊〉 to thy children, what concerns decency: And on the other side, they 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Alexandria as subject, and ghostly vassal to the Pope, in these words; ` 〈◊〉 hath extended his 〈◊〉, even against him to 
〈◊〉.  whom the guard of the Vine hath been committed by our 〈◊〉; that is to sait, 〈◊〉 thy 〈◊〉.   

Of the claim of the Bishops of Constantinople. CHAPT. VII.  
BUT the adversaries of the Church not finding any foundation in the history of the other patriarchs, to establish the equality, that they would introduce, between the Pope, and the simple patriarchs, had recourse to the claims of the Bishops of Constantinople which are to be reduced principally into two. The first claim was that of Anatolius, who packed in the Council of Chalcedon by the 〈◊〉 of the Emperor Marcian, and of the 〈◊〉 of the city of Constantinople, to be declared the second 〈◊〉, and to 〈◊〉 after the Pope, the like 〈◊〉 of honour as the Pope; because Constantinople was a second Rome, that is to say, packed to be declared equal to the Pope, not in regard of the Pope, to whom 〈◊〉 he and all his Catholic successors, always protested 〈◊〉 inferiors, but in regard of the other patriarchs over whom he affected to be, what the Pope was over him and them. For that is it that these words of the Council of Chalcedon signify that the city of 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. c. 28  should be honoured in Ecclesiastical causes, as the Roman, being the second after her; to wit, that as the Bishop of Rome, had the 〈◊〉 absolutely over all the patriarchs, so the Bishop of Constantinople should have it after him, over all other patriarchs. It was ordained (saith 
I 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 l 2. c. 4.  〈◊〉, repeating the same Canon) that the Sea of new Rome, because of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 she held after the ancient Rome, should have the primacy before the other Sea. The second Claim was, that of John and of Cyriacus patriarchs of 〈◊〉, who in the time of Pelagius the second and of Saint GREGORY, would participate in the title of universal Bishop, which in the presence, & with the consent of the Council of Chalcedon had been attributed to the Pope; pretending, that by the same Council of Chalcedon, it had been said, that the Bishop of Constantinople should enjoy the like 〈◊〉 of honour as the Pope, after the Pope: and then, that as the Pope had the right to bear the title of universal Bishop through all the world; so the 〈◊〉 of Constantinople should have the right to bear it in the Empire of the East. For that such was their Claim, it appears besides a thousand other proofs, by the capitulation of the great Comentor of Homer Eustathius Patriarch of Constantinople, and the other 〈◊〉 would have renewed with the Latins, under the Greek Emperor Basilius six hundred years agone; to wit, that the Bishop of Constantinople, might be called universal in the Empire of the East, as the Pope 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  over all the world. The Bishop of Constantinople (saith Glabar, an author of the same age) with his Prince Basilius and some other greeks, held a Council 〈◊〉 it might be lawful for them with the Pope's consent, to have the Church of 〈◊〉 to be held and called in that compass universal, as the Roman is, in the 〈◊〉 of the whole world.  
Now may I in two words, not only confute these two objections, but also retort them against the Pope's adversaries. For if the Bishop of Constantinople pretended to obtain the second place after the Pope, be cause Constantinople was a second Rome; that is to say, a part and a branch of the city and Church of Rome, for what cause is it not manifest, that the Church of Rome before his challenge, had then the primacy before all other Churches; as also the officers of the Emperor Marcian acknow. ledged in these terms; even when they protected Anatolius: By the proofs 
Conc. 〈◊〉 act. 16.  which have been produced on both sides, it appears that the primacy before all, and the principal honour hath been preserved by the canons, to the most beloved of God, the Archbishop of the ancient Rome? And if the Bishop of Constantinople would participate in the title and nomination of universal Bishop, because Constantinople was a second Rome, how could it be, but that the title of universal Bishop, did appartaine primitively and originally to the Bishop of Rome? But for as much as the beginning of these contentions, came from the Council of Constantinople, it is best to take the business at the source of the history, which is thus: At the Council of Constantinople held under the great Theodosius, the Greek Bishops ordained in favour of the City of Constantinople, and in favour of the Emperor of the East, who resided there to make a new Sea of the Empire that the Bishop of Constantinople, should have the prerogatives of honour after him of Rome, because Constantinople was a second Rome. Now this Canon was no Canon 
Conc. Const c. 3.  of a General Council; for be it that it was framed by the Council of Constantinople that we call General; or be it was made by that which was reassembled at Constantinople the year following; the Council of Constantinople that we call Ecumenical, having been composed only of the provinces of the Empire of the East, and being become general but by the adiunction and confirmation of that which was celebrated at the same time at Rome, and this Canon not having been sent thither it could not hold the place of a Canon of a general Council And therefore when Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople, would have caused it to be renewed in the Council of Chalcedon, the Pope's 
Conc Chalc act. 16.  Legates answered, that is was not to be found in the Code of the Synodical Canons of the universal Church and added, that is was never put in practice. If the Bishops of Constantinople (said they,) have enjoyed, it what 
Ibid.  would they have more? and if they have not enjoyed it, why do they demand it? and for this very cause, Pope Leo writ back to Anatolius: The signatures 
Leo ad Anatol. Episc. Const. ep. 51.  of certain Bishops made as thou pretendest more than threescore years agone, cannot uphold thy intention, to which being tardy and long ago fallen, thou hast sought weak and feeble props: for never having bone transmitted to the knowledge of the Sea Apostolic, it could obtain no force. And saint GREGORY to 
Greg. Magn. l. 6. indict. 15. 〈◊〉. 31.  the patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch; The Roman Church hath never hitherto, neither now doth receive the Canons or acts of the Council of Constantinople; but she hath admitted that Synod in what it hath defined against Macedonius. Anatolius then seeing this Canon had remained without effect, for want of having been confirmed by the Pope, and by the western Church, resolved to take the occasion of the Council of Chalcedon, celebrated at the gates of Constantinople, and of the deposition of ` Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria and second Patriarch of the Church, which rank he desired to possess, to attempt to cause it to be renewed. And therefore spying out at the Evening of the twelfth day, the time that the assembly of the Council was separated, and that the legates of the Pope, and the Senate were retired, and that there were none remaining, but the Bishops that he thought he could easily bring to his Bow; making use of the absence of the Prelates of Egypt and of Libya, who assisted not at the last Sessions of the Council; for as much as there was yet no 〈◊〉 of Alexandria established in Dioscorus his steed; and prevailing with the fearfulness of Maximus Bishop of Antioch, created in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Ephesus, who for the sense he had of the vice of his 〈◊〉, durst not open his mouth against Anatolius who had ordained 〈◊〉 he 〈◊〉 a decree be particularised which renewed the pretended Canon of the Council of Constantinople, and made it be signed by certain 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Bishops of the provinces near Constantinople. There was that 〈◊〉 (saith 〈◊〉) an other Session, when after the departure of the judges and the 〈◊〉, and the Legates of the Sea Apostolic, certain privileges were 〈◊〉 to the Church of Constantinople by Anatolius his usurpation, takeing advantage of 〈◊〉 condemnation. The next day the Pope's Legates stood upon the form of this surprise to the Council, and represented that the Bishops themselves that had signed this decree, had signed it by constraint. But the plot was so well laid for Anatolius, borne out by the Emperor, and by the Senate of Constantinople, and by the Prelates of his division, that their resistance was in vain. For part of the Bishops being absent, as those of the Patriarkship of Alexandria, who had the principal interest in it, and part dissembling their opposition, as Maximus Patriarch of 〈◊〉, who afterward complained to the Pope of the preiudices that the priviledgs of his Church had received in the Council of 〈◊〉, and part confessing against their will, that they had signed it 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 60  with their will, as the Bishops of Asia minor, who had already protested in the sowrth action, that they had as lief dye, as permit that the Bishop of Constantinople should ordain their metropolitans. And besides that Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaus, one of the Bishops of the division of Constantinople, assuring falsely, that the Pope was of agreement with the Article; the Council passed forward to the approbation of the Canon; and when the legates of the Pope opposed it, they writ to the Pope to pray him to confirm it, in these terms: We pray thee to honour our decree 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 3.  with thy judgement, and as we have brought correspondence to our head for matters of weal, so thy sooner aigntie may fulfil to thy children in matters of decency; for in so doing, the religious Emperors shall be gratified. Now the Pope had been already desired not to give consent to such erterprises, for upon this, that in the Council of Ephesus, Jwenall Bishop of Jerusalem abusing the absence and contumacy of john Patriarch of Antioch, and assaying to usurp the jurisdiction of Palestina, against the Canon of the Council of Nicaea, which attributed the superintendency of Palestina, and of the Bishop of jerusalem himself, to the Archbishop of Caesarea, one of the metropolitans of the Patriarkship of Antioch: saint CYRILL Patriarch of Alexandria, prayed the Pope to consent that such attempts should take place In the Council of Ephesus (saith Pope LEO the first, in his Epistle 
I 〈◊〉. ad.  to Maximus Patriarch of Antioch) Iwenall Bishop thought to have found 
Maxim. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. ep. 60.  out a sufficient occasion, to obtain the principality of Palestina, and to cause his audacious, insolence to be confirmed by surreptitious writings which saint Cyrill of holy memory justly having in honour, represented to me, and declared to me by his letters; what Iwenalls ambition had attempted, and requested me with great 〈◊〉 and care, that no consent might be given to such unlawful attempts.  
For those causes then, and also that Maximus Patriarch of Antioch had renewed the same request unto him, the Pope instead of confirming the decree of the Council of Chalcedon, seeing it inviolated the order of the Council of Nicaea, which had given the second place to the Bishop of Alexandria; and the third place to the Patriarch of Antioch, annulled and abrogated it, by these words addressed to the Empress Pulcheria; 
Ibid. ep. 53.  The piety of your Faith joined with us we annul the plots of the Bishop's repugnant to the rules of the holy canons established at Nicaea, and by virtue of the authority of the blessed Apostle PETER, we wholly abrogate them by a general sentence. And that with such effect, as the Emperor and the Bishop of Constantinople, were constrained for the time to depart from their pursuit, as it appears by these words of the same Pope to Anatolius: This thy fault which thou hast committed to 
Ibid. ep. 69  augment thy power, as thou sayest by the exhortations of others, thy tharitie had better and more sincerely blotted out, if that which could not be attempted against thy will, thou hadst not imputed it only to the Council of thy Clergy etc. but it is an agreeable thing, to me most dear brother, that thou dost now protest to be displeased with what should not even then have pleased thee; but the profession of thy love, and the testimony of the Christian Prince shall suffice to cause thee to re-enter into common grace, and let not his correction seem tardy, that hath gotten so reverend a surety. And from hence it comes, that in many greek and latin copies, this canon is only in the history of the acts, but not in the Catalogue of the Canons no more than the twenty ninth and thirtieth, and that it is manifest to have been transferred from the history of the acts into the roll of the Canons, which possible is the subject that hath given saint GREGORY occasion to complain, that the Council of Chalcedon had 
Greg. Mag. l. 5. ind. 14 ep. 14.  been altered by the greeks.  
Afterward when Rome was fallen into the servitude of the northern nations, a people barbarous and heretical, the patriarchs of Constantinople making use of the opportunity or rather importunity of the time, again set forward the instance of this Canon, and obtained from the Emperor Zeno, who reigned in the East, a law, whereby he confirmed the precedency to the Bishop of Constantinople, before the other patriarchs; that is to say, before the other patriarchs of the East. And one from the Emperor Justinian after the recovery of Rome, by which he ordained, that the Bishop of Constantinople should hold the second place in the Church: We ordain (said the Emperor justinian) 
Iust. 〈◊〉. 131.  that the blessed Archbishop of Constantinople new Rome, shall have the second place after the holy Sea Apostolic of the ancient Rome, and shall be preferred before all other Seas: From whence it is, that Liberatus timefellowe with justinian speaking of the Council of Chalcedon adds, 
Liberat. in breu. c. 13.  And although the Sea Apostolic, to this day contradicts this decree, nevertheless the decree of the Synod, doth in some sort remain by the Emperor's protection.  
Now Anatolius had procured that the Clerks of the Council of Chalcedon, in renewing the Canon of the Council of Constantinople, should insert a word therein. For whereas the Council of Constantinople had simply ordained, that the Bishop of Constantinople should have the prerogatives of honour after the Pope; those that renewed is, added thereto (Equal) and couched the revocation of the Canon in these 
〈◊〉. Chalc 〈◊〉. 15. 〈◊〉. 18  words: that the Chair of Constantinople should have the prerogatives equal to that of the ancient Rome, and shall have the same advantages in Ecclesiastical causes as she hath, being the second after her: that is to say, ordained that the same prerogatives, as the Pope had absolutely over all patriarchs, the Bishop of Constantinople should have them after the Pope, over the other patriarchs.  
The Bishops of Constantinople then seeing, that this Canon not only granted them, to hold the second place after the Bishop of Rome, but also to enjoy the same privileges with him as Constantinople, being a division of Rome, and a second Rome; went so far as to desire to participate in the same titles of honour, which had been yielded to the Bishop of Rome, to possess them in a second place; and in form of adiunctes and colleagues with him; and finding that in the Council of Chalcedon, the title 〈◊〉 or universal had been offered to the Bishop of Rome, they 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 act. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Alexand.  insisted as second Popes and Bishops of the second Rome, to participate therein, not in intention to exercise it, in regard of the Pope, but under the Pope, and in regard of the other patriarchs, and were openly favoured therein by the Emperors. For not only the Council of Constantinople holden under the Emperor Justin predecessor to justinian, yielded the 
〈◊〉. Const 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. Iust. 〈◊〉. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 1. l. 7.  title of universal Patriarch to john the third Patriarch of Constantinople; but also the Emperor Justinian in the law, to Epiphanius Patriarch of Constantinople, exhibited to him the title of universal Patriarch; and after under the same Justinian the Council of Constantinople holden against 〈◊〉, attributed the name of universall to Menas; & still after under Mauritius, john Bishop of Constantinople surnamed the Faster, held a kind 
〈◊〉 Const 〈◊〉 Men. 〈◊〉. & seq. Greg. l. 7. 〈◊〉. 2. ep. 69.  of Council at Constantinople, where he began to entitle, and inscribe himself, Universal Bishop; and then the Popes displayed their censures against this title; for although the Synods of the East, had before this time yielded the title of universal Bishop, to the Bishop of Constantinople, nevertheless the Bishop of Constantinople, had never yet presumed, to inscribe and subscribe himself Universal Patriarch, until the Council of Constantinople holden under Mauricius the Emperor. And therefore the Pope Pelagius the second, predecesson to saint GREGORY, abrogated and annulled all the decrees of that Council, except what had been decided concerning the cause of Gregory 〈◊〉 of Antioch. It hath been 
Pelag. Pap. 2. 〈◊〉. 1.  reported to the holy Sea Apostolic (faith Pope Pelagius the second) that John Bishop of Constantinople, entitles himself Universal, and that upon this presumption of his, he hath called you to a general Council, notwithstanding that the authority of calling general Synods, hath been consigned by a singular privilege to the Sea Apostolic, of the blessed Peter. And a little after; 
Greg. Mag. l. 4. indict. 13. op. 38. & l. 7. cp. 69.  And therefore all that you have decreed, in that no Synod of yours, for Synod so attempted, it could not be, but a conventicle; I ordain by the authority of the blessed PETER, that it be annulled and abrogated. And saint GREGORY successor of the same Pelagius: Our predecessor Pelagius of blessed memory, hath disannulled by a sentence entirely valid all the acts of that Synod, except what concerned the cause of Gregory Bishop of Antioch of reverend memory. When Pope Pelagius was dead, and saint GREGORY his successor established in the Popedom, the same John Bishop of Constantinople assisted by the favour of the Emperor Mauricius still continued his challenge, and persevered to attribute to himself, the quality of universal Bishop; not to exercise it in the Pope's behalf, but to exercise it in the Pope's absence, and as colleague and adjunct to the Pope in the universality, over the Empire of the East, and toward the other patriarchs. For it shall be showed hereafter, that he always acknowledged the Pope for head and stock of the universality, and for absolutely universal over all the Church, and did protest himself to be his subject and inferior; and did not pretend to enjoy the title of universal, but under the Pope, and by association subaltern and subordinate to the Pope's authority; which was soon after interdicted him by the Emperor Phocas immediate Successor to Mauricius, who declared that the title of universal Bishop, appertained but to the Bishop of Rome only, and could not be communicated to him of Constantinople. And so much of the truth of the history; Now let us come to the objections which are drawn from it.  
To the first then of these objections, which is that in the Council of Chalcedon, Anatolius packed to be declared equal to the Pope after the Pope; we bring three Answers. The first answer is, that he pretended not, to be declared equal to the Pope in regard of the Pope; but under the Pope, and in regard of the other patriarchs; that is to say, that he did not pretend to have like advantage over the Pope, as the Pope had over him; but to have the same privileges over the other patriarchs, as the Pope had over him and them; and by this means to be equal to the Pope, not in regard of the Pope, but in regard of the other patriarches. And this is testified by the universal history of the Bishops of Constantinople, which have been from the first contention to the second; that is to say since Anatolius until Cyriacus; over all which the Pope hath exercised a perpetual jurisdiction, and judged continually both of their judgements, and of their persons. For not to speak of Paul Bishop of Constantinople, that Pope julius restored to his Seat; for as much as to him (saith 〈◊〉) 
Soz. hist. 〈◊〉 cl l. 3 c. 8.  for the dignity of his Sea, the care of all things appertained: Not to speak of saint CHRISOSTOME, who having been deposed from the Sea of Constantinople, appealed by writing to the Pope, that he might cause the judgement of his deposition to be made void: Not to speak of Eutiches, who having been judged by Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople, and having alleged that he had appealed to the Pope, was again judged by the Pope, Flavianus and the Council of Chalcedon consenting to it; where Anatolius himself was in person, approving the judgement: Not to speak of Flavianus, who having been deposed in the false Council of Ephesus appealed from it to the Pope, and that saith 
In ep. 〈◊〉. Conc. 〈◊〉  the Emperor Valentinian, following the custom of Counsels: Not to speak of Anatolius, who having been chosen Bishop of Constantinople in the false Council of Ephesus, and consequently his election being void, was made valid by the Pope; as Pope Leo testifies to the Emperor in these words: It ought to have sufficed him, that by the help of your piety, and the consent of my favour he hath obtained the Bishopric of so great a City. 
〈◊〉 ep. 52.  And in brief, not to speak of all the former examples, but to restrain myself to the only time between Anatolius and Cyriacus when Acacius who was created Patriarch of Constantinople, thirteen year after the death of Anatolius, fell into the faction of heretics, had not the Churches of the Patriarkship of Constantinople recourse to Pope Symmachus, as to the superior both of them and their Patriarch? seeing thy Children to perish (said they) in the prevarication of our father 
Ep. eccls Orient. ad Sym. in vo. lum. Orthodoxograph. impress. Basil.  Acacius, delay not or rather to speak with the prophet, slumber not, but make haste to deliver us: And again; Thou art taught daily, by thy sacred doctor, Peter, to feed the flock of Christ, which is committed to thee through the whole world, not constrained by force, but willingly, thou that criest with the blessed Paul to us thy subjects; we will not have dominion over you in the saith, but will cooperate with you in joy? And did not Pope Felix depose the 
Teod. Anagnost. ad calcem 〈◊〉. eccls Theod. in edit. Rob. Steph.  same Acacius from the Patriarkship of Constantinople yea with such effect, that although Acacius borne out as long as he lived by the heretics, despised the Pope's Sentence, nevertheless after his death, his name even in Constantivople it-self; was razed out from the records of his Church and excluded from the recital of the mysteries? And when Macedonius Patriarch of Constantinople, was solicited by the Emperor Anastasius, to take out of the service of his Church, the memory of the Council of Chalcedon; did not he answer him; that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not do it without a general Council, wherein the Bishop of great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be Precedent? And when john Patriarch of Constantinople executed the sentence of the Sea Apostolic against the memory of 〈◊〉 his Predecessor; did he not write to Pope Hormisdas: I promise, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  in time to come, no more to recite amongst the sacred Mysteries, those who are separated from the Communion of the Catholic Church; that is to say, that 〈◊〉 not wholly consent with the Sea Apostolic: that if in any thing I attempt to depart from this my profession, I protest myself to be comprehended, by mine own condemnation, in the number of those whom I have 
〈◊〉.  condemned? And when Anthymus was installed in the Patriarkship of 〈◊〉, did he nor oblige himself to do all that the 〈◊〉 Pope of Great Rome should decree? And did he not write to all the patriarchs that he wholly followed the Sea apostolic: And when Pope Agapet was arrived at Constantinople, did he not depose the same Anthymus 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 24. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sub Men. 〈◊〉. 4.  from the Patriarkship of Constantinople; and did he not excommunicate the Empress Theodora, who sustained him? And when Menas Patriarch of Constantinople, gave his voice in the Council of Constantinople, did he not say; We follow in all things the Sea Apostolic, and obey it? And when the Emperor justinian pressed by the Empress, who was an Eutychian would persecute Pope Siluerius, did not the Bishop of Patara in Lycia, one of the subjects to the Pattriarkship of Constantinople, represent to him, that there was no king in the world, that was over all the world, as the Pope was over all the earth? And 
〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉. c. 22.  even in the time of saint GREGORY, until whose Popedom, the temporal dignity of the City of Rome grew into such a diminution, and that of Constantinople contrariwise to such a height, that Constantinople then exceeded Rome, and all the other Cities of the world,  

As the high Cypress sharpe-head doth outgrowl  
The crooked wreathes of Shrubbs that spread below.   
The Churchmen of the division of Constantinople, after they had been judged at the Tribunal of the Patriarch of Constantinople, 
〈◊〉 l 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. & l. 7. 〈◊〉. 64. 〈◊〉. l. 7 〈◊〉. 63.  did they not go by appeal, to that of the Pope? And did not the Emperor and the Patriarch of Constantinople themselves, Confess that the Church of Constantinople, was subject to the Sea Apostolic?  
The second answer is, so far of is it that from this Canon there may be drawn any arguments to oppose the primacy of the Pope, as contrariwise there may from hence be drawn, strong reasons to 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  defend it. For from this, that the first Council of Constantinople, and the Council of Chalcedon ordained, that the Bishops of Constantinople, should hold the second place after the Bishop of Rome, and should enjoy after him the same privileges, because Constantinople was a second Rome, doth it not appear that before the Council of Constantinople and Chalcedon, the Pope was the first of all the patriarchs, and the first not in simple primacy of order, but in primacy of jurisdiction; since the equality that these Canons gave to the Bishop of Constantinople with the Pope, was excepting the primacy of order, which they reserved to the Pope: And since, by virtue of this equality in the second degree, the Bishops of Constantinople attributed to themselves, the right of receiving appeals from the Patriarkships of the East, and to ordain in extraordinary occurrences the persons of their patriarchs, and to participate in the title of universal Bishop, and to call the general Counsels of the Empire of the East, and to judge the patriarchs of the East? For was it not under this pretence that Anatolius, before the Council of Chalcedon ordained 
Leo ad Martian. ep. 52.  Maximus Patriarch of Antioch? Anatolius (saith Pope Leo the first) without any example, and against the Constitutions of the Canons, hath presumed to ordain the Bishop of Antioch, which we would not revoke, for the desire of repairing faith, and for the zeal of peace. And was it not under this pretence, that he would have brought under the Patriarkships of Alexandria and of Antioch; from whence it is, that the same Pope Leo reproached it to him, that he had packed this decree, not simply to exalt his rank, but to increase his power? This thy fault (said he) 
Idem ad 〈◊〉.  which to augment thy power, thou 〈◊〉 committed as thou sayest by the exhortation of others, thy charity had better and more sincerely blotted out, if thou hadst not imputed that which could not be attempted without thy will, to the only 
Idem ad 〈◊〉.  Counsels of thy Clergy. And elsewhere; After the vicious beginnings of thy promotion, after the ordination of the Bishop of Antioch, which against the rules of the Canons thou hast attributed to thyself, I am grieved that thy dilection hath fallen so far, as to insringe the holy Constitutions of the canons of Nicaea; as if thou hadst watched a time for thy purpose, wherein the Sea of Alexandria was fallen from the privilege of the second honour, and wherein the Church of Antioch had lost the propriety of the third dignity; to the end that those places being subjected to thy jurisdiction, all the Metropolitans might be deprived of their proper honour. And was it not under this pretence, that the patriarchs of Constantinople attributed to themselves the appeals from other patriarchs? That which was defined (saith Balsamon) in the 
Balsam. in Conc. Sard c. 3.  Council of Sardica for the Pope concerning appeals, ought also to be extended to the Patriarch of Constantinople, for as much as he hath been by diverse canons, (meaning the canon of the Council of Chalcedon, and that of the Council Trullian) honoured in the same sort as the Pope. And again; This 
Ibid.  privilege belongs not to the Pope alone, that every Bishop being condemned should have recourse to the Sea of Rome, but it ought also to be understood, of the Patriarch of Constantinople. And Nilus Archbishop of Thessalonica; the 
Hilar. de prim. Pap. l. 2.  twenty eight canon of the Council of Chalcedon, and the thirty sixth of the sixth Council, honouring the Sea of Constantinople, with the same privileges with that of Rome, grant also manifestly the appeals to that of Constantinople. And in brief was it not under this very pretence, that when Gregory Patriarch of Antioch had appealed to the Emperor and to the Council from the persecutions of the Governors of Syria; John Patriarch 
evag. hist. Eccl. l. 6. c. 7.  of Constantinople presumed to call a generali Council of the Church of the East, and to assign the other patriarchs and Metropolitans of 
Pelag. 2. ep. 1.  the Empire of the East, to be there, and there to judge with them, the cause of Gregory, and there to entitle himself universal Bishop? 
Greg. ep. l. 7. ind. 2. 〈◊〉. 69.  Now is not this to protest, that before that Constantinople was erected into the title of second Rome, and that the Counsels of Constantinople and Chalcedon had made this pretended extension of the privileges of the Bishop of Rome to him of Constantinople; the universal primacy and superintendency of the Church, belonged to the Pope? For to say, that at least it appears from these words of the Council of Chalcedon; The Fathers did justly exhibit the privileges to the 
Conc. 〈◊〉 act. 15. c. 28  Sea of the ancient Rome, for as much as that city had the Empire; and the hundred and fifty Religious Fathers, moved with the same consideration 〈◊〉 attributed equal privileges, to the holy Sea of the City of 〈◊〉. That the cause wherefore the Fathers which had preceded the first Council of 〈◊〉, had given the primacy to the Pope was not the Succession of saint PETER, but the dignity of the city of Rome; besides that here, the question is not of right, but of possession, nor of 〈◊〉 the cause, wherefore the Fathers which lived before the first Council of 〈◊〉, had granted the primacy to the Pope; but to know whether indeed, they had granted it him, when the Bishop of the Council of Chalcedon said: that the primacy had been exhibited to the Church of Rome, because the city of Rome was the Seat of the Empire; they intended not that the dignity of the city of Rome had been the next conjoined and immediate cause of the primacy of the Bishop of Rome but the cause antecedent, obiective, and remote, contrariwise, the next and conjoined cause of the primacy of the Church of Rome, they acknowledged to be the Succession of saint PETER, as it appears both by the title that they gave to the Pope's Epistle, calling it the sermon 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  of the Sea of saint PETER: and by the protestation that they made, that the Pope's primacy was of divine right, and instituted by the proper mouth of our Lord, when they said, speaking of Dioscorus; He hath extended 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against him, to whom the guard of the vine was committed by our 〈◊〉, But the cause of the cause; that is to say, the cause that moved saint PETER, head of the Apostles, to place and settle his Sea at Rome rather than in an other place, they pretended to have been the dignity of the City. By means whereof these two causes were not exclusive but inclusive one to the other: As also the law of the Emperor's 〈◊〉 & Valentinian, made six year before the Council of Chalcedon, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  comoynes them in these words: Three things have established the primacy of the Sea Apostolic; the Merit of saint Peter, who is the Prince of the Episcopal 〈◊〉; the dignity of the City; and the Synodical authority.  
And to this there is no repugnancy in that which the Fathers of the same Council argued also of the dignity of the city of Constantinople, and they alleged that it was second Rome, to infer from thence, the second place to the Bishop of Constantinople: for they grounded not their 
〈◊〉 de 〈◊〉. l. 5.  instance simply upon the temporal dignity of the city of Constantinople, which was, saith saint AUSTIN, daughter to the city of Rome: but also upon the spiritual dignity of the Church of Constantinople, which was daughter to the Church of Rome, forasmuch as a part of the Clergy of Rome, were transferred to Constantinople, with the other Roman inhabi tants, when one of the halves of the Empire was transported thither; that is to say, they did not lean only upon this, that the City of Constantinople was an other Seat of the Empire; but upon this, that the Church of Constantinople was a Swarm and a colony of the Church of Rome, and 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  the Episcopal Sea of Constantinople a member and part of the Sea Episcopal of Rome; or rather, one and the same Sea Episcopal, and one and the same Throne of saint PETER with that of Rome, as john Patriarch of Constantinople protesteth to Pope Hormisdas, in these words: I esteem 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  the Church of your ancient and this new Rome, to be one selfsame Church; and I make account that that Sea of saint Peter, and this of this Imperial city, is oneself same 〈◊〉: And as it seems the title of the law of the Emperor 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it, when he calls the Sea of Constantinople, the Sea 〈◊〉 and Zonarus when he saith, that in the time of the Council entitled 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  the 8th. Occumenicall, the Bishop of Rome and him of Constantinople 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and homothronall; that is to say, united in one selfe-same 〈◊〉, and set in one selfe-same Sea. And therefore, the Fathers of the Council of Chalcedon, did noly allege in their Canon, that it was reasonable that Constantinople being adorned by the Empire and the Senate, should enjoyalsoin the second place after the City of Rome, the same privileges in 
Conc. Chalc act. 15 c. 28.  Ecclesiastical causes; but addeth thereto in their relation two other reasons, taken from the spiritual affinity of the Church of Constantinople with that of Rome. The one, the facility of the influence of the government of the Church of Rome into that of Constantinople; for as much as the beams of the Sea Apostolic, might spread more commodiously from Rome to Constantinople, then to the other patriarchal Seas, because of the communication that those two cities, which made oneself same head of the Empire, had together. By means whereof, it was more convenient, that the rules which the other Patriarkships should take from the Roman Church the Church of Canstantinople, where resided in ordinary the Nuncios of the Sea Apostolic, and which was nearer the Patriarkship of Rome, should receive them first and immediately from the Roman Church, and then communicate them to the other Seas, which were farther off. The other, that the Church of Constantinople, was daughter and extract from the Roman Church; we have (said they,) been encouraged to do this, for that the Beam Apostolic reigning amidst you; and you by your ordinary government 〈◊〉 
Conc. Chalc apud Leon  it to the Church of Constantinople, you may cause it to shine the 〈◊〉 into these parts, because you are wont without envy to enrich those of your lineage, with the participation of your Goods. And therefore Pope Leo, with a purpose to cut off in a word, all their hope of this pretence, writ to the Emperor that Constantinople, what soever Anatotius might attempt, could never be made a Sea Apostolic: Let Anatolius (said he) not disdain the imperial 〈◊〉, which he cannot make a Sea Apostolic: which moved the latter greeks to add 
Leo ad Martian. Aug ep. 52.  another device. For considering that the pretence of the unity of their Sea with that of saint PETER, could not serve for a good Colour of a Spiritual title, to perserve thereto the second place in the Church, they have had recourse, to derive by a fabulous list, and which hath no testimony 
Catalogue. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. in iur. 〈◊〉. l 4 Niceph.  in antiquity, the Succession of the Bishops of Byzantium from saint ANDREW, brother to saint PETER, to maintain to the Church of Constantinople, built upon the foundation of Byzantium the second Sea after that of saint PETER.  
The third Answer is what soever the aim and sense of this Canon may be; there can noething be inferred from it either lawful or Canonical; forasmuch as it was a surreptitious Canon, and obtained by 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. in. Chron.  fraud and by surprise; and against which there were thirteen nullities, whereof the least is sufficient to impose a perpetual silence, to all those that allege it. The first nullity is, that they were neither the precedents of the Council, nor the Bishops of the Council which propounded and particularised this Canon, but the Clerks of the Church of Constantinople, and particularly Aetius Archdeacon of Constantinople, as it appears both from the eleventh action, in which one of the clauses which was after entered into this Canon to wit, that the Metropolitans of Asia minor, should 
Conc. Chalc can. 28.  receive their ordination from the Bishop of Constantinople, having been contested by the Bishops of Asia, the only Clerks of the Church of Constantinople, 
Ibid. act. 11.  with loud voices cried out; Let the ordinance of the hundred and fifty fathers (so called they the Canon of the Council of Constautinople, falsely alleged to that purpose) stand; let not the privileges of Constantinople perish, let the ordinations be made, according to the custom, by our Bishop: And from the words of Aetius Archdeacon of Constantinople, when he would have excused the obreption of this Canon, which were; It is a 
〈◊〉. Chalc act. 〈◊〉.  thing accustomed in Synods, after principal matters have been defined, to question and decide some other necessary things. Now we have; to wit the holy Church of Constantinople, some articles to propound: And from the excuse that Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople made, when he departed from this canon, which was that he had been set on to solicit it, by the importunity of his clergy. This thy fault (saith Pope Leo answering Anatolius) which to augment 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ep. 69.  thy power, thou hadst committed, as thou sayest, by the exhortation of others, thou hadst better and more sincerely blotted out, if thou hadst not imputed to the only council of thy clergy, that which could not be attempted without thy consent.  
The second nullity is, that this decree was made at an undue hour, and after the assembly of the Council had been separated; and when the Pope's Legates and the Senators which assisted there on the Emperor's part, were retired; as it appears both by the complaint that the Pope's 〈◊〉 made thereof the morrow after, to the Emperor's officers, 〈◊〉 to keep order in the Council, which contained these words: 〈◊〉 after the departure of your excellency and of our humility, they say there 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 16.  were made certain articles, that we pretend to be contrary to the canons, and to 〈◊〉 discipline: And by the answer of the Emperor's officers, which 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  was; If there were any articles framed after our departure, let them be read. And by these words of Liberatus; There was that day, another session, wherein after the departure of the Judges, and the Senate, and the Legates of the Sea Apostolic, certain privileges were adjudged to the Church of Constantinople, taking advantage of the condemnation of Dioscorus. And to that, is not 〈◊〉 the excuse that Actius Archdeacon of Constantinople alleged to the Emperor's officers in these words: We requested my Lords the Bishops of Rome to 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 1.  assist to it, they refused saying, they had no commandment to that effect: Weereported it also to your magnificence, you commanded the Synod should examine it, when your excellency was gone forth, the holy Bishops which are here, rising as for a common business, required that the action should be made; now it is in our hands, nothing hath been done in a corner or by stealth, but the action hath been competent and canonical. For either the clerks of Constantinople, had made no such request to the Pope's Legates & the Emperor's officers; or it was not that day, nor upon the point of the action, otherwise the Emperor's officers would not have answered the Pope's Legates, as being ignorant of the history; If there be any article framed since our departure, let it le read. 
Ibid.   
The third nullity is, that this canon was made, the Bishops of all the other Patriarkships being absent, & in the only presence of the Bishops of the Patriarkship of Antioch, and of the provinces near Constantinople. That it was so, besides that the Bishops of the western provinces of the Empire of the East; that is to say, of the Eastern Illyria, and of the natural Greek provinces; as of Macedonia, of Hellada, of Peloponesus, of Thessalia, and of the Isle of Crete, who had assisted at the other actions, were there omitted; neither were the Pope's Legates, (who represented all the Bishops of the Empire of the west) there, Anatolius having watched the time of their absence; nor any of the Bishops of the Patriarkship of Alexandria, which were those that had the principal interest in the business. 
〈◊〉. l. 4. c. 7.  For as for this that Calvin saith, that Proterius Patriarch of Alexandria was there, it is an ignorance disproved by the signatures of the canon, and by all the histories of antiquity, which teach us, that Proterius was not created Patriarch of Alexandria, till after the council of 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 14.  had been finished, and till the Egyptian Bishops were returned from Chalcedon, into Alexandria.  
The fourth nullity is, that even those that signed this canon, signed it against their wills, as the Pope's Legates protested when they complained 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 act. 16.  that they had made the Bishops subscribe byforce, or to unwritten canons. And it is no opposition to this, that the next day when the Senators asked the Bishops of Pontus, and of Asia, whether they had signed this canon 
Id. 〈◊〉.  with their will or against it, they answered that they had signed it without constraint. For this interrogatory and this answer had been procured by Anatolius, and by the Clerks of Constantinople, abusing the favour of the Emperor, and the support of the Senate, as it appears by the protestation that the Bishops of Asia had made in the eleventh Session of the Council, against the right that the Bishop of Constantinople would have attributed to himself, to ordain the Archbishop of Ephesus, Metropolitan of Asia Minor; which was afterward one of the principal articles of this decree. The Reverend Bishops of Asia (saith the eleventh Action of the Council 
〈◊〉. act. 11  of Chalcedon) prostrated themselves before the Council and cried out; have compassion upon us; have compassion upon our children, (that is to say, either of their Ghostly children, which were their Diocesans; or of their children borne by wives, married before their Priesthood) lest by our occasion, and by our Sins, they should dye &c. for if a Bishop of 〈◊〉 be ordained here, 
Ibid.  both our children will die, and the city will be rooted out. And again; The most glorious Senators said; The most reverend Bishops of Asia present in this 〈◊〉, protest that if there be here an other Bishop ordained, there will be a 〈◊〉 in the city of Ephesus. Let the Synod then declare, where the canons will that the Bishop of Ephesus be ordained. And a little after; The most Reverend Bishops ans 
Ibid.  were; In the Province. And Diogenes the most reverend Bishop of 〈◊〉 said; such is the custom, if the Bishop of Ephesus took his ordination from the Bishop of Constantinople, these things would not happen, etc. And Leontius right Reverend Bishop of Magnesia added; Since S. Timothy until this present, there have been twenty seven Bishops created, all have been ordained at Ephesus; one only 〈◊〉, hath been violently ordained here, from whence there have ensued many murders. 
Ibidem.  And in the end, The Right Reverend Bishops cried out; Let the canons stand, etc. And the Clerks of Constantinople chose; Let the ordinance of the hundred and fifty Fathers stand; Let not the privileges of Constantinople perish; Let the ordination according to custom be made by our Archbishop. From whence it appears evidently, that the Bishops of Asia, and the Clerks of Constantinople, were directly contrary in this article: And that what Diogenes Bishop of Cyzica, and the other Asian Bishops said then when the canon was read over again, to wit, that they had signed voluntarily, was so far from being true, that chose the same Diogenes Bishop of Cyzica, and the other Asian Bishops had protested, that if they should consent, that the Bishop of Constantinople, should ordain the Metropolitans of Asia, which was one of the principal clauses of the Canon, their Diocesans would perish, and their cities would be put to fire and sword.  
The fifth nullity is, that the Clerks of Constantinople saigning to renew by this decree, the canon of the Council of Constantinople, which is called the canon of the hundred and fifty Fathers, did insert therein two manifest falsehoods; the one was, that they added thereto the word equal, which was not in the canon of the Council of Constantinople. For whereas 
〈◊〉. Const 〈◊〉. 3.  the Council of Constantinople had said simply; That the Bishop of Constantinople should have the prerogatives of honour after the Bishop of Rome; those that renewed the canon, supposed that it had said; that the Bishop of Constantinople, 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 act. 15 〈◊〉. 28.  should have the prerogatives of honour equal after the Bishop of Rome: And the other, that they imputed to the Council of Constantinople, that it had adjudged the ordination of the Metropolitans of Pontus, and Asia minor, to the Bishop of Constantinople; a thing, whereof the Council of Constantinople, had not only spoken nothing to that purpose, but had pronounced 
〈◊〉. Const c. 2.  clean contrary, that the Bishops of Asia, should govern the affairs of Asia. And the Bishop of Thracia, that is to say, of Constantinople, should only 
〈◊〉. hist. 〈◊〉. l. 5. c. 〈◊〉  〈◊〉 the affairs of Thracia; which Socrates repeats in these words: 〈◊〉 obtained the great city and Thracia: And Helladius successor to Basilius in the Bishopric of Caesarea in Cappadocia, obtained the division of Pontus, etc. And 〈◊〉 Bishop of Iconia, and Optimus Bishop of Antioch in Pisidia, that of Asia. And is it not to be said, that those that renewed the decree annexed thereunto, the ordination of the Bishops of Pontus, & Asia; not as a thing decreed by the Council, but as a thing added by them. For besides 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  this, that their text bears; The hundred and fifty religious Father's 〈◊〉 with the same design, have granted equal prerogatives, to the most holy Sea of 〈◊〉 Rome; reasonably judging, that the Imperial city, which is adorned by the Senate, and hath the same privileges with the ancient Rome, should also be equally exalted in Ecclesiastical affairs, being the second after her, and that she shall ordain the Metropolitans in the Dioceses of Pontus, Asia, and Thracia: words 
Ibid.  which have manifest relation to the canon of the Council of Constantinople, when the Bishops of Asia protested, they could not suffer, that their Metropolitans should be ordained by the Bishop of Constantinople, the Clerks of Constantinople cried out; Let the canon of the hundred and fifty Fathers stand; let not the privileges of Constantinople perish; let the ordination be 
Act. 11.  made, according to custom, by our Bishop.  
The sixth nullity is, that when this canon was again put to the touch, and propounded to be reviewed in the Council, the liberty of the assistants had already been prepossessed by the temporal officers of the city of Constantinople. For the Senators of the city of Constantinople, that the Emperor had deputed, to maintain order in the Council, considered so much their own interest in the challenge of Anatolius, esteemeing they might by this means, still augment the dignity of their city, and in such sort imprinted into the spirits of the assistants, that it was the desire and passion of the Emperor; that the Bishops of the Council believed, they could not resist this decree, without offending the Emperor, and the Senate of Constantinople, and all the Imperial Court of the East; as it appears by the relation of the Bishops of the Council to the Pope, in these words: We gratifieing the most religious and Christian Emperors, who 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  take pleasure in this decree, and all the illustrious Senate, and in a word, all the royal city; have esteemed it to purpose, that this honour should be confirmed by the general Council. And a little after; We pray you then to honour our judgement, with 
〈◊〉.  your decrees; and that as in what concerned the weal we have brought 〈◊〉 to our head; so your sovereignty may accomplish toward your children, what concerns decency; for in so doing, the religious Emperors shall be gratified.  
The seaventh nullity is, that Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaus, and abettor to Anatolius his Claim, used a manifest surprise, to cause this decree to be approved by the Council, which was, to testify to the Council, that 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 act. 16.  it was agreeable to the Pope: I have (said Eusebius of Dorylaus) voluntarily signed this canon, because I have read it at Rome to the most holy Pope, in the presence of the clerks of Constantinople, and he approved it. From whence it is, that the Bishops of the Council writ to the Pope, in the relation that they addressed to him, that it was upon this foundation that they had proceeded to the confirmation of the decree: We have (said they) taken the 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  to confirm it, as a thing begun by your Holiness, in favour of those that you 〈◊〉 always desired to cherish, knowing that in whasoever children do well, it is referred to their Fathers. And nevertheless this testimony, was a testimony full of falsehood and imposture, as it appears both by the instruction 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  that the Pope had consigned to the Legates which bore; Suffer not the canon of the holy Fathers to be violated by any rashness: And a little after; And if any perchance trusting in the power of their own cities, shall attempt to usurp any thing; repress them as agreeth with 〈◊〉: And by the words of the same Leo, who writ in the epistle to Maximus; If they say, that the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  brethren which I have sent in my steed, to the Synod, have done any thing 〈◊〉 what concerns Faith, it shall be no force, for as much as they have been sent by the Sea Apostolic to this end only, to root out heresies, and to defend 〈◊〉: And in his epistle to Anatolius; Never may my conscience consent, that so 〈◊〉 a 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  covetousness, shall be helped by my favour; but rather that it be suppressed by me, and by those that allow not the proud, but consent with the humble.  
The eight nullity is, that when they would proceed to the approbation of the canon, the Pope's Legates protested a nullity against it, and made their protestation to be registered within the acts of the Council. This appears first by the verbal process of the Council, where their opposition is couched in these words: We require your excellence to command, that the things which were yesterday done against the canons in our absence, 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 act. 16.  may be cut of; or if not, that our contradiction may be inserted into the acts, that we may know what we have to report to the Apostolic Bishop, and to the Precedent of the whole Churches, that he may pronounce the injury done to his Sea, and to the subversion of the canons: This they added, not that this decree gave any authority to the Patriarch of Constantinople but after the Pope, and in regard of the other patriarchs, but forasmuch as to propound it without the Pope's consent, who was the protector of the rights of the other patriarchs, and preserver of the canons; and to make it pass against the opposition of his Legates, it was to wound the dignity of the Sea Apostolic, and to infringe the ancient discipline, which annulled the rules of the 
Socr. hist. eccls l. 2. c. 8 Leo ad Anatol. ep. 51.  Church, made without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome. And secondly it appears by these words of the Pope to Anatolius: Our brethren sent in behalf of the Sea Apostolic, which presided in my steed at the Council, resisted pertinently and constantly to those unlawful attempts, crying out with a loud voice, that the presumption of a pernicious novelty, might not be exalted against the canons of the Council of Nicaea: And their contradiction cannot be doubted, since thou thy-self complainest in thy letters, that they have desired to cross thy enterprise, wherein thou dost greatly recommend them to me; but thou accusest thyself, for not obeying them. And thirdly it appears by the relation of the Council itself, to the Pope, which contains these words; Deign most holy and blessed Father, to 
Conc. 〈◊〉 ep. ad Leon.  embrace these things, for the most holy Bishops Paschasinus and 〈◊〉, and the most religious Priest Boniface, holding the place of your Holiness, have greatly strove to contradict this rule, desiring that such a good might take the entire original from your providence; to the end that as the rule of Faith, so that of good order, might be attributed to you.  
The ninth nullity is, that the Pope instead of consenting to the request that the Council solicited by Anatolius, and by the Emperor, and the Senate, had made to him to confirm this canon, disannulled & abolished it: joyninge with us (said the Pope in his epistle to the Empress' 〈◊〉) 
jeo ad Pulcher. ep. 53.  the piety of your faith, we annul the plots of the Bishop's repugnant to the rules of the holy canons established at Nicaea, and by virtue of the authority of the blessed Apostle Peter, do wholly abrogate them by a general sentence: And Pope 
Gelas. Pap. 1. tom. de anathem. vincul.  Gelasius forty years after repeating the same history, That which the authority of the Sea Apostolic hath confirmed in the Council of Chalcedon, hath remained in force; and what she hath refused, could obtain no steadfastness: And only she hath disannulled that, which the Synodical congregation had adjudged against order should be usurped And it is not to be said, that the Pope abrogated this canon for passion, or out of desire to contradict, and not in zeal to preserve the right of the other Seas, and to maintain the canons of the Council of Nicaea; for the Pope did not abrogate it of his own motion, but having been already prayed before by saint CYRILL Patriarch of Alexandria, and since by Maximus Patriarch of Antioch, not to permit that such attempts should take place, and that the rights of the Churches settled by the Council of Nicaea, should be violated. Thy charity (saith Pope Leo in his epistle to Maximus Patriarch of Antioch) having esteemed that some what ought to be done for the privileges of your Church, let it take care 
〈◊〉 ad Max. 〈◊〉 Antioc. cp. 60.  to explain it by letters, that we may answer absolutely and fitly to thy consultation; for the present it shall suffice to pronounce in general, that if any thing seem to have been attempted, or even for a time exhorted by any one, in what Synod soever it be, against the canons of the Council of Nicaea, it cannot do prejudice to the inviolable decrees. And a little after; In the Council of Ephesus, Jwenall the Bishop 
Ibid.  thought to have found a sufficient advantage; (to wit, that of the schism of john Patriarch of Antioch) to obtain the principality of Palestina, and to cause his insolent boldness to be confirmed with surreptitious writings; which Cyrillus of holy memory justly abhorring, represented to me, and entreated me with great instance and care, that no consent should be given to such lawless attempts.  
The tenth nullity is, that Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople seeing this canon could not subsist if it were discovered that it had been annulled by the Pope, concealed from the Bishops of the Council of Chalcedon the abrogation that the Pope had made of this decree, and kept back the Pope's letters, whereby he had annulled and abolished it, a fraud so perilous, as it had like to have turned upsidowne all the Church of the Empire of the East. For the Pope having joined in one letter the abrogation of this decree, with the confirmation that he made of the other acts of the Council, Anatolius because he would not show the censure of his ambition, concealed the Pope's letters, where the one and the other clause was contained; which was the clause that the Eastern Churches remained in such doubt, whether or not the Pope had confirmed the Council of Chalcedon, as infinite people for this cause making difficulty to receive it; the Emperor was fain to request the Pope, to dispatch new letters confirmative of the Faith of the Council of Chalcedon to all the Bishops who had assisted there, and to send them to each one of them in their Churches. This (said Pope Leo in his answer to the Emperor Martian) your clemency thinks will be more easily fufilled, if throughout all the Churches we 
Leo ad Mart. Aug. cp. 57  signify, that the definitions of the Council of Chalcedon have pleased the Sea Apostolic, a thing whereof there was no occasion of doubt, etc. seeing I have written to your Glory, and to the Bishop of Constantinople, letters which evidently 〈◊〉, that I approved those things which had been there defined concerning Catholic Faith: but because by the same letters I had reproved those things, which under the occasion of the Synod had been evilly attempted, he rather chose to conceal my applause, then to publish his ambition. And in his epistle to the Empress Pulcheria: 
Id. ad Pulcher. Aug. cp. 58.  whereas the most Religious Emperor, hath willed that I should write letters to all the Bishops, which assisted at the Council of Chalcedon, whereby I should confirm what was then defined concerning Faith, I have willingly accomplished it, lest the deceitful dissimulation of some, should pretend to put people in doubt of my sentence, although by the means of the Bishop of Constantinople, to whom I had largely testified my joy, that which I had written, might have come to the knowledge of all, if he had not rather chosen to conceal my contentment, then to publish the rebuke of his ambition.  
The eleventh nullity is, that Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople, even he that had packed this Canon, he himself in whose favour it had been particularised, departed from it, as is seen by the text of the epistle that 
Leo ad Anat. cp 59  Pope Leo the first writ him, which is such: This thy fault which to increase thy power thou hast committed, as thou sayest, by the exhortation of others, thy charity had better and more sincerely blotted out, if that which could not be attempted without thy consent, thou hadst not imputed it, to the only Counsels of thy Clergy, etc. But it contents me much dear brother, that thy dilection protests to be aggrieved with that which even then ought not to have pleased thee; it 〈◊〉 to re-enter into common grace: the profession of thy charity together with the attestation of the most Christian Prince; and let not his correction seem tardy that hath gotten so reverend a surety: And 
Gel Pap. tom- de Anath. vinc  by these words of Pope Gelasius written forty years after against Acacius: That which the Sea Apostolic consented not to, nor did the Emperor impose it, nor Anatolius usurp it: and all was put into the power of the Sea Apostolic; and therefore what the Sea Apostolic confirmed in the Council of Chalcedon, hath been in force, what it refused could not be steadfast.  
The twelfth nullity is, that this Canon hath been falsely inserted into the catalogue of the Canons of the Council of Chalcedon, by the latter greeks, which perchance made Saint GREGORY to 
Greg. l. 5. indict. 14. cp. 14.  say; The Council of Chalcedon hath in one place been 〈◊〉 by the Church of Constantinople; for during all the age of the Council of Chalcedon, this Canon which had been but projected and not confirmed, remained in the only history of the Acts, and was not inserted into the catalogue of the Canons, till a long time after; as it appears both by the testimony of the most ancient Greek and latin copies; in all which, the roll of the Canons contains but twenty seven Canons. And by the collection of Theodoret, an author of the same age, in 
Theodor. in Synagoge cannon. in bibliotheca regia Medicea.  which the list of the Canons of the Council of Chalcedon, is but of twenty seven Canons. And by the Edition of Dionysius Exiguus timefellow with the Emperor justinian, whose catalogue of the Canons of the Council, comprehend but twenty seven Canons: And 
Dionis. Exig. in Cod. can.  by the acknowledgement that Theodoret Anagnestes, a Greek author makes thereof in these words: The Council of Chalcedon published twenty seven Canons. 
Theodor. Anagn. ad calc. hist. Eccl.   
And the thirteenth nullity is finally, that the number of thirty Canons, which the greeks of following ages have attributed to the council 
Theod in edit. Rob. Steph. col. lect. l. 1.  of Chalcedon, to comprehend this, and to make it come in under the title of the twenty eight is a supposed number. For it is evident that the two last canons, to wit, the twenty ninth and the thirtieth are no canons, but are, the one of them, an interlocution between Paschasinus the Pope's Legate, and Anatolius Bishop of Constantinople: and the other a prohibition provisorie, to any of the Bishops of Egypt, which had excused themselves, from signing the epistle of Pope Leo, because they remained without a Patriarch, not to depart from Constantinople, before the arrival of the news of the creation of a new Patriarch of Alexandria: which have been taken out of the history of the Acts of the Council, and transferred into the catalogue of the Canons. Whereunto it serves not to allege for counterbattery, that the council Trullian which was holden two hundred and forty years after the council of Chalcedon, citeth this canon as a canon of the Council of Chalcedon: for besides that in saying, we renew the decree made by the hundred and fifty Fathers 
Conc. Const 6. in Trull. can. 36.  assembled in this religious and royal city; and by the six hundred and thirty Fathers assembled at Chalcedon, it shows sufficiently how this canon had 
In chap. 15  been till then disputed and called in question; the Council Trullian was aschismaticall, ignorant, and unlawful Council, as it shall hereafter appear, both by the testimony of BEDA an author of the same time; 
Bed. de sex aetatibus.  who calls it an impious Council; and by the approbation which was made there of the Council of Africa concerning the Anabaptism of heretics, which had been an erroneous and reprovable Council, as Saint AUGUSTINE, and all antiquity do testify, and as the Pope's adversaries themselves do acknowledge: And this suffficeth for the first objection. Now let us go forward to the second.  
To the second objection then, which is that the Bishop of Constantinople, went about to participate in the title of Ecumenical or universal, whereof the Pope had received the nomination in the Council of Chalcedon; we bring four Answers: The first answer is, that it was not to possess this title by the exclusion of the Pope; but to possess it by the association of the Pope, and in regard of the other patriarchs; for not only in the Council of Chalcedon, the title of universal had been offered the Pope, before the Bishop of Constantinople had ever presumed to aspire to it; but in the Council of Constantinople holden under Menas, which is the first Council where the name of Universal had been given to the Patriarch of Constantinople, be it directly, or be it from the relation of a Council holden a little before it; there were read the requests of the Churchmen of Constantinople, of Antioch, and of Jerusalem, presented in Constantinople itself to Pope Agapet, and couched in these terms: To our 
Conc. Const sub Men. act. 1.  most holy and most blessed Lord Agapet, Archbishop of the ancient Rome and universal Patriarch, And during the contention of saint GREGORY, and the Patriarches of Constantinople; Eulogius patriarch of Alexandria, writing 
Greg. l. 7. ind. 1. ep. 30  to Pope GREGORY calls him Universal Pope. And in the next age after saint GREGORY, the Emperor Constantine the bearded, residing at Constantinople, and assisting at the third general Council of Constantinople, entitleth the pope, Universal Patriarch, and Arch-Pastor: You have (said he in the epistle to the council of the West) seconded your captain the 
Cont. 6.  
Const. act. 18.  universal ●ier arch and Patriarch. And again; You have been present by your Procurators, you and the universal Arch-Pastor at our council. And after, when the Emperor Basilius the younger, and Eustachius Patriarch of Constantinople would have reconciled themselves to the Roman Church, they 
Ibidem.  capituled, that it might be lawful for them to obtain with the consent of the Pope, that the Church of Constantinople should be called Universal in the 
〈◊〉.  
Rod. hist. l. 〈◊〉. c. 1.  compass thereof, as the Roman was in the compass of the whole world. And still after them Balsamon, although puffed up with his imaginary title of Patriarch of Antioch, and a great enemy to the Latins which possessed his pretended patriarksip, he favoured the Pope as little as he could; and attempted to prove all the patriarchs equal, for that which concerns the ordinary administration of their patriarkships; nevertheless he confessed that the custom of the greeks, was to attribute to the Pope, the title of Universal Pope; and to the Bishop of Constantinople, 
Theod.  that of Universal Patriarch, I have (said he) a purpose to tell, wherefore 
Bals. medit 〈◊〉.  the Pope of Rome is called, Universal Pope; and likewise the patriarch of Constantinople, 
Ibid.  Universal patriarch. And a little after: But because the Devil of self-love hath separated the Pope from the society of the other most holy patriarchs, and hath restrained him only into the West, I omit this discourse as unprofitable.  
The second Answer is, that by the word Universal, the Bishop of Constantinople never pretended to exempt himself from the Pope's jurisdiction, but acknowledged himself subject and inferior to the Pope, as it appears by those very pieces where the name of Universal is attributed to the Bishop of Constantinople; which do all testify, that he was subject and inferior to the Pope, and that the instance that he made to be adjoined and associated to the Pope in the participation of the universality, was not to the end to possess it in regard of the Pope, but under the Pope, and in regard of the other patriarchs; always acknowledging the Pope for stock and head of the universality, and protesting himself his subject and his inferior. For in the law of the Emperor justinian to Epiphanius Patriarch of Constantinople, which is the first where the word universal is offerred to the Patriarch 
Cod. Iust. impress.  of Constantinople, doth not Justinian write to him: We have in all things preserved the Estate of the unity of the holy Churches, with the most 
Paris. Antwerp. & Geneu. tit. 1. l. 7.  holy Pope of ancient Rome, to whom we have written the like. For we suffer not that any thing should pass touching the Ecclesiastical Estate, which shall not be also referred to his Blessedness, for as much as he is the head of all the most holy Prelates of God? And in the Council of Constantinople holden under Menas which is the first Council in form, where we 
Conc. Const sub Men. act. 4.  see the title of Universal, given to the Patriarch of Constantinople: Is it not (saith Anthimus Patriarch of Constantinople) protested to do all that the Sovereign Pope of great Rome should decree: And writ to all the most holy patriarchs, that he would altogether follow the Sea Apostolic? And Menas Patriarch of Constantinople, doth no he himself pronouncé these words; We will in all things follow and obey the Sea Apostolic? 
Ibid.  And in the heat of the question of the word Universal, doth not saint GREGORY report, that john Priest of Chalcedon a City situate in Asia, and at the gates of Constantinople, having been judged at the Tribunal of john Patriarch of Constantinople, appealed from him to the Sea Apostolic, and was again judged at Rome, and the Bishop of Constantinople giving his helping hand to it, even then when he took upon him, the quality of universal, and sending the Acts of the first judgement to Rome, to be reviewed by the Pope? 
Greg. l. 5. indict. 14. epist. 24.  Knowest thou not (Saith saint GREGORY) that in the cause of John the Priest, against our brother and fellow-Bishop, john of Constantinople, he had recourse according to the Canons to the Sea Apostolic, and 
Id. l, 4. ind. 13. ep. 39  that it hath been defined by our sentence? And elsewhere; John Bishop of Constantinople, hath gone so far as under pretence of the cause of John the Priest, he hath sent hither Acts, wherein almost at the end of every line, he calls himself universal Patriarch.  
And finally the Emperor, and the Patriarch of Constantinople, did they not themselves acknowledge in the strength of this dispute, that the Church of Constantinople was subject to the Roman Church, as saint GREGORY reports it in these words: Who is it (saith he) 
Id l. 7. ind. 2. ep. 63.  that doubts, but that the Church of Constantinople, is subject to the Sea Apostolic; which the most Religious Lord the Emperor, and our brother Bishop of the same city, continually protest? For as for the illusion of those, who to weaken the credit of this passage, cavil upon the word Eusebius, which is in the printed copies, before these words, Bishop of the same cittié; and object, that the Bishop of Constantinople then being, was not called Eusebius, but Cyriacus: I will not stand upon it, to say that there was no inconvenience in it that Cyriacus, might have had two names, and be called Eusebius Cyriacus, as Saint JEROME was called EUSEBIUS JEROME: And besides that the word, Eusebius might there be taken adiectively, and signify pious and religious, as when 
Theod. histor. Eccl. l. 1. c. 6.  Arrius writ to Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia: Farewell Eusebius truly Eusebius; that is to say, farewell Eusebius truly Religious. It will be a short cut to answer at the first, that it is an error of the Exemplarists, who of an (〈◊〉) evil written, and for that occasion blotted out, and written again, have made Eusebius: for the copies of this epistle which had been currant two hundred year after saint GREGORY read simply, (and our brother Bishop of the same city) without making any mention of 〈◊〉, as is seen by the relation of Amalarius Bishop of Treuers, who lived eight hundred years agone; who inserting into his Book of the Ecclesiastical offices, this epistle of saint GREGORY whole and entire, from the beginning to the ending, reports the period now in question in these only words, without any mention of Eusebius; for as for that 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. l. 4. c. 36  which is spoken of the Church of Constantinople; who doubts but it is subject to the Sea Apostolic, which the most Religious Lord the Emperor, and our brother the Bishop of the same Town continually protest? And therefore alsoe when the patriarchs of Constantinople, were in any Synodical action with the Pope's Legates; yea, within Constantinople itself, they abstained from the title of Universal, and left it to the Pope's Legates alone for their master, to the end to show, that they held the Pope for head and stock of the Universality; and did repute themselves Universal but in the absence of him, or of those that represented him; as appears by the signatures of the third general Council of Constantinople, which was celebrated under Constantine Pogonat in the next age after Saint GREGORY; wherein the Pope's Legates signed in the quality of Legates to the universal Pope; and the Patriarch of Constantinople, in the quality of only Bishop of Constantinople: for though the epistle of the Emperor to the Patriarch of Constantinople, written before the holding of the Council, attributes to him, the title of Universal, nevertheless in the signatures of the Council, the only Legates of the Pope, take the title of Universal for their master, and sign in this form; Theodorus, humble Priest of the holy Church of Rome, and holding the place of the blessed and universal Pope of the city of Rome Agatho, I have subscribed. George humble Priest of the holy Church of Rome, and holding the place of the blessed and Universal Pope of the City of Rome Agatho, I have subscribed. john 
〈◊〉. Const 〈◊〉. 18.  humble ` Deacon of the holy Church of Rome, and holding the place of the blessed and universal Pope of the City of Rome, Agatho, I have subscribed. And the Patriarch of Constantinople forbore it, and signed thus; George by the mercy of God Bishop of Constantinople new Rome, I have voted and subscribed.  
The third Answer is, that whatsoever was the intention of the Patriarch of Constantinople, so far was he from doing any thing against the Pope's authority, as contrariwise he confirmed and 〈◊〉 it altogether. And that it is so, how from this, that the Bishop of Constantinople, pretended to be universal Bishop, because Constantinople had been associated to the Rights of Rome, can it chose but follow, that the Bishop of Rome, was so primitively and originally? For as for those that say, that the Patriarch of Constantinople was called Ecumenical Bishop in the same sense, wherein the other patriarchs were so called, (not knowing that there is great difference 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  between the word, Catholic Bishop, which Nilus attributes to the patriarchs, which signifies general Bishop of a Region, and the word 〈◊〉 Bishop, which signifies universal Bishop, either of all the Imperial Orb, or of the particular Orb of the Empire of Constantinople;) I will not stand to confute them; it shall suffice me to ask them, why then the Patriarch of Constantinople never gave the name of universal Patriarch, to the other patriarchs of the East? And why the other patriarchs of the East, never gave it one to another, but have yielded it only to the Bishops of Rome, and of Constantinople? And why the Bishops of Constantinople, have stirred up so many tragedies to participate therein, and have alleged that Constantinople was the second Rome, and aught after her to enjoy the same Rights and privileges? And in brief, it shall suffice me to ask them; why then both anciently and even to this day, the Patriarch of Constantinople doth attribute to himself, by virtue of his universality, this advantage above the other patriarchs of the East; to call the general Counsels of the East, and to preside in them, and to judge by appeal of the sentences of the other patriarchs? It hath been reported (saith Pope Pelagius in the epistle before 
Pelag. Pap. 2. cp. 1.  alleged to those of the East) to the Sea Apostolic, that john Bishop of Constantinople inscribes himself Universal; and by virtue of that his presumption, hath called you to a general Council. And the Emperors Constantine 
Leo & Con stantinus apud Leunclau. 〈◊〉. 3. de Pat.  and Leo; The care and the judgement of all the Metropolitanships, and Bishoprics, and of all the Monasteries and Churches, appertain to their proper Patriarch; but the Patriarch ol Constantinople, may in the territory of the other Seas, when there hath been no precedent consecration plant the Cross; and not only so, but also may decide and determine the controversies bredd' in the other Seas. And Nilus; The twenty eight canon of the Council 
Nilus de prim. Pap. l. 2.  of Chalcedon; and the thirtieth six of the sixth Council honouring the Sea of Constantinople with like privileges to that of Rome, grant also manifestly, the appeals to that of Constantinople: And Balsamon; This privilege is not given 
Balsam. in Conc. Sard. c. 5.  to the Pope alone; to wit, that every condemned Bishop should have recourse to the Sea of Rome, but it ought also to be understood of the Patriarch of Constantinople. And elsewhere; that which nevertheless is but a claim bred amongst the greeks, since the schism; The fifteenth canon of 
Id. in Conc. Ant. c. 15.  the council of Antioch, was abolished by the fourth Canon of the council of Sardica; or at least is to be understood of the Synods, which are subject to no appeal, as those of the Pope, and of the Patriarch of Constantinople. For as 
See below. in the chapt. of the Council of sardica.  for the place of Photius from whence they infer that the patriarchs were as the Prefects of the pretory, from whence there was no appeal, that shall be satisfied hereafter, and showed that it is a vice in the transcription of the copies.  
And the fourth and last Answer is, that this claim was not long suffered in the Bishop of Constantinople, for the Emperor Mauricius who favoured it, having been extinguished by the conspiracy of Phocas, the same Phocas interposed his temporal authority, and forbadd him any more to call himself Universal Bishop, reserving that title only to the Pope alone. It is true, that afterward the Empire being again fallen into the hands of two heretical Emperors Heraclius and Constans, successors to Phocas; the greeks again set abroache this custom, and not only set it abroache, but have since continued it even to the last ages, as it appears by the inscriptions of 
Ius Canon. Orient. l. 3. Ibid.  〈◊〉, Germanus, Constantius, Alexius, and other patriarchs of Constantinople, reported in the Canon law of the greeks, where they inscribe and sign, Universal Patriarches. Only they use this distinction, that they call the Pope, Universal Pope; and the Patriarch of Constantinople, Universal Patriarch: And that if it be lawful to give way to conjectures for two reasons; the one, because the antiquity of the title of Universal Patriarch, was evidently restrained by this distinction, to the superiority only over the simple patriarchs; wherein the Pope was not comprehended, as it appear; when saint GREGORY saith; that if one of the 〈◊〉 patriarchs had done that against the Pope's letters, that was 
Greg. l. 2. indict. 10. 〈◊〉. 17.  done by the Bishop of Salona, such a disobedience could not have passed without a most 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. And the other, forasmuch as the Constantinopolitans 〈◊〉 the word POPE, except amongst the monks, to be a title more exalted, then that of PATRIARCH; because the name of Pope was more reverend amongst the Bythinians, a people near Constantinople, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  who had accustomed in the time of Paganism, to call Jupiter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that of Patriarch; from whence it is, that the latter greeks have 〈◊〉, although ignorantly, that the reason why the patriarchs of 〈◊〉 bore the title of Pope, came from this, that saint CYRILLUS Patriarch of Alexandria, had been legate to the Pope in the Council of 〈◊〉, as Balsamon noteth in these terms: The 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Bishop of Alexandria hath been called Pope, for as much as saint CYRILLUS in the third Council received the privileges of the Pope of Rome Celestinus. And Nicephorus in these; Celestinus Bishop of Rome, refused to assist at the Council of Ephesus, for the danger of navigation; but he writ to Cyrillus, that he should hold his place there, and since that time the fame goes, that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Tiara, and the name of Pope, and of judge of the world.  
For whereas Beda, Paul the Deacon, Theophanes, and Anastasius the 〈◊〉, and after Anastasius the Bibliothecary, all the latin 〈◊〉 say, that Phocas judged; that the Sea of the Roman and Apostolic 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Church, was the head of all the Churches; forasmuch as the Church of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 herself, the first of all the Churches; It is a mistake that Beda an English author, and later by an hundred year than Phocas, hath made of the question, which was about the word, Universal, and not about the word, 〈◊〉; And of this we have two certain and undoubted proofs; the one that saint GREGORY, who is he only of all the authors of the age that hath spoken of this contestation, and who was himself one of the parties contesting, testifies that the dispute was about the word Universal, and not about the word First. And the other, that the patriarchs of Constantinople have always remained within the terms of the second Sea; and have perpetually yielded the first, to the Bishop of Rome. For never can it be found in any monument of antiquity, that the Church of Constantinople, hath at any time taken the title of the first of all the Churches: contrariwise, all the pens of antiquity have witnessed that the Church of Constantinople never affected more than the second in the Church, and hath always given the first to the Church of Rome; for in the Council of Constantinople, which was the source of all those pretences, it was 〈◊〉, that the Bishop of Constantinople should have the prerogatives of honour after the Pope; because Constantinople was a second Rome. They 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  〈◊〉 (〈◊〉 Socrates) that the Bishop of Constantinople should have the 〈◊〉 of honour after the Bishop of Rome, because Constantinople was a second Rome. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  And in the Council of Chalcedon it was ordained, she should be honoured as the Church of Rome, being the second after her: It was esteemed fit saith 〈◊〉) that the Sea of new Rome, because of the second rank it held after that of 〈◊〉 Rome, should be preferred before the others. And in the third general council of Constantinople, which was the sixth general council; the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  council called the Pope, the Protothrone of the universal Church: & the Emperor 〈◊〉 Pogonat, called the Patriarches Synthrones of the Pope, after the Pope; that is to 〈◊〉, set in one same throne with the Pope, after the Pope. And in the council entitled Trullian, the canon of the council of Chalcedon was renewed in these words: We decree that the Sea of Constantinople, shall have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the Sea of ancient Rome, and shall be honoured in 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it, being the second after it. And when Nicephorus Patriarch of 〈◊〉 writes against the Iconoclasts he calls the Sea of Rome, the 〈◊〉 and Apostolic Sea. The divine Patriarch Nicephorus (saith Zonarus) speaking of the Icconomaks writes thus; their being cut of from the Catholic Church, appears clearly (amongst other things) by the letters of the blessed 
Zon. in Conc. Chalc c. 28.  Archbishop of Rome; that is to say, of the first and apostolicke Sea.  
And against this it is not to be objected, that the Emperor Zeno calls Constantinople, the mother of all the Orthodoxal; For he speaks of the orthodoxal of his Empire; that is to say, of the Empire of the East; within the which there remained the year before, no patriarchal Sea except 
Cod. l. 1. 'tis 2. l. 16.  that of Constantinople, but was possessed by heretical patriarchs. As little is it to be objected that justinian saith, that the Church of Constantinople is the head of all the other Churches; For he speaks, not of the Church of 
Ibid. l. 24.  Constantinople in regard of the Churches of the whole world, but of the Cathedral Church of the City of Constantinople; that is to say, of the Church of saint Sophia that he calls the great Church of Constantinople, in regard of the other Churches of the Patriarkship of Constantinople, as it appears both by the next following discourse of the Chartularies, and by the Seaventh law of the foregoeing title, where he writes to the Bishop of Constantinople; That the Pope is head of all the holy Prelates of Gods And by the 131. Novel. where the same justinian ordaineth, that the 
Cod. l. 1. 'tis 1. l. 7.  Sea of Constantinople, should be the second after Rome: We ordain (saith 
〈◊〉. 131.  he) according to the definition of Counsels, that the holy Pope of old Rome, shall be the first of all Prelates; and that the blessed Archbishop of Constantinople new Rome, should have the second place, after the Sea Apostolic of old Rome. Less yet is it to be objected, that some latter greeks say, that the Counsels of Constantinople & Chalcedon; adjudged the primacy to the Church of Constantinople; for they will not say, that the intention of those Counsels was then, to judge the primacy to the Church of Constantinople, but by prophetical spirit, to judge the primacy to the Church of Constantinople, after the Roman Church should have lost it. And to this end they pretend, that the word, after, which the Council of Constantinople made use of when it saith, the Bishop of Constantinople should have the privileges of bonor after him of Rome, was not a note of order, but a note of time; that is to say, that the Fathers of the Council foreseeing by divine inspiration, that the Sea of Rome should one day fall into the heresy of the double procession of the holy Ghost (so call they the doctrine of the procession of the holy Ghost, by derivation from the Father, and from the Son) and by that occasion fall from her rank; they ordained, that after the Bishop of Rome should have lost his primacy, the Bishop of Constantinople should possess it. Which Zonarus, although a Greek and a Schismatic reports and confutes in these words: Some (said he) believe that the 
Zon. in Conc. Const 1. c. 3.  preposition (after) is a mark of time, and not a submission of honour to the Church of Rome; and they make use for the proof of their opinion, of the twenty vl Canon of the Council of Chalcedon, etc. But the 130. Nou. of justinian, inserted in the 
Ibid.  third title of the fifth book of the Basilickes, give the Canons otherwise to be understood. And a little below; From hence it appears manifestly, that the preposition (after) signifies submission and inferiority. And elsewhere: the Council of Chalcedon 
Ibid.  ordains, that new Rome should be honoured with the same Ecclessiasticall prerogatives as old Rome, and should be preferred in honour before all the other Churches, being the second after her; for it is impossible, that she should be equally honoured in all things; unless they will say, that those divine Fathers foreseeing by 
Zon. in Coc. Chalc c. 28.  the light of the holy spirit, that the Church of Rome should be cut off, from the body of the orthodox, and be banished from the Society of the faithful, because of the diversity of the doctrine; they destined that of Constantinople to be one day the first, and so esteemed it then worthy to enjoy in all things equal privileges; to wit when she should have received the primacy, as the Roman Church had in former time had it. And again; But to this sense the thirty sixth canon of the council 
Ibid.  Trullian doth oppose itself; which having placed the Sea of Constantinople second after that of old Rome, adds; And after it, that of Alexandria; and after that of Alexandria, that of Antioch; and after that of Antioch, that of jerusalem. And therefore not only Nilus' Archbishop of Thessalonica writing against the latins, confesseth ingeniously, that the greeks never disputed for primacy with the Roman Church: We are not (said he) 
Nil. de 〈◊〉 Pap. l. 1.  separated from peace, for attributing to ourselves the primacy, nor for refusing to hold the second place after the principality of Rome; for we never contested for primacy with the Roman Church, But even amongst the Authors of the last age, Duaren although a great enemy to the Pope, acknowledgeth, that the sentence of Phocas intervened upon the word, Universal, and not upon the word, First. Behold his words: Boniface the third (said he) obtained with great contention from Phocas to be made ecumenical 
Duaren. de Sacr. 〈◊〉. Min. l. 1. c. 10.  and universal Bishop. Only he shows his gall in saying that Boniface obtained from Phocas to be made universal Bishop; where he should have said, that he obtained of Phocas, that the title of universal Bishop, should be preserved to him alone; and that the Bishop of Constantinople who desired to participate in it, might be excluded from it. For neither did the Bishop of Constantinople, dispute the title of Universal Bishop with the Pope, but pretended he ought to be therein associated with him: neither did the title of Universal Bishop, begin to be attributed to the Pope by Phocas, but from the time of the Emperor Marcian above an hundred fifty year before Phocas, it had been exhibited to him in the council of Chalcedon: and after that, under the Emperor justinian, above fifty years before Phocas, it had been given him in Constantinople itself; as it appears both by the Acts of the Council of Chalcedon, wherein the petitions of the Clerks of Alexandria presented to the Council, bore; To 
Conc. 〈◊〉 act. 3.  the most holy and universal patriarch Leo, and to the holy general Council: And by the testimony of saint GREGORY, who wrote to Eulogius Patriarch 
Greg. l. 7. indict. 1. ep 30. &. l 4. indict. 13. cp. 32. & 34  of Alexandria: Your Holiness knows, that the title of universal Bishop, hath been offerred in the council of Chalcedon, and by the following Fathers to my predecessors. And by the Acts of the Council of Constantinople holden under Menas, & confirmed by justinian where the petitions of the Regulars of Constantinople, and of Syria, and of the Bishops of the Patriarkships of Antioch, and of jerusalem to Pope Agapet, were inserted with this inscription: To our holy and blessed Lord, the Archbishop of old Rome, and universal 
Conc. Const sub Men. act. 2.  Patriarch, Agapetus. In such sort, as be it that Phocas sentence, were upon the word, universal, it cannot be said, that Phocas was the author of the attribution of this title to the Pope, since from the time of the Council of Chalcedon, and since under the Empire of justinian, it hath been attributed to him: or be it that it interuened upon the word, First, the original thereof, could not be imputed to Phocas, since the Emperor justinian more than fifty year before Phocas, had written: We ordain, 
Iust. nou. 131.  following the definitions of the Counsels, that the holy Pope of old Rome, be the first of all the Prelates; and that the blessed Archbishop of Constantinople new Rome, have the second place after the Sea Apostolic of old Rome, and be preferred before all the other Seas.  
But it may be replied, that S. GREGORY did not only condemn the use of the word universal in the person of the Btshop of Constantinople, but refused it himself, in his own. For having admonished the Bishop of Alexandria, that he should give this title neither to him, nor to the Bishop of Constantinople; and the Bishop of Alexandria having written to him, that he had abstained according to this admonition, from attributing it to the Bishop of Constantinople; he replies: I said you 
Greg. l. 7. ind. 1. ep. 30  should give such a title neither to me, nor to any other; and behold in the front of your Epistle, which you have addressed to myself, which have made you this prohibition, you have imprinted this title of proud nomination; Calling me Universal Pope, 
Id. ibid. & l 4; ind. 〈◊〉. ep. 32. &. 34  which I pray your most dear holiness no more to do. And a little after; And certainly your holiness knows, that this title was offered in the Council of Chalcedon, and since again by the Father's following to my Predecessors, but none of them would ever use this word, because in preserving in this world the honour of all Bishops, they might maiutaine their own toward God Almighty. To this then, to make an end, we answer; that the word Ecumenical or universal hath two meanings; the one proper, literal, and grammatical, whereby it signifies only Bishop And the other transferred and metaphorical, whereby it signifies, superintendment over all Bishops: And saint GREGORY 
Greg. ind. 13. ep. 36. & l. 7. ind. 2. ep. 69.  censered this title in the first sense, forasmuch as it would have ensued, from the use of this word grammaticallie taken, and measured by the letter, that there had been but one Bishop only, be it in all the Empire, or be it in the particular Empire of Constantinople; and that all the rest had been but his commissioners and deputies, and not true Bishops in title, and true offices of Christ. If there be one that is universal Bishop (saith saint GREGORY) all the rest are no more Bishops. Now saint GREGORY maintained, that all Bishops were true titulary Bishops, and true ministers, and officers of Christ, although concerning jurisdiction, they were subordinate one to an other; as the inferior judges of a Kingdom, although concerning jurisdiction, they be subaltern to the superior judges, and that there be appeals from the one to the other, yet are they not their commissioners or their deputies; but are also themselves judges in title, and ministers and officers to the Prince: And therefore he opposed this title, as a title full of sacrilege and arrogancy; by which he that usurps it puts himself into the place of God, making of God's officers; and even in that by which they are Gods officers; and exalting himself for that which is of the Episcopoll order, above his brethren; that is to say, denying to his brethren, the Essence and the propriety of Bishops; and holding them, but for commissioners and substitutes in the Bishop's Sea, and not for true Bishops in title, and true ministers and officers of Christ: And in brief reputing himself, not as Servant constituted over his 
Matt. 24.  fellow servants, whereof the Gospel speaks, but as the Master and Lord of his fellow servants. And it is not to be said, that the Bishop of Constantinople, pretended not to the title of universal Bishop in this first sense: for when a title hath two senses, whereof the one is evil and pernicious; it is easy for him that is in possession of such a title, to transferr it abusivelie from one sense to the other. And therefore saint GREGORY rejected absolutely, the use of the word Universal, for fear least under pretence of an acception in process of time, it might be captiouslie drawn to the other: And for this cause he withstood it, not according to the metaphorical sense which was given it, but according to the natural and original sense which it had. For that it was in this sense, that 
Greg l 6. 〈◊〉. 15. ep. 30. & alibi.  saint GREGORY cried out; That he that entitled himself, Universal Bishop, exalted himself lick Lucifer above his brethren, and was a forerunner of Antichrist; to wittin as much, as the word Universal Bishop, took from others the quality of Bishops, and the title of officers of Christ; And not 
Id. l. 2. ind. 21. ep 30.  to deny in case of jurisdiction, the prelature and superiority of one Bishop over others, he shows it sufficiently when he writes; For as much as it is notorious, that the Sea Apostolic, by God's institution is preferred, before all other Churches, so much, amongst many cares, we are most diligent in that which we must have, when for the consecration of a Bishop, they attend our will: And when he alleges, to distinguish between these words, Principality and Universality, the example of S. PETER, who was indeed Prince of the Apostles, and head of the universal Church, and notwithstanding, was not universal Apostle. The care of the Church (said he) hath been committed 
Id. l. 4. in l. 13. cp. 32  to the holy Apostle, and Prince of all the Apostles Peter; the care and principality of the universal Church, hath been committed to him, and yet he is not called universal Apostle: And when he adds, that none of the Saints under the law was ever called universal; The Saints before the law (said he) the 
Id. l. 4. ind. 13. ep 38.  Saints under the law, and the Saints under grace, compounding one Body of Christ, have all been constituted amongst the members of the Church, and none would ever be called Universal. Certain proofs, that by the universality that S. GREGORY opposed, he intended not to exclude the principality and superintendence of one Bishop over others, not to deprive himself of the quality of head of the Church; no more than in denying that saint PETER was universal Apostle, he denied him to be head of the Apostles, & that the principality & superintendencie of the universal Church was committed to him; he that contrariwise came from saying; The principality of the universal Church is committed to Peter; nor in denying that any under the law was called universal; he means not to deny, that the highest Priest of the law, was head of the jewish Church, & had the superintendency over all the other Priests & Levites. And therefore what pretence is left, to the Ministers of the excellent King to abuse this passage, to calumniate the Sea Apostolic? They say S. GREGORY cries out, That a Bishop that entitles himself, Universal Bishop, exalts himself like 
Greg. l. 6. ind. 15. ep. 30.  Lucifer, above his brethren, and is a forerunner of Antichrist; it is true, but besides, this is so too, that S. ATHANASIUS cries yet with a stronger voice; 
Athan. ad solit. vit. agent.  That an Emperor that makes himself Prince of Bishops, and presides in judgements Ecclesiastical, is the abomination foretold by Daniel: Who knows not that there is great difference between Forerunner and Predecessor: And that Antichrist should not sit in the Seat of his Forerunners (for foe are all heretics and schismatics) no more than our Lord sat in the Seat of S. JOHN, who was yet his Forerunner, but not his Predecessor? otherwise Antichrist must sit in the Episcopal Seat of Constantinople; for it was the Bishop of Constantinople, that S. GREGORY pretended by this clause to qualify the Forerunner of Antichrist. And then what blindness is it, to strike upon the refusal that S, GREGORY made of the title of Universal; and not to see that the same S. GREGORY protests, that by the refusal of this word, he intends not to refuse the quality of head of the Church, nor superintendency & jurisdiction, over all the other Bishops, Archbishops, and Patriarches? for what age of S. GREGORYS epistles is not full of testimonies, that the Roman Church, is the head of all the Churches?  

Heaven, in her bosom, not so many Stars embow'rs;  
The Sea so many sails, th'Earth so many Flowers.   
He writ in the epistle to john Bishop of Syracuse; Who doubts but the Church 
Greg. l. 7. ind ep. 63.  of Constantinople, is subject to the Sea Apostolic? which the most Religious Lord the Emperor, and our brother the Bishop of the same city protest continually. He writes in the Epistle following, to the same Bishop; If there be any crime found in Bishops; I know no Bishop but is subject to the Sea Apostolic; 
Greg. l. 7. ind. 2. ep. 64.  but when crimes exact it not, all according to the condition of humility, are equal. He writes in the Epistle to john the defendant, correcting the judgement which had been given against the Bishop Steven; If they answer he had neither Metropolitan nor Patriarch, it must be replied, that the cause should have been heard and determined by the Sea Apostolic, which is the head of all the Churches. He writes in the Fpistle to john Bishop of Panormus: We admonish thee, that the Reverence of the Sea Apostolic be not troubled 
Ibid. ep: 〈◊〉.  by the presumption of any. For then the state of the members remains entire, when 〈◊〉 injury is done to the head of the faith. He writes in the Epistle to Natalis Bishop of Salona; If one of the four Patriarches had committed such an act, 
Id. l. 2. ind. 10. ep. 37.  so great a disobedience, could not have passed without a grievous scandal. He annulled in his Epistles to john Bishop of Constantinople the judgement of the Church of Constantinople, against john Priest of Chalcedon; Reproving (said he) the sentence of the foresaid judges, we declare him by our definition, to 
Id. l. 5. ind. 14. ep. 15.  be Catholic and free from all heretical crime. And elsewhere; Know'st 〈◊〉 not 
Ib. ep. 24.  that in the cause of john the Priest, against our brother and Colleague, John of Constantinople: He had recourse according to the Canons, to the Sea Apostolic, and it hath been defined by our sentence? He abrogated in his Epistle to Athanasius 〈◊〉 Regular of Lycaonia the decree of john Bishop of Constantinople against him, and restored him to his place: We decree thee (said he) to be exempted 
Ib. ep. 64.  from all blot of heretical forwardness, and do grant thee free leave to return into thy Monastery, and to hold the same place and rank as thou didst before. He abrogated in the Epistle to john Archbishop of Larissa in Thessalia, the sentence of the same Archbishop of Larissa against Adrian Bishop of Thebes, and one of the fuffragans of the archbishopric of Larissa, and eclipsed the Bishopric of Thebes from the jurisdiction of the archbishopric of Larissa; and ordained that if the Archbishop of Larissa should ever more undertake to exercise jurisdiction over the Bishop of Thebes, he should be deprived of the communion of the Body of Christ, and that it might not be restored to him, except at the point of death, but by the leave of the Bishop of Rome, We ordain (said he) that thy brotherhood 
Id. l. 2. ind. 11. ep. 7.  obtain from the power thou hadst before over the Bishop of Thebes, and over his Church, and according to the letters of our Predecessor: for if any cause either of 
Greg. l. 2. ind. 11. ep. 6.  faith, or of crime, or of money, be pretended against our said Colleague Adrian, it may be judged, if it be a matter of mean importance, by our Nuncios, which are, or shall be in the Royal City; that is to say, in Constantinople; and if it be a matter of Weight, that it should be reported bither to the Sea Apostolic to be decided by the sentence of our audience. And if at any time, or for what occasion 〈◊〉, thou do attempt to contradict this our decree, know that we declare thee 〈◊〉 from the sacred Communion, so as it may not be restored to thee unless in the article of death, but with the leave of the Bishop of Rome. And finally he abrogated in his Epistle to John Patriarch of the first justinianea, who had confirmed the sentence of the Archbishop of Larissa, the judgement of the said john Primate of the first justinianea, and condemns him to remain deprived of the communion of the Body of Christ for the space of thirty days: Abrogating (said he) and annulling the decrees of thy sentence; We decree by the authority of the blessed Prince of the Apostles, that thou shalt be deprived of the sacred communion, for the space of thirty days. Now, what was this, but to cry with a loud voice, that in refusing the title of Universal; he refused not therefore the title of Head of the Church, and the jurisdiction and superintendency over all other Bishops, Archbishops, and Patriarches?   

Of the Order of sitting in the Council of Nicaea. CHAPT. VIII.  
BUT Calvin, to fight against this doctrine, and to prove that the Pope is not head of the Church, nor Superior to the other patriarchs, useth four principal means; first, that the Pope's legates have not presided, in the ancient General Counsels. The second that the Pope called them not. The third that the appeals of Bishops were not to the Pope. And the fourth that the Canons of Africa forbadd the Bishop of the first Sea; by which Calvin impertinently 〈◊〉 the Pope, to call himself Prince of Bishops: and the first means he strives to prove by Seven examples, which we had best confute all at a clapp, for 〈◊〉 they will object them to us in a second Answer.  
He produceth then before all things, the order of the Council of 
The first objection of Calvin against. the precedency of the Pope in the Counsels.  Nicaea, which he ignorantly calls the Council of Nice, not knowing that the Council of Nice was an heretical Council, that the Arrians held at Nicé in Thrace, to deceive the Catholics by the affinity of the words Nice and Nicaea, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 compounded almost of the same letters. The Arrians (saith the Epistle of the Asians to Liberius) caused to be signed by fraud and perjuries at Constantinople a faith contrary to that of the 
Soc. hist. ec cl. l. 4. c. 11.  holy Council of Nicaea, which had been brought from Nice in Thrace. And Socrates: They transported themselves into a city of Trace called Nice, and after a longest aye, held there an other Council &c. to surprise the simple, by the affinity 
Id. edit. graec. l. 2. c. 37.  of the words. For the simple people believed that it was the faith of Nicaea in Bithynia. And Theodoret: They brought many Bishops against their wills, into a Town 
Theod. hist. eccls l. 2. c. 21.  of Thrace, whose name was Nice. And Sozomene; Passing through Thrace, they came into a city of the Country called Nice, 〈◊〉 there kept a Conventicle etc. And this they did expressly at Nice, to the end to persuade the simple people to consent to it, 〈◊〉 
Soz. hist. ec cl l. 4. c. 18.  by the nearness of the words, and believing it to be the decree which was made at Nicaea. For although Stephanus do indeed, put in a City of Nicaea in Thrace, nevertheless, besides that Ammianus Marcellinus saith, that the 
Am. Marc. l 31.  〈◊〉 of Thrace, situate upon the passage from Italy to Constantinople, which was the same wherein the Arrians had held their false Council, was called Nice; The Graecian Ecclesiastical historians very notably mark this difference, between the Council of the Catholics and that of the Annians, upon the name where of the fraud was founded; that that of the Catholics was holden at Nicaea 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that of the heretics at Nice 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and reporting the two impostures of the Arrians, use in the first (which was to hold a mocke-Councell at Nice in Thrace) the word, affinity of name, and say, that the Arrians advised themselves of this 
Theod. hist eccls l. 2. c. 16.  fraud, to surprise the simple, by the affinity of the names. And in the second, which was to hold a mock Council at Nicaea in Bithynia, they 
Soc. edit. 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 27.  use the word, identity of names, and say, that they committed this fraud, to surprise the simple by the identity of names. By which means, that in the writings of saint HILLARY, the Town of Nice in Thrace where the Conventicle of the Arrians was held, is called Nicaea, It is a vice of the Copyists, which have imposed it upon some learned men. But in Sum what soever the city of Nice in Thrace be, it is Certain, that that of Nicaea in Bithynia, where the Catholic Council was holden, was 
The french translator Nicephorus and others.  called, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Nicaea, and not Nice. Which I would not reproach to Calvin, were it not, that all the Authors of the Ecclesiastical history, agreeing in this note, he is as inexcusable for having been ignorant of it, as many Catholics which are deceived after him, are excusable for having followed him bonafide. But here is to much of this digression; let us come to the point.  
He alleges then, that in the Council of Nicaea, S. ATHANASIUS 
Calu. inst. l. 4 c. 7.  presided, and that the Pope's Legates had only the fourth place, I pray you (saith Calvin) if they had acknowledged julius for head of the Church, would those that represented his person, have been cast back to the fourth place? Had Athanasius presided in the general Council, where the order of the Hierarchy ought to be siugularly observed? Now, what should I answer to this, but what the oracle said of Chalcedon; to wit, that heresy is the land of the blind? For all the Authors of Ecclesiastical antiquity, 
a Epiph. haer. Melet.  S. EPIPHANIUS, 
b Ruffin. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 5. & 14.  Ruffinus, 
c Soc. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 15.  Socrates, 
d Theod. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 27.  Theodoret, 
e Soz hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 17.  Sózomene, and 
f Athan. apol. 2. Hillar. in frag. Syn. Arim.  S. ATHANASIUS himself, and the Council of Alexandria, reported by him, to whom we may over and above add S. HILLARY; testify, that S. ATHANASIUS was yet Deacon, in the time of the Council of Nicaea, and was not made Bishop of Alexandria, till five months after the Council of Nicaea; and that Alexander Bishop of Alexandria his Predecessor, assisted at the Council of Nicaea, and did not preside there, (so far was S. ATHANASIUS that was then but his Deacon from presiding) but only held the second place there, and was preceded by the Pope's Legates. It is true, Calvin may easily be pardoned this error, since he is so ignorant in the 
Theodor. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 26. Socr. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 23.  Ecclesiastical history, as to have believed that Sabellius who was above threescore years before Arrius and the Council of Nicaea, was since both the one and the other. But let us leave the error there, and pass forward to the consequence. 
Calu. inst. l. 1. c. 23. sect. 4.   
Calvin's argument then against the Legates of the Pope is, that Sozomen writes; At this Council assisted from the Sea Apostolic, Macarius Bishop of 
Soz. hist.  jerusalem, Eustachius Bishop of Antioch, Alexander Bishop of Alexandria; and 
Eccl. l. 1. c. 16.  as for Julius' Bishop of Rome, he assisted not at it, because of his age; but in his steed, there assisted Vito and Vincentius Priests of the same Church. And from thence Calvin infers, that the Legates of Julius were only then in the fourth place; and consequently that julius did not preside there, Now could I note in passing by, that the Council of Nicaea was not holden under Julius, as Calvin thought, but under Sybuester the predecessor of Julius, and that it is a depravation of Sozomens copies, that hath deceived Calvin; and before him Cassiodorus, Beda, and many others. For first 
a Euseb. in Chron.  Eusebius, 
b Hier. in Chron.  saint JEROM, 
c Soc. hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 27.  Socrates, 
d Theod. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 3.  Theodoret, 
e Gel. in act. Conc. Nic.  Gelasius of Cyzica, and the ancient latin subscriptions: and after all those Hincmarus Archbishop of Rheims testify, the Council of Nicaea was held in the time of Sylvester, and not of julius. 
Hincmar. opusc. 55 c. 20.  And secondly Sozomene notes, that under the third consulship of Crispus and Constantine Caesar's, which is he by whom he hath begun his history, 
Soz. in praef. oper. Soz. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 2.  Sylvester was Bishop of Rome. Now the third consulship of Crispus and Constantine ended but four months before the overture of the Council of Nicaea, which begun in the month of May under the consulship of Paulinus & Julianus; by which means Julius could not have sent his Legates, seeing 
Socr. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 9  between Sylvester and Julius, Sozomene reports, that there was a Papacy interposed; which was that of Marcus, which according to S. JEROM 
Id. ibid.  
Soz. l. 1. c. 25.  
Conc. Chalc. act. 2.  
Soz. hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 20.  
Hier. in Chron.  lasted eight months. And thirdly the cause wherefore Sozomene observes 
Theodor. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 1. c. 7. Soz. hist. 〈◊〉. l. 4. c. 7.  that the Bishop of Rome assisted not at the Council, which was his extreme age, or as Theodoret saith, his profound age, could not agree with the person of julius, who lived till thirty years after the Council. And fourthly Sozomene assigns but twenty five years to julius' 
Socr. hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 27.  Papacy; in which place we must read but fifteen with Socrates; and consequently he could not presuppose, that julius had been Pope, in 
Soz ibid.  the time of the Council of Nicaea; seeing aswell he, as Socrates affirm, 
Soc. ibid.  that julius died, after the death of Magnentius Gallus and Silvanus; 
Id ibid.  
Ibid.  that is to say, thirty years after the Council; for Magnentius was slain, according to Socrates, under the sixth consulship of Constantine; and the second of Gallus; which was the twenty vl year after the Council, and Gallus under the seaventh of Constantine, and the third of his ownen, which was the twenty ninth year after the 
Am. Marc. l. 15.  Council, and Siluáńus, according to Amianus Marcellinus, after Gallus. I add, that julius would never have reproached to those of the East, that 
Soz l. 3. c. 9  they did not request him to assist at the Council of Antioch, which was holden sixteen years after the Council of Nicaea, if he had been so old 
Soc. edit. 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 7.  at the time of the Council of Nicaea, as he could not be there. I add, that Sozomene had had much more cause to impute it to julius his age, that he was not at the Council of Sardica, which was holden twenty 
〈◊〉. c. 20.  two year after that of Nicaea, then that he was not at that of Nicaea. And finally I add, that Sozomene himself decides the point of the question, and teacheth us, that it is a vice in the writing, which is slipped into the text of the history. For after he had finished in the closing up of the first book, the whole narration of the Council of Nicaea with these words: here 〈◊〉 this place ends all that concerns the Council of Nicaea: 
〈◊〉. hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 1.  And after he had employed all the ninteen first chapters of his second book, to set down what passed between the Council of Nicaea, and that of Antioch against Eustathius: when he had finished the recital of the Council of Antioch against Eustathius, he begins the twentieth chapter 
Id. c. 20.  of his second book with these words: In this time, Marcus having for a short space holden the Bishop's Sea of Rome, after Sylvester; julius took the government of the Sea of Rome: and Maximus after Macarius, of that of jerusalem. From whence it appears manifestly, either that the word, julius, which is in the precedent book, where Sozomene saith, speaking of the Council of Nicaea, julius' Bishop of Rome because of his age, was not there, is a note which slipped out of the margin, into the text; and that Sozomene had simply said, as Eusebius; The Bishop of Rome, because of his 
Euseb. de vit. Const. l. 3. c. 7.  age was not there: or that, instead of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, we must read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to say; ancient, or venerable: But because we have handled this matter more at large elsewhere; to wit, in the preface, composed by us at Rome, but published without our name, before Gelasius of Cyzica, we 
Conc. 〈◊〉. Imp. Come tom. 1.  will here content ourselves to remit the Readers to that; and the while we will examine the place of Sozomene.  
Sozomene then (saith 〈◊〉) writes; At this Council assisted of the Seas 
Soz. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 16.  Apostolic, Macarius Bishop of jerusalem, Eustathius Bishop of Antioch, Alexander Bishop of Alexandria; and as for the Bishop of Rome, he was not there because of his age; but in his steed, there assisted Vito, and Uincentius, Priests of the same Church. This is true, but so far of is it, that from hence it follows, that Sozomene puts the Pope's Legates in the fourth place; As contrariwise it is evident, even there, that he attribures to them the first. For being constrained to follow the tract of his discourse, which obliged him, since he had purposed to speak of the Apostolic Prelate which assisted at the Council, to begin with those that were there in person; before he would make mention of those which were there but by their Legates; he ●●erted of set purpose the order of the enumeration, and began with the fourth and last of all the patriarchs, which was the Bishop of jerusalem, who was then but a patriarch of honour, and then went up increasing to him of Antioch, who was the third and then came to him of Alexandria, who was the second, to the end to keep the last place of the progress, for the Pope's Legates. Now, what could be done more expressly, and with more note to testify the primacy of the Pope? A man that being to describe an Imperial diet, where the Emperor assisted but representativelie, would begin with the Princes of the Empire, who had assisted there in person; but to keep the greater dignity to the Emperor, would invert the order of the other Princes and would say, rising from the last to the first of the Princes of the Empire there assisted at the Imperial diet; the Marqueses of Brandenbourg; the Count Palatine, the Duke of Saxony, the Archbishop of Collen, the Archbishop of 〈◊〉, the Archbishop of Mentzes, and the King of Bohemia; and as for the Emperor, he was not there, but deputed two Vicars there to hold his place: should he in doing so, give the last rank to the Emperor, or the first? For that the order reported in Sozomene, was the inverted order, and not the direct order of the Sea of the patriarchs, it appears both by the confession of Calvin, who cries out; Amongst the Patriarches, jerusalem 
Calu. inst. l. 4. c. 6.  hath ●en● the last: and by all the Ecclesiastical histories, which teach us, that jerusalem was the fourth of the patriarkships, and Antioch the third, and Alexandria the second. And by the Canons of the Council of Nicoa itself, which sets Alexandria before Antioch, and Antioch before jerusalem. And by the express report that Socrates 
Socr. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 12.  made of the direct order of the Council, taken by the very synodical book of S. ATHANASIUS, which is thus: Osius Bishop of 〈◊〉, Uito and Vincentius Priests, Alexander of Egypt, Eustathius of great Antioch, Macarius of jerusalem: In which Catalogue Saint ATHANASIUS, and Socrates, put Osius the Bishop, and Uito, and Uincentius Priests; as holding but one and the same place in the first rank: And Alexander Patriarch of Alexandria, who was the second Patriarch in the second place; and Eustachius Patriarch of Antioch, who was the third Patriarch, in the third: And Macarius Patriarch of jerusalem, who was the fourth Patriarch, in the fourth place.  
But they will reply, that Eusebius, and after him Theodoret, and So●omene make mention but of two Legates of the Pope Vito and Vincentio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; and consequently that S. ATHANASIUS and Socrates could not place Osius, Vito, and Vincentius, as being all three Legates to the Pope, in one same place to this reply then, the answer shall be, that the Pope's 〈◊〉 accustomed to send two sorts of Legates to the general Counsels celebrated in the East; the one Bishops, taken out of the body of the Roman patriarchal Church: As Arcadius and Proiectas Bishops, to the first Council of Ephesus. julian Bishop of Pozzoly, to the second. Paschasinus Bishop of Lilybea, to the Council of Chalcedon; and the other Priests taken out of the body of the particular Roman Church, 〈◊〉 Vito and Vincentius to the Council of Nicaea: Archidamus and Philo●elius, to the Council of Sardica: Philip to the first Council of Ephe●●●● Boniface to the Council of Chalcedon. And the reason of this was that the body of the 〈◊〉: Church, was never at the general counsels celebrated out of the 〈◊〉 of the West; but the Pope held at Rome, a Council of the Bishops of the West, whose resolution he sent by a legation to the Council, of the other patriarchal divisions assembled in the 〈◊〉; 〈◊〉 at 〈◊〉, confirmed by a Council holden afterward, that which had been decided at the Counsels of the other patriarchal divisions assembled in the East: And from this concourse, arose the absolute title of general Council. The Legates then, that the Pope sent, to 〈◊〉 the voice of the 〈◊〉 Church, to the 〈◊〉 Counsels assembled in the East, were of two sorts; the one taken from the body of the Bishops, to represent in general the whole body of the 〈◊〉 Church, that is to say; 〈◊〉 the person of the Pope, as of the other Bishops of the West, and the other Priests and Deacons, taken from the 〈◊〉 Clergy of the Roman Church, to represent particularly the 〈◊〉 and person of the Pope: And this was some times the practice of those of the East in the western ex pedition: For when Flavianus Patriarch of Antioch, sent his embassage to Rome, to recover the grace of the Pope; he added to it, besides the Priests and Deacons of the Church of Antioch, Acacius Bishop of Beroe in Syria, one of the Bishops of his patriarkship, who was (saith Theodoret) 
Theodor. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 23.  head of the legation; and some other Bishops of the same division; to the end to show the consent of his patriarchal Church with his particular Church. But let us leave those of the East, and return to the Pope.  
The Pope then to cause the 〈◊〉 of the western Church to be carried to the general Counsels, celebrated in the East, sent a legation compounded of two kind of Legates; the one internal, and taken from the body of the particular Roman Church, whom we with 
Conc. Sard. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉  the Council of Sardica call, Legates taken out of the Popes own side: and the other external, and taken out of the order of the Bishops: And this legation was sometimes made by two distinct commissions; as in the sixth general Council; the Legates from the pope's particular person, and those from the Council of Rome, were deputed feverally: And sometimes by a joint deputation, as in the Council of Ephesus and Chalcedon. Now were those Legates that we call internal (that is to say taken out of the particular Clergy of the Roman Church) the principal Legates, not in honour; except when the Pope's legations, and those of the Council of Rome, were distinct; but as for the instructions, and in the report of the Pope's intentions. And therefore also when there was question of the particular voice of the Pope, they were often named alone; as in the history of Sozomene, 
Soz. hist. Eccl. l. x. c. 17.  and in the list of the signatures of the Council of Sardica, because, they were only Legates deputed both from the person of the Pope, 
Athana. apol. 2.  and from the body of his Church. And of those examples we have one remarkable in the commission that the Council of Ephesus gave to the Bishops that it sent to Constantinople: for by this commission, the Council of Ephesus entitled Philip Priest of the Roman Church, 
Conc. 〈◊〉. edit. graec. inter epist. Catholic.  Legate from the Pope in these words: To Philip Priest, holding the place of the Bishop of Rome, Celestine; to Arcadius, to 〈◊〉, etc. And entitled not Arcadius Legate to the Pope, though he were both Bishop and Legate to the Pope altogether: because Philip was Legat à latire, from the Pope; that is to say, a Legate taken out of the very body of the particular Roman Church; and Arcadius was Legate from the patriarchal Roman Church; that is to say, Legate from the Pope and Council of Rome; by means whereof, when Sozomene and Theodoret say, there were two Legates from the Pope at the Council of Nicaea; to wit, Uito and Uincentius; and that S. ATHANASIUS and Socrates, put Osius, Uito, and Vincentius into one place; they contradict not one an other; for as much as the one speaks only of the internal Legates, that we call Legates a latere, of which Osius was none; and the other speaks of the Legates, aswell internal as external, whereof Osius was one. And in this the ancient Greek 
Hincmar. opusc. 55. capitul. c. 20.  and Latin Canonists, agree with us: For not only Hincmarus Archbishop of Rheims, who flourished in the time of Charles the Bald, and was not suspected to favour the Pope much, writeth; At the Council of Nicaea in the place of Sylvester, Osius Bishop of Cordua, and Vito, and Vincentius Priests of the city of Rome presided: But alsoe Dalmatius Bishop of Cyzica in Asia, one of the Fathers of the Council of Ephesus, who lived near a thousand two hundred years ago; and after 
Gel. Cyz. in prolog. Syntag.  him Gelasius Priest of Cyzica, who lived under the Emperor Zeno a thousand one hundred and forty years ago; that is to say, in the 
Conc. Nic.  next age to the Council of Nicaea; and from whose pen is come to us the famous Canon of the Eucharist, so much cited by Calvin and by all the Sacramentaries, written in the extract of the same Council of Nicaea, that Osius was the Pope's Legate in the Council of Nicaea; and that Vito and Vincentius were his Colleagues. At this Council (saith 
Gel. in Sin Conc. Nic. l. 2. c. 5.  〈◊〉 of Cyzica, speaking after Dalmatius of Cyzica of the Council of Nicaea) assisted Osius Bishop of Cordua, who held the place of the Bishop of great Rome Sylvester, with the Priests Uito and Vincentius. And not only Gelasius of Cyzica useth these words; but Photius Patriarch of Constantinople, the greatestenemie to the Roman Church that ever was amongst the greeks, allegeth them near eight hundred years ago, in these 
Phot. Biblioth.  words: I have (said he) read a book in form of a history entitled, The 
Ibid.  Acts of the Council of Nicaea, containing three tomes, and bearing (added he a little after) the title of Gelasius of Cyzica; in this book (saith he) the Author writes, that Osius Bishop of Cordua, and Vito and Vincentius Roman Priests assisted at the Council from the part of Sylvester Bishop of Rome. And not only Photius allegeth them; but himself in his treaty of the Synods, dedicated to Michael King of the Bulgarians, and reported by Euthymius, writes; with Vito and Uincentius was joined Osius Bishop of Cordua. 
Phot. ep. de 7. Syn. in Panopl.   
And indeed, for what other cause, should Osius simply a Bishop of the patriarkship of the Roman Church; and subject in the first instance 
Euthym. p. 2. tit. 24. Catalogue.  to the Metropolitan of Sevilla in Spain, and by appeal to the Patriarch of the West, have preceded all the Patriarches of the East; yea, in the East it 
Conc. Elib.  self he that in the Council of Eluira that we call Elibertin, composed of 
Conc to. 1.  nineteen Bishops of Spain had held but the second or according to others, 
Collect.  the eleventh place. And in the Council of Arles compounded of two 
Conc. Hisp.  hundred Bishops, had had no rank amongst the principal Bishops of 
a Gars. Loais.  the Council, but for the same cause, for which Uito & Uincentius simple 
Aug. cont. Parm. l. 2. c. 5.  Priests of the Roman Church, preceded them; to wit, for the order of his legation? for to precede them by virtue of the particular conditions of his person, neither age, nor antiquity of promotion, nor learning, nor desert, hath ever given rank in general Counsels to any simple Bishops before Archbishops, much less before the Patriarches; otherwise the distinction of the Seas had been introduced in vain, and the personal condition of Osius were good to make his person reverend, but not to make him preside in a general Council, where the order of the Hierarchy (saith Calvin) ought to be singularly observed. 
〈◊〉. inst. l. 4. c. 7.  jointly, that even in all these qualities, there were many in the Council, that surpassed him. For if we speak of persecutions for the Faith, 〈◊〉 Bishop of one of the cities of Thebaida, who had lost a knee under 
〈◊〉. hist Eccl. l. 〈◊〉. c. 4.  the persecution of Maximinus and an eye, whose scar the Emperor Constantine was wont to kiss; was not he there? Potamon Bishop of Heraclea 
Soc. l. 1. c. 11.  in Egypt, whom S. EPIPHANIUS calls, great Bishop and great 〈◊〉, and who in the same persecution, had had an eye put out; was not 
Epiph. count. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 68  he there? Paul Bishop of Neocesarea upon Euphrates, whose hands had been maimed with a hit iron, in the persecution of Licinius; was not he 
Theod. hist Eccl l. 1. c. 7.  there?  
And if we speak of the gifts of prophety and working of miracles, Spiridion Bishop of Trimithunta in Cyprus, that Ruffinus calls a man of the 
Ruffi. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 5.  order of the Prophets; was not he there? James that great Bishop of Antioch in Mygdonia, otherwise called Nisibis, that Theodoret saith 
a Theod. lust. Eccl. l. 1. c. 7.  had raised again the dead, and whom he entitles the prince of the troop of the Council; was not he there? S. NICHOLAS Bishop of Myra in Lycia, a man for 
b. Theod. hist. Sanct. 〈◊〉. c. 〈◊〉.  manners and for miracles Apostolical; was not he there? And if we speak of credit and estimation, with the Emperor; even he whose credit we learn from Osius; to wit Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea in Palestina, whom the Emperor from his childhood had known in the East, 
c Euseb. de vit. Const. l. 1. c 13.  and whom he testified in his conceit to be worthy of the Bishopric of the whole earth, 
e Ep. Const. apud 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 vit. Const l. 3. c. 59  and to whom besides so many other letters and marks of familiarity, he directed the first commission, for the re-establishment of the Churches in the East, 
f Eus. de vit. Const. l. 2. c. 44.  and the charge of the transcription of the sacred books 
g Id. l. 4. c. 36.  for the Churches of Constantinople; was not he there? Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia, who afterward baptised the Emperor, and who was Metropolitan of the provinces where the Council was held, and Bishop of the Seat of the Empire in the East, and of the city where the Emperor resided, a man (say Socrates and Sozomene) endued with great 
Socr. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 6.  authority, and very prudent, and honoured in the palace of the Emperor (for the eclipse of his favour with the Emperor, happened not till after the 
Soz. l. 1. c. 15.  Council, and lasted but a moment) was not he there? Alexander Bishop 
Soc. l. 1. c. 1. Cod Iust. l. 1 tit. de his qui'in Eccl. manumittuntur.  of the future Imperial city of Byzantium, converted by exchange of name into Constantinople; was not he there? Paphnutius of whom Socrates saith, the Emperor honoured him extraordinarily, and kept him ordinarily in his Court; was not he there? Protogenes Bishop of Sardica, to whom the Emperor had addressed his first law for the manumission in Churches, 
Cod. Theo l 4. tit 70.  and to Osius the second law; was not he there? 
Euseb. de vit. Const. l. 4. c. 35.   
And if we speak of learning; the same Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea, of whom the Emperor said, that he more than admired his knowledge and his 
Theod. histor. Eccl. l. 1. c. 26. Id. l. 1. c. 7. Soz. l. 2. c. 19  studies; was not he there? Alexander Patriarch of Alexandria, whom Theodoret calls, the admirable Bishop; was not he there? Eustachius Patriarch of Antioch, who made the oration of the Council, and whom Sozomene entitles the miracle of eloquence; was not he there?  
And if we speak of reverence for age; the same Alexander of Alexandria, 
Ruffi. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 5 Theodor. 〈◊〉. Eccl. l. 1. c. 9  whom the histories of the Council call, the old man; and whom the epistle of the Council exalts, for having at that age sustained so many labours; was not he there? Alexander Bishop of Constantinople of threescore and three years of age, whether he were then Bishop in chief, 
〈◊〉. hist. Eccl. l. 3. c. 3.  or as the patriarchs of the Church of Constantinople will have it coadjutor, and Legate of Metrophanes, yet elder than himself; was not he there?  
And if we must speak of the antiquity of promotion; Zeno whom saint EPIPHANIUS calls, antique Bishop of Phenicia, evil qualified 
Epiph. her 69.  by the lists of the signatures of the Council, Bishop of Tyre; was not he 
Epiph. ibid.  there? Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia, before Bishop of Berith, whom saint EPIPHANIUS calls, the ancient old-man of Nicomedia; was not he there? And in brief, an infinite number of other Bishops, that Eusebius, for the antiquity aswell of their age as of their promotion, comprehends in the 
Eus. de vit. Cont. l. 3. c. 9  first clause of this passage; some where honoured, because of their length of time; others flourished in the rigour of their age and spirits; others were newly entered into the course of their charges, were not they there? For that in the Council of Sardica, the age of Osius was accounted amongst those things that purchased him Reverence; that was more than twenty year after the 
Theod. hist Eccl. l. 2 c. 8.  Council of Nicaea. And that saint ATHANASIUS calls him, the Father of Bishops, and saith he died a centenary it was near forty year after the 
Athan. ad solit. vit. agent.  Council of Nicaea, But if none of these, what personal quality soever he had, Noah not Alexander Patriarch of Alexandria, whom the Epistle of the Council calls, the master of the Council; that is to say, Master for sufficiency, 
Theod. hist. eccls l. 1. c. 9  did advance himself a finger breadth, beyond the degree of his dignity: for what cause should Osius for his particular conditions, have been Precedent of all the Assembly? For to say Osius presided there as the Emperor's deputy, the Emperor was in person at the Council, and so could have no deputy; and besides that, he presided not there, but was set there beneath the Bishops and in a lower Seat; and after he had attended, and desired the leave of the Bishops, to show that in matter of 
Eus. de vit Const. l. 3. c. 10.  Religion, he was of the number not of the judges, but of those that were to be judged. And in the sirst Council of Arles, where the Emperor 
Soc. l. 1. c. 1  Constantine assisted also in person, and Osius with him, as it appears by the reproaches of the Donatists against the judges of that Council wherein Osius was enwrapped; not only Osius who was already then in 
Aug. cont. Parm. l. 1. c. 4. 5 6. 7.  as great Credit with that Emperor witness the Epistle of the iudowing the Churches of Africa, did not preside there, but even in the letter of the Council was not placed amongst the first Bishops, but comprehended 
Eus. hist. 〈◊〉 cl. l 10. c. 6 Pars. act. Concil. Arelat. sub Constantin in ep. ad 〈◊〉.  under the curtain of silence with the troop and multitude of the Bishops. And in the Council of Sardica, where Osius presided, aswell as at the Council of Nicaea, he was so evil willed by Constantius the Lord of the Empire, who was an Arrian that he could not be said there to preside, in quality neither of a favourite or of a Deputy to the Emperor; contrariwise the care he had to make himself Procurator and Promoter of the Pope's Rights, and the instance he made for the appeals to the Pope, and for the honour of saint PETER'S memory, and the iustificative 
Conc. Sardic. Can. 3. 4. 5.  relation of the Counsels, which Protogenes Bishop of Sardica and he, dedicated to the Pope; and the protestation that he and the other Bishops inserted into the Epistle of the Council to the Pope, to hold 
Soz. hist. ec cl. l. 3. c. 12.  him for head of the Church, and to acknowledge, That it was a convenient 
Epist. Conc. Sard. ad jul. in fragm. Hilar. de gest. Concil. Arim. & apud. Nicol. 1. ep. ad Episcop Gal.  thing, that from all Provinces of the earth, the Prelates of God should refer all affairs to their head; that is to say, to the Sea of the Apostle Peter; show sufficiently that it was from the part of the Pope, and not of the Emperors that he presided there.  
And from this it derogates not, that saint ATHANASIUS making the recital of the signatures of the Council of Sardica, puts the signatures of Osius, without a title of Legation, and before that of the Pope in those words: Osius of Spain, julius of Rome, by Archidamas and Philoxemus: 
Athan. apol. 2.  For besides that, this recital follows not the ranks of the dignities, as it appears by Nessus an African Bishop, who is placed there before Gratus Archbishop of Carthage. And moreover, that he useth this order for as much as Osius signed the Epistle of the Council immediately, and by himself and the Pope mediately, and by another the legates of the Pope, who were Bishops, had a vote of their own in the Council, and the Priests not. From whence it is, that when the legations of the Pope and of the Council of Rome were distinct, as in the sixth general Council, the legates of the Council of Rome because they where Bishops, took the quality of difinitors, and signed in this form: john unworthy Bishop of the holy Church of Port, and legate of all the Synod of the 
Conc. 6. 〈◊〉. act. 18  holy and apostolic Sea of the city of Rome, I have defined and subscribed And the Legates from the particular person of the Pope abstained from it, and 
〈◊〉. Const. act. 18.  signed thus: Theodorus humble Priest of the holy Church of Rome and holding the place of the most blessed and universal Pope of the city of Rome, Agatho, I have subscribed. Now, saint ATHANASIUS had an interest, not to diminish the number of those that voted for his justification in the Council of Sardica, and not to lose that of Osius. For this cause then he procured him to sign, not as a simple reporter of the Pope's voice, but as having right himself to vote, and say his opinion in the Council, and reserved to Archidamus and Philoxemus, who were but simple Priests, and had no voice of their own in the Council, the office to represent the voice and the signature of the Pope; and in truth with what a face could Osius have accepted to preside in the Counsels, whether of Nicaea or Sardica in the behalf of the Emperors, he that writ to the Emperor Constantius; Go 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. ad Const. in Script.  not about to meddle in Ecclesiastical affairs, and command not us in such matters, but rather learn of us: God hath committed the Empire to thee, and the government 
Athan. ad solit.  of the Churches to us. And S. ATHANASIUS, How could hè have past without censure, he that cries out; that an Emperor presiding in Ecclesiastical 
Athan. ad 〈◊〉.  judgements, is the abomination foretold by Daniel.  
For that afterward in the Council of Chalcedon, the Emperor Marcian presided; the Fathers of the Council declared, that it was not for things Ecclesiastical, but for order and temporal policy; to the end, to hinder such seditions, as had happened in the false Council of Ephesus, and testified, that the presidency of the Emperor, whas not of the essence of the Council, as that of the Pope, but only for comeliness 
Ep. Conc. 〈◊〉. ad I con. act. 1. & seq q.  and ornament. Thou governest us there (said they to the Pope) 〈◊〉 the head doth the members, contributing thy good will by those that hold thy place; and the faithful Emperors presided there for ornament, or to cause good order to be observed there. And in the sixth general Council holden under the Emperor Constantine Pogonat, it is said in the roll of the causes of the Laycks: the most religious and Christian Emperor presiding; that hath reference not to the assembly of the Synod, but to the assembly of the Senate, and of the imperial offices. For there were two distinct assemblies in the hall of the Council: the one, that of the Senators, and officers of the Empire, wherein the Emperor presided; and the other; that of the Synod of the Bishops, wherein the Pope's Legates presided, as it appears, both by the verbal process of the Counsels, which after it had decreed, 
Conc. Const. 6. act. 1. & seqq.  the assembly of the officers of the Empire, added; the holy and general Council being also assembled, called by the imperial ordinance in this Royal and God-protected City: to wit the most reverend Priests Theodore and George, and the most Reverend john the deacon holding the place of the most holy and sacred Archbishop 
In ep. Greg 〈◊〉. ad Le on 〈◊〉. ep. 1.  of old Rome, Agatho; and George the most holy and sacred Archbishop of this famous city of Constantinople new Rome; And by the protestation that the same Emperor sent to Rome for the holding of the Council in these words: I will not sit as Emperor with them, and I will not speak Emperiouslie, but as one of them, and what the Prelates shall ordain, I will execute: And finally by the modesty which he used in the signatures, in signing last, and after all the Bishops. For whereas in the false Council entitled Trullian, the Emperor justinian 〈◊〉 his son signed contrary to his Father's modesty, before all the Prelates: it was an irregular action, and done in an erroneous and illegitimat Council, as it shall appear hereafter; And then, if credit with Emperors, should have given any Bishop the prerogative 
In cap. 15.  to preside in Council, what Bishop had ever more credit with the Emperor Constantius then 〈◊〉 Bisohp of Murses; to whose merits, 
Sulp. Seu. hist. sacr. l. 2.  and not to his Soldier's valour, he said he ought the victory over Magnensius, and the preservation of his Empire; And upon whose industry and counsels, he depended in all affairs of Religion: Who not witdstanding, never presided in any one of the many Counsels, holden under Constantius? Or what Bishop had ever more credit with the Emperor 〈◊〉, than Theodorus Archbishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, who was his 
evag. hist. eccls l. 4. c. 37.  dear and trusty Counsellor and Assessor; or rather, the soul and Oracle of all his Counsels; who notwithstanding presided not, in the fifth General Council, but sat there in his simple rank of Metropolitan, below 
Conc. Const. oecum. 5. act. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.  all the Patriarches and legates of the patriarchs?  
Now if Osius had presided in the Council of Nicaea, for the merits, and conditions of his person, must not the election have been made before by a solemn and authentical act in the Council? or if he had presided there by delegation from the Emperor, must not the same Emperor have signified it, and enrolled his commission in the Council? for if they say, there is no mention found of it, because the acts of the Council are lost, wherefore should they rather exact testimonies of the delegation of Osius by the Pope, then by the Emperor, and not content themselves that the analogy of the ancient Ecclesiastical order, and that which is saved from the shipwreck of the acts of the Council in the memory of the following ages, and hath been collected by Dalmasius or others yet more ancient; and by Gelasius of Cyzica, Greek and Thrace authors, the one writing a hundred year, & the other an hundred & fifty after the Council of Nicaea; and the Confession of the latter, and Schismatical greeks themselves, as 〈◊〉 and others do plainly inform us of it, in affirming that Osius, was 〈◊〉 legate, with Vito, and 〈◊〉; And that saint ATHANASIUS and Socrates, do tacitly inform us so, in setting Osius Vito, and 〈◊〉, in one and the same place, and before the second 
Eus. de vit. Const. l. 2. c. 62.  Patriarch? For where 〈◊〉, and after him Socrates, and Sozamene say, that from before the Council of Nicaea, the Emperor Constantine had sent Osius from Nicomedia into Egypt, to assay to pacify the difference of the Church of 〈◊〉, which commission happened not seven year 〈◊〉 the Council of Nicaea, as they conceive that would salve the acts entitled from Silvester; but the next year before the Council of Nicaea, as it appears by Sozomens history, who puts the calling of the 
Soz. hist. eccls l. 1. c. 17.  Council of Nicaea, presently after the return of Osius, what can assure us, that it had not been with the advice and authority of Pope Silvester? or rather, what can assure us, that it was not Pope Silvester, that sent him 
Epist. Lib. ad Const. in opusc, Lucif.  to the Emperor into the East, to provide for the trouble of Arrius; whereof the Bishop of Alexandria had written to the same Silvester, and to 〈◊〉 the Emperor, to interpose his authority, and that what remains to us from the 〈◊〉 of the Ecclesiastical history, more 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the first 〈◊〉 of the Emperors to note their actions, than those of the Popes; to the end, to strengthen the Church, with the temporal authority of the Empire, hath not passed it over in 〈◊〉? or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 who can 〈◊〉 us, that the same Eusebius with an 〈◊〉 malice, as being an Arrian, and for that cause an Enemy to the Roman Church, hath not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as well as he dissembled., that Alexander 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 the relation of the trouble of the Church of 〈◊〉, to Pope 〈◊〉, and an other relation 〈◊〉 the circular letters addressed to the 〈◊〉 Bishops of the East, as it appears from 
Epiph count. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 Soc. hist. cc cl. l. 1. c. 6.  the number and the degrees of those that were excommunicated; where of there is mention 〈◊〉, which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, we learn evidently 〈◊〉 Pope 〈◊〉, who writes to the Emperor Constantius: We have 
Theod hist 〈◊〉 l. 〈◊〉. c. 5.  〈◊〉 in our 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Bishop 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Silvester, of holy memory; and 〈◊〉, from saint 〈◊〉, Patriarch of the same 
Epist. Lib. ad. Const. ubi sup.  place of 〈◊〉, who 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pope CELESTINE; The long 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉, 〈◊〉 me to communicate those things to your 〈◊〉. 
Cyril. ep. ad Celest. in 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. part. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉   
The Fathers of the third 〈◊〉 Council of Constantinople, which was the 〈◊〉 general Council, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and which lived near a thousand year ago, and had read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ecclesiastical histories, that 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 robbed from us, and in whose cares there sounded yet the memory of the acts of the Council of Nicaea, do not 〈◊〉 throughly 〈◊〉, that not only the Emperor Constantine, but also Pope 〈◊〉, wrought for the 〈◊〉 of this Council; when they 〈◊〉 The most sacred 〈◊〉, and the famous 〈◊〉; called the great and 
〈◊〉. Const. oecum. 6. 〈◊〉. 18.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Council at Nicaea? And doth not the analogy of the history inform us, that the Pope before the celebration of the Council of Nicaea, must 〈◊〉 have holden a 〈◊〉 Council of the western Church; that is to 〈◊〉; a Council compounded of the deputies, from the particular 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 Provinces, to send by delegates, carrying the 〈◊〉 of that Council the sense of all the western Church to the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉, as it was done when there was question of holding the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉, and 〈◊〉? Otherwise, how had the Council of 〈◊〉, which was compounded but only of the Eastern Provinces, and where there were but 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 Bishops of all the west, been originally 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉; (I say originally, and not by accession, as that of 〈◊〉,) if some one of them had not been deputed, to 〈◊〉 the voice of all the western Church? And which of those Bishop's 〈◊〉 it 〈◊〉, except Osius, who only had his 〈◊〉 with the Pope's 〈◊〉, before the heads of all the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉? For if the authors of 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  the 〈◊〉 all history for the most part 〈◊〉, which remain to us, have spoken of no Council of the West preambulary to that of 〈◊〉, what 〈◊〉 is it, 〈◊〉 that of the Council of Capua; that the Council of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 general Coucell, and that saint AMBROSE 
Conc. Carth 3. c. 38.  describes, as assembled from all the parts of the world, and for the affairs 
Amb. ep. 78.  of the East, there is found no author of the ancient. Ecclesiastical history that speaks a word? And if Eusebius and those that have followed him, have made no memory of the Council of the West, holden for the preparation of the Council of Nicaea; what marvel is it, if they have made no mention, of the deputation of the Bishop, sent 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  from the Pope; and the Council of the West, to represent their person at the Council of Nicaea? We find indeed, that Eusebius Bishop of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Italy, and Lucifer Bishop of 〈◊〉 in Sardinia, two Bishops of 
Ruff. hist. eccls l. 3. c. 27.  the Pope's Patriarkship, where 〈◊〉 into the, East and that at the issue of their banishment one of them, to wit, Lucifer, created in Syria, 
Soc. hist. ec 〈◊〉 l. 3. c. 27.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 and assisted by one of his deacons, at the 
Ibid.  Council of Alexandria, holden for the restitution of the Churches: And 
Ibid.  the other; to wit Eusebius, assisted there in person, but that they bore the quality of the Pope's Legates, when they were banished into the East, or since we find nothing in all the Grecian antiquity: And nevertheless, saint JEROM describing the life of Lucifer, saith; Lucifer Bishop of Calaris, 
Hier. de script Eccl in Lucif.  sent Legate for the faith with Pancratius and Hyllarius, Clerks of the Roman Church, by the Bishop Liberius to Constantius, because he would not under the name of Athanasius condemn the Faith of Nicaea, was banished into Palestina. And describing that of Eusebius: Eusebius (saith he) made, from a Lecturer 
Idem Ibid. in Euseb.  in the Roman Church, Bishop of Vercelles, was for the confession of his faith, 〈◊〉 by the Emperor Constantius to Scythopolis, and from thence to Cappadocia. And saint HILARY describing the Council of Milan, from whence they where both sent into the East by Constantius: Eusebius Bishop of 〈◊〉 (saith he) is there with the clerks of Rome, and Lucifer Bishop of Sardinia. And Liberius himself, in an Epistle to the Emperor Constantius, 
Hilar. ad Constant. l. 1.  which remains to us in the works of Lucifer; I have (said he) sent to you my holy Brother and fellow-bishop Lucifer, with Pancratius my fellow-Priest, 
Liber. epist ad Constant. in oper.  and Hillary Deacon. And Nicetas a grave Greek Author, and who had seen many Ecclesiastical histories, that time hath envied to us, expounding 
Lucifer. & in fragm.  these words of saint GREGORY Nazianzen: There were at Caesarea in Coppadocia, Bishops of the west, which drew all that were orthodoxal to 
Hilar. Greg. Nazian. Or. in Basil.  them; adds, These Bishops were Lucifer and Eusebius, who had been sent from Rome.  
And why then, as all the ancient greeks concealed the deputation of 〈◊〉 
Nicet. Serr ibid.  and Eusebius Bishops of Uercelles, from the Pope, to the Emperor Constantius; so could not Eusebius and those that have followed him conceal the deputation of Osius from the Pope, be it to the Emperor Constantine, or be it to the Church of Alexandria? And if from this, that Eusebius notes not, that Osius. (whom in hate to Catholic doctrine, he vouchsafes not so much as to name in all the history of the life of Constantine) was sent by the Emperor into Egypt as the Pope's legate, or from this that he doth not relate that Osius assisted at the Council of Nicaea as the Pope's Legate, 〈◊〉 do ensue, that it was not in the quality of the Pope's legate, that Osius presided at the Council of Nicaea; must we not conclude by the same means, that he presided not there at all? for Eusebius saith not, that Osius presided at the Council of Nicaea; he only 
Euseb. de vit. Const l. 3. c. 7.  saith, that he sat there, with many others: From Spain itself (said he) there was one very famous Bishop set with many others. Two only historians do inform us of it; the one is Socrates, who saith after saint ATHANASIUS, 
Gel. in Synt. Conc Nicen. l. 2. c. 5.  At this Council assisted Osius Bishop of Cordula, Uito and Uincentius Priests: The other Dalmatius of the same time with Socrates, who writes; and Galatius of Cyzica fifty years after him; At this Council assisted Osius Legate of the Bishop of Great Rome Silvester; with the Priests Uito, and Uincentius; but as for Eusebius he saith thereof nothing at all; chose, he affirms clearly that the Priests of the Bishop of Rome, whom he reserves to name last, as the seal and the Crown of the Council, 
Euseb. de vit. Const. l. 3. c. 7.  held there the rank of their Bishop. The Bishop of the city regnant (saith he) assisted not there because of his age, but his priests kept his rank there. Now by what arithmetic could the priests of the Roman Church, keep there the rank of the Bishop of Rome, if Osius possessed the first place, otherwise then in the quality of their Colleague, and filling up one selfsame place with them?  
Moreover, how had not the patriarchs of Alexandria, Antioch and jerusalem lost at the Council of Nicaea their rights of the second, third, 
Conc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. c. 6. 7.  and fourth Seats in the Counsels, against the express protestation, that the Council of Nicaea made to preserve their privileges; if Osius Uito, and Uincentius, had held diverse places there and not one and the same place? And how had the Council of Constantinople, celebrated in the same age, that the Grecians call the second general Council, when they would erect Constantinople into a Patriarkship, ordained that the Patriarch of Constantinople should hold the second place after the Bishop of Rome; if in the first general Council the Bishop of Rome had not held the first place? And how could the legates of the Pope in the Council of Chalcedon have complained, that Dioscorus had presumed to undertake to preside in a pretended general Council, without the Pope's authority, 
Conc. Chalc act. 1.  which had never been lawful nor ever had been done, if Osius had presided in the Council of Nicaea without the Pope's authority? And how could the Emperor justinian have said; We decree following all the sour holy 
Iust. nou. 131.  Concells, that the most holy Pope of old Rome, be the first of all the Prelates; if in the first of all the general Counsels, a simple Bishop of Spain, had been the first, otherwise then in the quality of delegate by the Pope?  
And finally, how came it that an Action so irregular, as that by which a man who was neither Metropolitan nor Patriarch, had preceded all the patriarchs of the East; and even in the East was not noted amongst the extraordinary examples of antiquity? And how came it, not to speak of the interest of the patriarchs, that Theognis Bishop of Nicaea, the City wherein the Council was celebrated, and Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia head of the Arrian faction, and Metropolitan of the Province of Bithynia wherein the Council was holden, and Bishop of the Seat of the Emperors in the East, did not oppose it: as well as when Fortunius Archbishop of Carthage was at Constantinople the Metropolitans subject to the Patriarkship of Constantinople, opposed this that the Archbishop of Carthage, should have caused the acts of the second general Council of Constantinople to be searched, to see what place the legate of Primosus Archbishop of Carthage had there; And how chanced it, that they, and the other Arrians, who after the death of Constantine and Constans, the Catholic brothers to Constantius the heretical Emperor stirred heaven and earth to reverse the authority of the Conncells of Nicaea and Sardica, could not allege for a means of nullity, that Osius had presided irregularly in the one and the other, if he had presided otherwise, then as representing the person of him, to whom the right to preside did appertain?  
But the question in the matter that Calvin propounds, is not between the Pope and Osius, who at least was one of the Suffragans or rear Suffragans of the Pope; that is to say, one of the Bishops of the Pope's patriarchal division; And by consequence, what rank soever he held, it could not tend to the Pope's prejudice? For were it that the Pope sent him from the West into the East, with the title of legate; or were it, that being already there, the Pope had chosen and designed him by letters to represent his person; or were it, that neither the one nor the other had chanced, but that being at the Council, he had been entreated as the most ancient Bishop there present of the Pope's Patriarkship, to join himselfo with his deputies, to help them to present him; it could be no way to the disadvantage of his Patriarch: It is between the Pope and the other patriarches, and consists in this, whether at the Council of Nicaea the Pope's deputies were set after the other three patriarches, 
Soc. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 12.  or before them. Now of this ATHANASIUS and Socrates put us out of doubt, when they say, that the order of the Council was: 
Soz. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 18.  Osius Bishop of Corduba Vito and Uincentius priests, Alexander of Egypt, Eustachius Patriarch of great Antioch, and Macarius Bishop of jerusalem. For to this that Eustachius Patriarch of Anthioch, or as others say, Eusebius Archbishop of Caesarea, made the oration of the Council to the Em peror, and was set at the head of the Bishops on the rigth hand in respect of the Emperor to whom his speech was directed; it sufficeth to answer two things; the one, that the highest qualified were not chosen to preach the oration, but the most eloquent, amongst whom Eustachius, that Sozomene calls admirable in eloquence, held the first 
Idem l 2. c. 18.  rank; And the other, that the right hand at the coming in, and reckoning 
Euseb. de vit. Const. l. 3. c. 10.  from the place where Constantine was, who had his back turned towards the door, and his face to the Fathers; at the first encounter of whom in coming from the door, he stayed, was not the most honourable place in the Council, but the right hand at going forth; and to reckon from the place where the Gospel was set, as appears by the order of the Council of Chabcedon and of the Council of Constantinople, 
Conc. Chalc Conc. Const. sub Men. Act. 1. ct seqq.  holden under Menas, where the Precedents were set at the left hand from the side where they came in, which was the right hand from the side of the Gospel; and the others at the right hand.   

Of the order of the sit in the first Council of Epehsus. CHAPT. IX.  
THE second objection of Calvin, is taken from the first Council of Ephesus, and couched by him in these words; Att the first 
Inst. l. 4. c. 7  Council of Ephesus, saith Calvin, Pope Celestin used an oblique practice, praying saint CYLILL Bishop of Alexandria, who otherwise was to preside there, to hold his place; And the Pope's Ambassadors were there in an inferior place. But with what oblique faith was this done? For first Pope Celestine had made saint CYRILL Patriarch of ALEXANDRIA his Vicar in the East, before any Council was spoken of to be kept at Ephesus, and had given him commission to execute at Constantinople, the rudgement pronounced at Rome against Nestorius' Archbishop of Constantinople; Adding to thee (said Pope Celestine in his Epistle to 
Conc. Ephes impress.  saint CYRILL;) the authority of our Sea, and using with power the representation 
Heidelb. c. 16.  of our place, thou shalt execute exactly and constantly this Sentence; to wit, that if within ten days, reckoned since the day of this monitory, Nestorius do not anathematise by writing his wicked doctrines etc. thy holiness should provide for that Church without delay, and declare him to be wholly cut of from our Body. And in the Epistle to Nestorius, read and inserted into the Acts of the Council: We have sent the form of this judgement with all the verbal 
I bid. c. 17  process to our holy fellow-Bishop of Alexandria, to the end that he being made our vicar, may execute these things. And in the Epistle to the Clergy of Constantinople; We have conferred our Uicarship, because of the far distance 
Ibid. c. 17  of places, to our holy brother Cyrillus. And the Council of Ephesus in the relation to the Emperor; The sentence of him and his before there 
Ibid. o. 65.  was any Synod assembled at Ephesus, the most holy Celestine Bishop of great 〈◊〉 had testified by his letters, and had committed to the most holy and most beloved of God, cyril Bishop of Alexandria, to be his vicar. And saint CYRILL himself in the Epistle against Nestorius, addressed to the Constantinopolitans; We are constrained (said he) to signify to him by Synodical 
Ibid c. 15.  letters, that if 〈◊〉 speedily, that is to say, within the time defined by the most holy Bishop of the Roman Church, he renounce not the novelties of his doctrine, he shall have no more communion with us, nor place amongst the Ministers of God?  
And secondly Celestine making saint CYRILL his vicar, it was by 
Ibid. c. 65  form of commission, and not by form of entreaty. He committed to 
Marcell. Com. in chron.  him (saith the Council of Ephésus) to be his vicar. And Marcellinus Comes of the same time with justinian; Nestorius was condemned at Ephesus 
〈◊〉. in 〈◊〉. l. 5 Theoph. hist. 〈◊〉. ante Conc. Eph. imp. Heid.  in a Synod of two hundred holy Fathers, Celestine declaring to the Council, cyril Bishop of Alexandria, his vicar for the time. And Liberatus, the African author of the same age: Celestine signified to Nestorius that he had given his Uicarship to CYRILLUS. And Theophanes the Greeke-historian; Celestine of Rome writ to cyril of Alexandria to hold his place in the 
Basil. in Nomoc. Phot 〈◊〉. 8. c. 1.  Synod. And Balsamon, not only a Grecian but a Schismatic: Celestine, when he could not assist at Ephesus, and judge Nestorius in person, thought good to permit saint CYRILL, to preside in his place at this Council. And 
Niceph. hist. Eccl. l. 14. c. 34.  Nicephorus; Celestine Bishop of Rome refused to assist at the Council of Ephesus, for the peril of the navigation, but he writ to cyril to hold his place there, and after that time the fame goes, that Cyrill received the Tiara and the name of Pope, & of judge of the whole world.  
And thirdly, who revealed to Calvin that it was not, in the quality of the Pope's Legates but in his own name, that saint CYRILL presided in the Council? For did not Prosper an author of the same time say, 
Prosp. in Chron. Id. cont. 〈◊〉. Coc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Heid. c. 45.  To the heresy of Nestorius, CYRILLS' industry, and Celestines authority principally resisted. And again, Celestine cut of the Nestorian impiety, aided cyril with the Apostolic sword. And the letters of the Bishops, writing from Constantinople to the Council; Do they not bear this superscription; To the most holy and beloved of God, Bishops and Fathers, who by God's grace are assembled in the Metropolitan City of Ephesus; Celestine Cyrillus Iwenall, and others; to show that the Pope though absent, preceded saint CYRILL, even in the person of saint CYRILL? And did not the Pope's legates thank the Fathers of the Synod, because 
Conc Ephes part. 1. Act. 2.  they had showed themselves, holy members to their holy head, that is to say, to the Pope. And saint CYCILL writing to Pope Celestine; Doth he not 
Ep. Cyril. ad Celest. in Conc. Ephes. part, 1.  call him his Father, though himself were an ancienter Patriarch by ten year then Celestine? And did not the Council in the Body of it make themselves executioners of the Pope's Judgements against the same Nestorius, when they said; We are come not without tears to pronounce this 
Conc. Eph. p. 2. Act. 1. in depos. Nestor.  sad sentence, constrained by the force of the Canons, and by the letters of our holy Father and fellow-Minister, Celestine? And then if Alexander Bishop of Alexandria, had not presided at the Council of Nicaea, but was there, 
Socrat. hist Eccl. l. 1. c. 12.  preceded by two simple priests of the Roman Church Vito and Vincentius, why should saint cyril one of his successors, and Patriarch of Alexandria as he was, and no less enemy to Nestorius then Alexander was to Arrius, have presided at that of Ephesus, a city that was in Asia, and out of the Patriarkship of Alexandria, as well as Nicaea was? And if that appertained by right to saint CYRILL, for what cause did Dioscorus his Successor obtain surteptitious letters from the Emperor under pretence of the refusal that Eutyches made of the Pope's 
Contil. Ephes. 2. lect. in Conc Chalc Act. 1.  legates, forasmuch as they had been entertained, feasted and gratified with presents by his adversary; that is to say, by Flavianus Archbishop of Constantinople to preside at the false Council of Ephesus? And for what cause, notwithstanding the said letter, was he accused for this attempt at the Council of Chalcedon, as for a new and unheard 
Conc. Chale Act. 1.  of enterprise: He must (said Lucentius Bishop of Ascoli) give up an 〈◊〉 of his judgement, for as much as having no right to do the Office of a judge, he hath usurped it, and hath presumed to hold a Synod without the authority of the Sea Apostolic, which hath never been lawful, neither was ever done? And for what cause did the Council of Chalcedon, call his presidency Tyranny; and Victor of Tunes author of the following 
Epist. Concil. Chalc ad Leon. pag. 25.  age; usurped principality? for whereas Calvin adds, that at the Council of Ephesus, the other legates of the Pope, sat after saint CYRILL; that was, because saint CYRILL had been first deputed, and before the Council, and that the others came thither but at the end thereof; and 
Victor. Tun. in Consulat. Postumian. & Zenon.  besides, that amongst colleagues of one same legation, he that of himself was already in greatest dignity, was to precede.   

Of the order of the sit of the second Council of Ephesus. CHAPT. X.  
THE third objection of Calvin is; That in the second Council of 
Calu. inst. l. 4. c. 7.  Ephesus, Dioscorus Bishop of Alexandria presided; and that although the issue of this Council was unlawful; nevertheless at the beginning when order was yet observed, the Pope's deputies did not question him 〈◊〉 the first place: An objection that contains as many falsehoods as words: For first the second Council of Ephesus, that the greeks call the Council of robbery, was all disordered from the beginning to the ending; 
Lex Valent. & Marc. contra. 2. Concil. Ephes. in fin. Concil. Chalc. c. 11  Those things shall cease (said the law) which have taken their original from injustice. And indeed, how could it be otherwise having begunn by practices, by Steel and weapons? for Chrysaphius, Master of the imperial palace, who was an Eutychian, and Eutyches his Godson, 
a Liber. in 〈◊〉. c. 11.  sent thither from the beginning, 
b Id. Ib. c. 12.  regiments of Soldiers, to authorize by force 〈◊〉 the abettor of the Eutychian heresy, and to exclude from judgement, all those that were suspected by Eutyches. Now Eutyches refused the Pope's legates amongst others, aswell because the Pope had confirmed 
Zonar. in Theod. 2. Niceph. l. 14. c. 47.  the sentence of Flaviaws Bishop of Constantinople against him, as in their own interest, because that being arrived at Constantinople, Flavianus that 〈◊〉 held for his adversary, had entertained and feasted them; The legates 
Act. 1. Concil. Ephes. 2 lecta in Concil. Chalc. Act. 1.  (saith Eutyches) sent by the most holy and most beloved of God the Archbishop 〈◊〉 Rome, Leo, are suspected by me, for they have been entertained, and feasted, 〈◊〉 gratified with presents by the most beloved of God the Bishop Flavianus. 〈◊〉 these causes than Chrysaphius desirous to exclude them from the 
Cedrens. in Theod. 2:  judgement of the Council, obtained by surprise letters from the Emperor Theodosius the second (a man that signed dispatches without 
a Epist. Theodos. ad Elpid. & ad 〈◊〉. lect in Conc Chalc. Act. 1.  reading them, wherefore his sister to reproach him for his simplicity, once made him sign the bondage of his wife) by which, under 〈◊〉 of refusing those that had already judged Eutyches, he ordained 〈◊〉 to preside there, and accompanied them with men of war to have the sway there. Now, how unlawful this beginning was, 〈◊〉 needs no other judge but the same Emperor, who afterward informed of the deceit that Chrysaphius had made use of to himward, 〈◊〉 him by exile and confiscation of goods and offices. And secondly where Calvin saith, that the Pope's Legates did not dispute for 
Cedrenus in Theod. 〈◊〉 Niceph. l. 14. c 49.  the first place there, is manifestly false. For Liberatus an author of the next ensuing age writes exppressely, The Pope's deputies would not endure to sit there because the precedence had not been given to their sacred Sea. 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 Breu c. 12.  And when the Acts of the same Council (all which Dioscorus had falsified) were read over in the Council of Chalcedon, when they came to name Julian, legate to Pope Leo; it was said that the Act was false, and that the name of Leo, had not been there received. And 
Concil. Chalc. Act 1.  thirdly, the first complaint that the Pope's Legates propounded to the Council of Chalcedon against Dioscorus, was; That he had presumed to hold 
Ibidem.  an Ecumenical Council without commission from the Sea Apostolic, which had never been either done, or lawful to be done. And finally the primacy that Dioscorus had usurped in the false Council of Ephesus, though by surreptitious letters from the Emperor, and upon the refusal of the Pope's Legates, was declared, Tyranny, and himself deposed, 
Concil. Chalc. Act 5  amongst other causes, for having set upon the Pope. By the decrees of his tyranny; (said the Fathers of the Council of Chalcedon writing to Pope Leo) he hath absolved Eutyches, who for his impiety had been condemned, 
Ibidem ad Ibid.  and hath restored to him the dignity whereof he was deprived by your Holiness, And a little after; And to make up all this, he hath extended his felony, 〈◊〉 against him to whom the guard of the Vine hath been committed by our Lord, that is to say, against your Holiness. Is not this a goodly example for 〈◊〉 against the Pope?   

Of the order of the sit of the Council of Chalcedon. CHAPT. XI.  
Calvin's fourth objection is taken from the Council of 
Iust. l. 4. c. 7.  Chalcedon. In the Council of Chalcedon (saith he) Pope Leo 〈◊〉 it of Grace of the Emperor, that his Ambassadors might preside there because the Bishops of the East who had presided in the second 〈◊〉 of Ephesus, had misbehaved themselves there, and had abused their power: And I for my part must needs ask him, how long he will abuse our patience? For Leo did nothing less, then to pray the Emperor that his deputies might preside at the Council of Chalcedon, but having sent in the first month of the same year a legation to Constantinople 〈◊〉 Lucentius a Bishop and 〈◊〉 a priest; 
a Leo. ep. 42.  and after having added to them upon the occurrence of the celebration of the Council 〈◊〉 
Leo ep. 47 Leo ep. 39 & 54.  Bishop of Lylibea in Sicilia; and having associated with him julian a latin Bishop of the Isle of Cos in the Grecian Sea, who was already in those parts, and resided as Nuntio at Constantinople with the Emperor; he declared to the Emperor not in form of a request, but in form 〈◊〉 a resolution, that it must be this Paschasinus Bishop of Lylibea, of whose sufficiency and constancy to maintain the truth, he had more assurance then of the rest that should preside in his name at the Council; as also 〈◊〉 was there the head of the legation, and carried the vote in the conclusion of the Council, though he had been last sent. Now who seeth not that this was not to demand, that his legates might preside there, but to appoint which of his legates should preside there? I have (said he) 
Leo. Ep. 47.  sent my Brother and fellow-Bishop Paschasinus of the Province, which seems to me most secure, that he may fulfil my place, and have associated with him our brother and fellowe-Priest Boniface, comprehending with them, those that we had already formerly sent; to whom I have added for a Colleague the Bishop julian. And a little after; Because some of our brethren, a thing which we can not speak of without grief, could not keep their Catholic Constancy, against the whirlwinds of falsehood, it is Convenient that my said brother and fellowe-Bishop Paschasinus should preside in my place in the Synod. For whereas Calvin saith, That by those brethren that could not maintain their Constancy against the whirlwinds of falsehood, he intended not the legates of the Pope which had withdrawn themselves, but the Bishops of the East, who had presided at the false Council of Ephesus; to wit, Dioscorus; it is an ignorance that deserves the Ferula, since Dioscorus and his complices, were themselves the whirlwinds of falsehood. And indeed why should Pope Leo in the Epistle that Calvin citeth of him which was written under the Consulship of Adelphius, have prayed the Emperor that he might preside by himself, or by his legates at the Council of Chalcedon, since from the precedent year, that is to say, under the consulship of Valentinian and Abienus, and before it was known there should be any Council holden at Chalcedon, the Emperor had written to him; Our desire is, that 
Marcian. Imp. ad Leon. ep. 33. in proeam. Concil. Chalc. Id. ep. 34, 〈◊〉.  all impiety being banished by a Council assembled under your authority, an entire peace may be restored to all the Bishops of the Catholic faith. And again, It remains, if it please your Holiness, that you travel into these parts, and celebrate a Synod here etc. or if it be troublesome to come hither, your Holiness may please to signify it by your letters: Which Theodorus Anagnostes citing the same letters, repeats in these terms; Marcian and Pulcheria writ to Leo Pope of Rome, yielding to him all authority: And how could he have prayed the Emperor, 
Theodor. Anag. Collect. l. 1. ad calc. hist.  since without attending the Emperor's answer, and the next day after he had sent him the letter, he writ to the Council: The Emperor 
Eccl. Theo dor. in edit. Graec.  hath invited us by his letters, to contribute our presence at the reverend Synod, which the necessity of time and Custom will not permit; nevertheless, your brotherhoods may make account, that in these brothers of mine, Paschasinus and Lucentius Bishops, 
Robert. 〈◊〉. Leo ep. 45  and Boniface and Basilius priests, sent from the Sea Apostolic, I do preside in your Council? For the letter the Pope writ to the Emperor, was dated the sixth of the calends, of julie; and that he writ to the Council, was dated the fifth. And why should he have prayed him, since in the secular 
〈◊〉. Imp. Marcian in fiu Conc. Chalc.  confirmation of the Acts of the Council, the same Emperor saith: The Council of Chalcedon hath examined matters of faith, by the authority of the Blessed Leo Bishop of the City eternal in glory Rome? And why, since the Fathers of the Council writ to the Pope; Thou didst preside in the Council, as 
Conc. Chalc ep. ad Leon. p. 3.  the head to the members, exhibiting there thy good will by those that held thy place; And the faithful Emperors presided there, for policy and ornament? And why since the Emperor Anastasius a while after, pressing Macedonius Patriarch of Constantinople to race out of the roll of his Church the name of the same Council of Chalcedon, Macedonius answered him; That he could not do it without 
Theodor. Anagn. ubi supra. l. 2.  a general Council wherein the Bishop of great Rome did preside.   

Of the order of the sit of the fifth Council of Constantinople. CHAPT. XII.  
Calvin's fifth objection is, That Menas presided at the, fifth Council 
Inst. l. 4. c. 7.  of Constantinople; And that the Pope being called thither, debated not the first place, but without any difficulty, suffercd Menas Patriarch of the place to preside. Which is an objection, wherein ignorances march by troops. For first Menas was dead five years before, the fifth Council of 
Conc. oecu. 6. Act 3.  Constantinople was holden as appears by the Acts of the fixth Council 
Vict. Tun. in Chron. anno 13. post. Cons. Basil.  of Constantinople, which say Menas died the one and wenntith year of the Empire of justinian: but the fisth Council of Constantinople was holden the twenty seventh. And by Victor of Tunes an author of the same age, who, saith, That the fifth Council of Constantinople, was holden under Eutychius 
Conc. 5. oecum. Act. 1. 2. 3. 4. & seqq.  Successor to Menas: And by the very Acts of the fifth general Council in all the Sessions whereof Eutychius is named, and not Menas. For what we have from the Council of Constantinople under Menas, are but particular acts and preambulatory to the General Council, which was 
Euagr. hist Eccl. l. 〈◊〉 c. 36.  after holden under Eutychius, which hath given occasion to Euagrius and to Nicephorus, to mistake and to think that the fifth Council of Constantinople had been begun under Menas and finished under Eutychius, as impertinently as the same Euagrius placeth Epiphanius between Anthymus and Menas, and maketh Epiphanius succeed Anthymus, whereas chose he was his predecessor. And secondly Pope Agapet, who went to Constantinople, not to assist at any Council, but to treat a peace between the Emperor justinian and Theodat king of the Goths, was dead, when the Council of Constantinople holden under Menas, was celebrated; And by conseuqent had no 
Conc. Const. sub 〈◊〉. Act. 1.  occasion to debate for the first place; and Siluerius his Successor in whose time this Council was holden never was at Constantinople. And suppose Agapet had been living and present at the Council, how could Menas have presumed to preside in his presence; he that said 
Menas. in Conc. Const. Act. 4.  in the same Council; We follow the Sea Apostolic & obey it? And who had been made Patriarch of Constantinople, and his Predecessor 
Marcel. Come in Chron. Men. in Conc. Const. Act. 4.  Anthymus, deposed from the Patriarkship of Constantinople by Pope Agapet; And who calls Pope Agapet, his Father of most holy memory? And how would the Emperor Jusiinian have permitted it, he that said; We will not suffer that any thing shall pass concerning the estate of 
Cod l. 7.  Churches, but what should be referred to the blessedness of the holy Pope of old Rome; for as much as he is the head of the holy Prelates of God: And 
Iust. novel 131.  again; We decree according to the definitions of the four Counsels. that the holy Pope of old Rome, be the first of all the Prelates; and we ordain, that the blessed Archbishop of Constantinople new Rome shall have the second place after the holy Sea Apostolic of old Rome, and shall precede all the other Seas. Also how would he have permitted it, he that forsook his great friend Anthymus, whom he had exalted from the Bishop's Sea of Trebysond, to the Patriarkship of Constantinople, and suffered him to be deposed in his presence from the Patriarkship of Constantinople by Pope Agapet? We know (saith he law of the Emperor Justinian) that the same hath been done to Anthymus, who hath been 
Iust. nou. 42.  deposed from the Sea of this Royal city, by the most holy Bishop of old-Rome Agapet of holy and glorious memory, because that against all the sacred canons he had intruded himself into a Sea that appartained not to him. For what he adds presently after (but he hath also been deposed and condemned by the common sentence, first of that person of holy memory, and then of the holy Synod here celebrated, because he had strayed from the right doctrine,) hath reference not to the deposition of Anthimus of the Patriarkship of Constantinople as the Patriarch Nicephorus and Cedrenus supposed, authors far from the age of Justinian, but to the deposition of Anthimus from the Bishop's Sea of Trebisond.  
For the understanding whereof, you must know that there were two depositions of Anthymus, one from the Patriarkship of Constantinople, which was made and perfected by the Pope's only action; and wherein the Council of Constantinople, whereof justinian speaketh, had no hand; and the other from the Bishop's Sea of Trebyzond, which was indeed begun by the Pope, who ordained, that if Anthymus did not purge himself of the heresy which was imputed to him, he should be deposed also from the Bishop's Sea of Trebisond, which had been reserved to him by the first deposition, and should be withal excommunicated and deprived of all Sacerdotal title, and of all Catholic nomination. But because the Pope could not finish this second deposition, by reason death prevented him before he had the leisure to be fully cleared from the condition that was thereunto opposed, it was finished and executed in the Council. This appears by the Acts of the same Council, whereof justinian speaketh, to wit, of the Council of Constantinople holden by Menas; for the confirmation whereof, was published two months after, this law which is annexed to the end of the Council. For the action that precedeth it, is the last, although it be first recited God (say the Regulars of Syria, in their petition to the Emperor, reported by the same Acts) sent into this city Agapet, truly Agapet, that is to say, beloved of God and man, 
Conc Const sub Men. act. 1.  Pope of old Rome, for the deposition of Anthymus, and of the foresaid heretics, as 〈◊〉 he sent great Peter to the Romans for the destruction of the witcheraft of Simon. This reverend person then knowing by the requests of many of ours, the things injustly attempted upon the Churches, and knowing them by sight, would not so much as admit into his presence Anthymus transgressor of the canons, but justly deposed him from the Episcopal Sea of this city. And a little after; After 
Conc. sub Men. act. 1.  the Bishops of Palestina assembled in this city, and the other Eastern Bishops, that is to say, of the Patriarkships of Antioch and jerusalem, and the deputies of the others Bishops, and we, did again present petitions touching Anthymus and the other heretics, and demanded that Anthymus should certify his believe by libel to the Sea Apostolic, and should purge himself from all heretical errors, and in this case should return to the Church of Trebisonde; or if he would not do it, that he should be finally condemned and deposed from all sacerdot all dignity and action. And a little beneath; These our just requests, the same most holy personage, 
Ibid.  to wit Agapet, preventing them, and seeing Anthymus had failed to appear, he condemned him with the foresaid heretics, and despoiled him of all office and dignity sacerdot all, and of all title orthodoxal, even till the penance of his errors. And 
Ibid. a&. 4.  the Fathers of the Council itself in the sentence of the Synod; The blessed Pope Agapet of most holy and happy memory, setting with God his hand to the sacred canons, deposed Anthymus from the Sea which appartained not to him, pardonning those which had participated or communicated in this act; that is to say, Peter Patriarch of Jerusalem, and other of the East. And a little after; 
Ibid.  But because that even in doctrine, Anthymus was burdened with infinite accusations, and that many petitions and supplications were presented against him, and by diverse reverend personages to a most religious Emperor, and to the most blessed Pope; the same most blessed Pope, after much pain taken with a fatherly care, to call back his soul etc. pronounced a sentence by writing against him full of clemency and seemly holiness, granting him time of repentance, and ordaining, that till he had changed his opinion, and satisfied the doctrines canonically defined by the Fathers, he should neither have the title of a Catholic nor a Prelate. From whence it appears, that the Pope had made two diverse depositions of Anthymus, and in two differing times, one from the Patriarkship of Constantinople, and that grounded upon discipline, because against the canons Anthymus was exalted from the Bishop's Sea of Trebisond, to the Patriarkship of Constantinople: And the other from the Bishop's Sea of Trebisond, which had been reserved to him by the deposition from the Patriarkship of Constantinople, and that grounded upon doctrine, because Anthymus was accused and defamed for heresy. But the difference that was between these two depositions, was that the first, I mean, that from the Patriarkship of Constantinople, was absolute and definitive, and made and perfected by the Pope, without the helping hand of any Council. For whereas within the petition of the Bishops of the Patriarkships of Antioch and Jerusalem to the Pope, the latin interpreter hath unaptly translated Exossavimus Anthymum, you must say, 
Conc. sub Men. act. 1.  you have cast forth Anthymus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as it appears by this that follows; And our Emperor hath participated in your good 
Ibid.  work. And the second; to wit, that from the Bishopric of Trebisond was by provision, and conditional, and tempered with this clause until penance, which left the sentence depending, and subject to revocation, in case that Anthymus should appear and purge himself of heresy. Now the Pope died before he had leisure to attend whether Anthimus would come to repentance, and purge himself both of the contempt and of the heresy, which was imputed to him. For this cause then, the Council of Constantinople holden under Menas, taking it up where the Pope left it, and making an end to fulfil all the formalities required to clear the doubt of the condition, cited Anthymus again, and seeing he appeared not, executed the second sentence of the Pope against him, and deposed him from the Bishopric of Trebizond, and from all Sacerdotal and Catholic title, but without touching in any sort the deposition already made and perfected from the Patriarkship of Constantinople: Weé (say the 
Conc. Const sub Men. act. 4.  Fathers of the Council) following those things well examined by the blessed Pope, ordain that he shall be cast out of the body of the holy Church of God, and despoiled of the Bishopric of Trebizond, and deprived of all Sacerdotal dignity and action, and according to the sentence of the most holy Pope of the appellation of Catholic. For whereas the narration of the sentence of the Council, & the law of justinian reporting the history of the same sentence, places amongst the causes of Anthymus deposition, the transgression that he had made of the Canons in usurping the Sea of Constantinople, that makes nothing toward inferringe, that the deposition that the Council decreed against him, should be the deposition of the Patriarkship of Constantinople; forasmuch as the Council reported the memory of this usurpation, not to depose him then from the Patriarkship of Constantinople, from which the same Council testifies, that he had already been entirely excluded; but to aggravate the crime for which it would depose him from the archbishopric of Trebizond, to wit heresy, by a commemoration of his fore going crimes, as it appears both from the disposition of the sentence of the same Council, and from that of the sentence of Menas who presided there, and from the repetition which was made of it in the Council of jerusalem holden under Peter Patriarch of jerusalem: In all which places there is nothing spoken of, but the deposition of Anthymus from the archbishopric of Trebizond, and not from that of the Patriarkship of Constantinople. And indeed, how could the Council of Constantinople where Menas presided, touch the deposition of Anthymus from the Patriarkship of Constantinople, and Menas vote there in quality of Patriarch of Constantinople, since Menas had been promoted to the Patriarkship of Constantinople by the deposition of Anthymus? For of this 
Conc. Const sub Men. act. 1.  all the ancient monuments are of agreement: Agapet (say the Syrians to the Emperor) hath justly deposed Anthymus from the Episcopal Sea of the city of Constantinople; and with the help of your Imperial authority cooperatinge and lending a hand to the divine canons, have proposed the holy Menas to the same 
Marcell. Comes in Chron.  Church. And Marcellinus Comes of the same time with Menas: Agapet being come from Rome to Constantinople, drove away soon after his arrival Anthymus from the Church, saying, that according to the Ecclesiastical rule, he was an adulterer, because he had left his Church, and had packed for another, and ordained the Priest Menas Bishop in his place. And Liberatus of the same time with 
Liberat. in breviar. c. 21.  Marcellinus: The Empress promising in secret great presents to the Pope, if he would suffer Anthymus in his Sea; and on the other side tempting him with threats; the Pope persisted in not harkninge to her request; and Anthymus seeing he was cast out of his Sea, gave up the mantle that he had to the Emperors, and retired himself to a place, where the Empress took him into her protection. And then the Pope infavour of the Emperor, ordained Menas Bishop in his steed, consecrating him with his own hand. And Victor of Tunes of the same time with Liberatus: Agapet 
Vict Tun. in Chron.  Archbishop of Rome, came to Constantinople, and deposed Anthymus Bishop of Constantinople, usurper of the Church, and enemy to the Council of Chalcedon, and excommunicated the Empress, and made Menas Bishop of the Church of Constantinople. An admirable effect of the power of S. PETER'S Successor in the time that the Church of Constantinople was most flourishing and triumphant, & the Church of Rome chose, most abated & afflicted: when Constantinople was the Seat of the Empire, & the mansion of justinian the Emperor conquering and victorious; and that Rome on the other side was no more a city, but a tomb and carcase of a city, a servant and slave of the Goths a barbarous and Arrian people, a poor Pope, that the tyranny of Theodat king of the Goths, who otherwise threatened him to root out the Roman Church, had forced to transport himself into the East, to solicit the Emperor justinian to withdraw his arms out of Italy; and so poor, as he was fain to sell the sacred Vessels of his Church, to perform his voyage, being in Constantinople a stranger and without support, yea evil received and entertained by the Emperor; nevertheless deposeth and casts out of his Sea, Anthymus Patriarch of Constantinople, powerful in means and favour about the Emperor, and whom the Emperor and the Empress had exalted from the Bishopric of Trebizond to the Patriarkship of Constantinople, and pardons the Bishops of the East, who had communicated with him; and excommunicates the Empress, who obstinately defended him, and established Menas in his place: And Calvin will have it, that Menas who was Agapets' creature, preceded Agapet in the Council of Constantinople, in whose time Agapet was already dead; and wherein there is never mention made of him, but with this title of Agapet of holy memory: What an Argus is he in antiquity?  
But, at the least will Calvin reply; the Bishops of Italy that assisted with Menas at the Council of Constantinople after the death of Agapet, did not preside there. It is true: But what will this reply serve him for, but to increase his shame? for these Bishops were no more the Pope's deputies when the Council was holden, and had no commission to be there, but were Bishops, Priests, and Deacons which were long before come out of Italy for other businesses, 
b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  and whose legation was finished both by the arrival and by the death of Agapet, and who assisted not at the Synod, which was no general Council, but a simple council of the Patriarkship of Constantinople, and of some strange Bishop's resident at Constantinople; but for honour sake; and by virtue of the Emperor's commandment as exlegates, and not as Legates. Neither must he hope to escape by this excuse, that he pretended to speak of Uigilius and not of Agapet, for Vigilius was neither Pope nor present at Constantinople, when the council of Constantinople holden under Menas was celebrated.  
Less yet can Calvin save himself, by saying that his intention was to speak of the council holden under Eutychius: for Uigilius who was then Pope, was neither present by himself, nor by his Legates, and consequently had not occasion to hold the second place; but confirmed it by writing: 
c Concil. Const. 6. act. 18.  Vigilius (saith Euagrius) 
d 〈◊〉. hist. Eccl. l. 4. c 〈◊〉.  consented by letters with the Council: And Photius: 
e 〈◊〉. de sept Synod  Vigilius approved by writing, the faith of the Fathers. And that he refused to assist there, it was not (as Nicephorus a Schismatical author 
f Niceph. hist. 〈◊〉: l. 17. c. 27.  and later by many ages pretends) because he disdained to receive the Bishop of Constantinople into one Seat with him, that is to say, that he would have sat in a seat more exalted. For how should that have been put in dispute, since the same Nicephorus saith, 
g Id. c. 9  it had been practised twenty eight years before by Pope john, who had sat within Constantinople in a throne exalted above Epiphanius Patriarch of the place, and that (adds he) 
h Ibid.  not to abandon the prerogative of the Sea Apostolic, But forasmuch as he saw the Emperor resolute to cause the three chapters to be condemned, so were called certain writings of Theodorus of Mopsuestia, of Ibas, and of Theodoret, which had been read in the council of Chalcedon, and feared that if this condemnation should be made, the Bishops of the Provinces of the West not being present, it might beget a schism between those of the West, and those of the East. For those of the West held, that to condemn those three chapters, it was to give advantage to the Entychians, and to make a breach in the Council of Chalcedon, who had received into their communion, Ibas and Theodoret authors of those writings and defender of Theodorus of Mopsuestia; and those of the East contrariwise held, that to maintain them, was to give advantage to the Nestorians, and to oppose the Council of Ephesus, which had condemned the doctrine therein contained, and denied that to censure them, was to do wrong to the Council of Chalcedon, who had indeed received Theodoret and Ibas into their communion, but after they had made them detest the doctrine of Nestorius. For this occasion, though Pope Uigilius in his particular condemned 
Conc 5. act. 7. & 8.  these three chapters, yet he would not assist at a Council, wherein they should go about to condemn them publicly, unless it had been a general Council, and wherein the Bishops of the West had been present, aswell as those of the East: And he admitted not the reason alleged by the Legates of the Council, that in the other general 
Conc. 5. act. 2. in relat Legator. Conc.  Counsels there had been few Bishops of the West, forasmuch as those few Bishops of the West which had been in other general Counsels, went thither after Counsels holden upon the same matter in the West, whose resolution they bearing with them, they carried the voice of all the western Church into the East.  
To this fear there concurred also that that Vigilius, had to renew the opinion that was held of him during his Antipapacie, I say during his Antipapacie, because in the beginning Uigilius was intruded into the Papacy by the private suit of the Empress, who was an Eutychian, his predecessor Siluerius a true and lawful Pope, 
a Liber. in breviar. c. 22.  still living, & with this simoniacal and heretical covenant not only to condemn the three chapters, but to approve the faith of Anthymus; which he did; and therefore sometimes as false Pope, and sometimes as an abettor of heretics, he was excommunicated by the true Pope Siluerius, 
b Silver. ep. ad Vigil  and by the Bishops that adhered to him, and amongst others by the Prelates of Africa. 
c Victor Tun. qui Chronic.  For those that suspect that Liberatus, 
d Laurent. Sur. In not. ad Liber.  the most exact monument that we have of antiquity hath been depraved in the fall of Uigilius, are mistaken; seeing Victor of Tunes, 
e Victor. in Chron. an. 2. post Consul. Basil.  timefellowe of them both, recites the same history; but after, Siluerius being dead, and Vigilius having been for the good of peace accepted by the election of the clergy of Rome, he became true Pope, and then so far was he from communicating with Anthymus, that contrariwise he rather chose to suffer all kind of disgraces, then to consent to it; yea, he went so far, as to condemn the same Empress, who had exalted him to the Papacy, as S. GREGORY testifies in these words: 
f Greg. l. 2. indict. 10. epist. 36. Paul. Diac. siue Theophan. hist. l. 17. & alij.  The Pope Uigilius constituted in the royal city, (that is to say, at Constantinople) published a sentence of condémnaiion against Theodor a then 〈◊〉, and against the Acephales'.  
This than was the cause why Uigilius assisted not at the fifth Council, but if he had assisted there, who doubts but he had presided, since the letters that Eutychius Patriarch of Constantinople writ to him to obtain the celebration of the Council, imported thus much: We require that 
Concil. 5. act. 1.  your Blessedness presiding over us under the Sacerdotal tranquillity and meekness, 
Ibid. act. 5. in histor. Concilij Mopsuest.  the holy Gospel being set in the middle (which was a form of obligation by oath, to vote according to conscience) the three chapters which are in question, may be examined? Well do I know that the minister junius would correct these words; presidente nobis vestrâ be atitudine; and change them into these, 〈◊〉 nobiscum vestrâ be atitudine. But who seeth not, this is a corruption, and no correction? For besides that this clause, under the Sacerdotal quiet and peace, presuppose presidency, and not simple residency, doth not the Pope repeat the request of Eutychius in these words: Your brotherhood hath required that we presiding (vobis praesidentibus) the three chapters might be examined? And after when the Council deputed all the patriarchs who were there in person, Eutychius Patriarch of Constantinople, 
g Conc 5. act. 1.  Apollinarius Patriarch of Alexandria, Domnus Patriarch of Antioch, and seventeen of the principal Metropolitans with them to the Pope, to beseech him to assist at the Council: is it not enough to testify, that they acknowledged the Pope for the Chief of the patriarchs, and that if he had assisted at the Council, he had presided there? And when the Emperor 〈◊〉 writes to the Bishops of the Council of Mopsuestia, that they should inform what had passed about the 〈◊〉 of the name of 〈◊〉 
Ibid. act. 5.  of Mopsuestia, from the records of his Church, and adds; And sends two 〈◊〉 thereof, one to us, and the other to the most holy Pope: Is not this enough to testify, that if the Pope had bène at the Council, he had presided there? And when the fifth Council itself inserts within the acts thereof, the relation of the Council of Mopsuestia to the Pope, and inrolles it in thesé words; They made also a relation to the most holy Pope Vigilius which 〈◊〉 
Ibid.  these words; It is very convenient, o most holies, (so called they the Pope in the plural number, to give him the more respect) since you hold the first 〈◊〉 of the priesthood, that those things which concern the state of the holy 〈◊〉, should be represented to your divinely honoured Blessedness. Is it not enough to testify, that the Pope had primacy over all the other Bishops, and that if he had 〈◊〉 at the 〈◊〉 he had presided there? And when Marcellinus Comes an author of the same age, saith; that within the cathedral Church of Constantinople, where the Patriarch of Constantinople should principally keep his rank, Pope john predecessor to Agapet, was set at the right hand that is to say at the right hand in regard of the 〈◊〉; and within the right Tribunal of the Church; dexter dextro insedit Ecclesia solio: And if we believe Nicephorus, in a 〈◊〉 eminent and exalted. Is not this enough to show, that if the Pope had assisted at the council of Constantinople, he had presided there? And when the Greek historians report that Macedonius Patriarch of Constantinople, who lived forty years' 〈◊〉 the fifth general Council finding himself pressed by the Emperor Anastasius to blot out of the records of his Church, the name of the council of Chalcedon, answered, That he could not do it, without a general 〈◊〉, 
Theodor. Anagnost. Collect. l. 2. ad calcen hist. Eccl.  wherein the Bishop of great Rome should 〈◊〉: Is not this enough to testify, that if the Pope Vigilius had assisted at the Council, he had presided there? And when the Emperor justinian himself, who caused the Council to be celebrated saith; We ordain according to the definitions of the four holy 
Theod. in edit. 〈◊〉. Robert. Steph. 〈◊〉. nou. 151.  Counsels, that the most holy Pope of old Rome, should be first of all the Prelates; and that the 〈◊〉 Archbishop of Constantinople, should be the second after the holy Sea Apostolic of old Rome, and should precede all the other Seas. And elsewhere; The Pope is the head of all the holy 〈◊〉 of God: Is it not enough to show, 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 1. l. 7. impr. Paris. An. tuerp & Geneu.  that if the Pope had been at the Council, he had presided there?  
But the Council (〈◊〉 the Pope's adversaries) was celebrated notwithstanding the Pope was neither at it by himself, nor by his deputies. It is true, forasmuch as the Fathers of the Council had already drawn a writing from the Pope, whereby he had promised them to consent to the holding of a regular Council, that is to say, complete, and to assist at it: We agree (said he) that assembling a regular Council, equity being observed, 
Concil. 5. act. 1.  and the sacred holy gospels being set in the middle, we united with our brethren will confer of the three chapters. But those that make this observation, add yet five more to it; the first, that it was not held for general, but since the Pope confirmed it; & that while it was celebrated, although all the other patriarchs assisted at it either personally or representatively; in any of the acts, it never took the title of General. Uigilius (say the Fathers of the sixth general Council) consented to 〈◊〉; and the 〈◊〉 
Conc. Const 〈◊〉. 6. act. 18.  Council was established. The second, that howsoever Pope Vigilius refused to be there, although he was in Constantinople itself and under justinian's halberds, the Council never passed to proceed against him. The third, that the great African light Primasius Bishop of Adrumeta, whose writings do to this day illustrate the Catholic Church, being within Constantinople, and being cited by the Council to assist at it, preferred the Pope's authority before the citations of the Council, & answered those that summoned him from the Council; The Pope not being there present, I 
Concil. 5. act. 2.  will not go. The fourth, that the strongest and last persuasion that the Emperor used to the council, to dispose them to the condemnation of the three chapters, was to send them particular writings of Pope Uigilius, whereby he had condemned them. And the fifth, that till three or four 
Ibid. act. 7.  Popes after Vigilius, whose intention was a long while called in question; Pelagius, S. GREGORY, and Sergius had confirmed this council, there were both in the West and East so many schisms and oppositions against it, and so many Bishops and counsels, that supposed that it was to gain the crown of martyrdom, to dye for resisting it; some believing Pope Vigilius never confirmed it, and others believing that Pope Vigilius who was said to confirm it, was not true Pope, forasmuch as he had intruded into the Papacy, his predecessor being yet living, that whatsoever threatenings, banishments and punishment the Emperor justinian employed upon it he could never compass it, neither he nor his next successors; but this is enough for this objection of Calvin, let us go on to the rest.   

Of the order of the sit in the sixth Council of Carthage. CHAPT. XIII.  
Calvin's sixth objection is taken from the sixth Council of Carthage: In the sixth Council of Carthage (saith Calvin) 
a Inst. l. c. 7.  Aurelius Archbishop of the city presided, and not the Ambassadors of the Sea of Rome. Now we might send him to dispute this matter with Hincmarus' Archbishop of Rheims of almost eight hundred years' antiquity who said contrariwise, speaking of the sixth Council of Carthage: 
b Hinemar. ep. ad  The Council of Carthage where the Sea Apostolic presided by his Vicars. Nevertheless lest it should seem to be a delay, the best will be to try it out in the 
Nicol. apud Flodoard. hist Eccl. Rom. l. 3.  field. To this objection than we will bring three answers; the first that there is nothing more uncertain than the Rolls of the sit, and signatures of Counsels, where the copies vary and mistake at every turn, sometimes following the order of the persons sending, sometimes the order of the persons sent, sometimes the order of the time of their arrival, sometimes the errors in the writing which slip in, in the transcription of lists and Catalogues as it appears, besides an hundred other proofs by the repetition of one of the Sessions of the first Council of Ephesus, inserted into the latin copy of the Council of Chalcedon, in which Arcadius, Proiectus and Phillippus, the Pope's legates, 
a Concil. Chalc Act. 1.  are named, not only after all the Bishops, but even after Bessula Deacon and legate of Carthage, which was the order of the time of their arrival; and nevertheless, the greek original of the same Council of Ephesus, placeth them in all the Sessions whereat they assisted immediately after saint CYRILL first legate of the Pope; and as it appears by the thing itself which is presented by the testimony of Hincmarus; for Hincmarns affirms particularly, (that the Sea Apostolic presided by legates, at the Council of Carthage, in these words; 
b Hincmar ubi supra.  The Council of Carthage where the Sea 〈◊〉 presided by Uicars. The second that there where diverse kinds of legates, some which represented the negotiating person of the Pope, as 〈◊〉, Agents, Nuntios, Apocrisaries, and Ambassadors; and others, which represented the judiciary person of the Pope, as Cathedraticall Vicars and legates, a kind only necessary for general Counsels, where the Body of the Church speaks with her head, and not for particular Counsels, as this of Carthage was. Now amongst these deputies, some held the rank of those that sent them, and others not, for in the Council of Chalcedon, 
c Council Chalc. Act. 1. &. seqq.  justinian Bishop of Cos, legate or rather Nuntio and Ambassador from the Pope to Constantinople, although he bore the 〈◊〉 of the Pope legate at the Council, nevertheless sat not with the other legates of the Pope, but after the patriarchs and among the 〈◊〉; and at the Council of Constantinople holden under Menas, the Ambassadors of the patriarchs of Antioch and jerusalem were not set in the rank of their patriarchs, but in the rank of their simple personal dignity, and after the Archbishops and Bishops. 
a Conc. Const. sub. 〈◊〉. A & 1 2. 3. &. 4.  And the third Answer finally is, that in the sixth Council of Carthage, the legation of the Pope's deputies was finished by the death of Sozimus, who had sent them the year before, and had not been renewed by Boniface his Successor, whose creation they knew well, for they procured 
b Conc. Carth. 6. c. 6. & 5.  and charged themselves 
c Conc. A●ric. c. 100  to carry him the Counsels letters, but they had not yet received any commission from him, and treated only upon the memories that they had brought from his predecessor. By means whereof, they were no more the Pope's legates, but Exlegates, continuing nevertheless in office to solicit for the rights of the Roman Church that they had begun in the former Council; and for this cause bearing for honour sake in the signatures, the title of the Legates of the Roman Church, but not the title of legates or Vicars of Pope Boniface then sitting. And indeed if they had been then, in the actual quality of the Pope's Vicars, and Cathedraticall Vicars; that is to say, representing the judiciary person of the Pope, they had been set one with an other, and had all signed in the rank of Bishops. Now this was not so, for Faustinus Archbishop of Potentia assisted but in his simple rank of Archbishop, below Aurelius' Archbishop of Carthage and Valentine Archbishop of Numidia, and Phillippus and Asellus were not there in the rank of Bishops; but sat and signed as simple priests after all the Bishops; where as in the Council of Ephesus which was general, the same Philip priest 
d Conc. Ephes. impress. Heid. Act. 1. & Rom. Act. 4.  as Vicar, deputed to represent the judiciary person of the Pope, was set with saint CYRILL and Arcadius likewise the Pope's legates before all the other Primates, Archbishop, s and Bishops. It it true that Faustinus, Phillippus, and Asellus, had been either nuntios or legates to Pope Sozimus in a Council holden the year before at Carthage under the twelfth consulship of Honorius and the vl of Theodosius as it appears from the discourse and from the Epistle of the sixth Council of Carthage, but of this Council (for that which is inserted under the date of the same consuls in the rhapsody of the Counsels of Africa speaks not of the Pope's legates) there remains to us no piece whereby we may judge whether the Pope's agents presided, or presided not; only it appears, that the authority of the Pope was very eminent there, for it was sent to Rome and confirmed by the Pope, as Prosper an author of the same age testifies in these words: 
e Prosp. in Chron.  Under the 12th. Consulship of Honorius, and the vl of Theodosius, a Council of two hundred and fourteen Bishops, having been holden at Carthage, the Synodical decrees were carried to Pope Sozimus. Which having been approved by him the heresy of Pelagius was condemned throughout the world. And again; 
f Id cont. Colla●.  Pope Zosimus annexed to the decrees of the African Counsels, the force of his sentence, and for the extirpation of the wicked, armed the right hand of all the Prelates, with the sword of Peter.   

Of the order of the sit in the Council of Aquilea. CHAPT. XIV.  
THE seaventh objection of Calvin is, That there was a general Council 
〈◊〉 inst. l. 4. c. 7.  kept even in Italy, to wit, (adds he) the Council of Aquilea, wherein saint AMBROSE presided for the credit that he had with the Emperor. Now this objection, is the crown & masterpiece of all Caluins objections for matter of impertinency: For first S. AMBROSE did not preside there, but Valerianus Bishop of Aquilea; the Bishop of Milan and the Bishop of Aquilea having been in such sort equals & parallels until the time of 〈◊〉, as when the Bishopric of Milan was vacant, as Pope Pelagius the first tymefellowe to justinian notes it, the Bishop of Aquilea ordained him of Milan: And when the Bishopric of Aquilea was vacant, the Bishop 
Pelag Pap. 1. apud Grat. c. 24 q. 1.  of Milan ordained him of Aquilea; by means whereof, each of them in his Diocese had his rank before the other, and in any third place, the ancienter of the two preceded, as at the Council of Rome, S. AMBROSE preceded Valerian, and at the Council of Aquilea, Ualerian preceded S. AMBROSE. It is true S. AMBROSE disputed there more than the rest because of his learning: And Aurelius Bishop of Bologna after him which deceived the author of Synodica, published by the Minister Pappus a greek author & meanly instructed in latin affairs, & many others with him. But he presided not there, if we give credit to the acts of the Council, which are couched in these terms; Under the consulship of Eucherius and Euagrius in the nonce of September, there were set in the Church of Aquilea, Ualerian, 
Act. Conc. Aquil.  Ambrose, Eusebius, Limenius and others. And then if he had presided there to what purpose was it to interpret that it was for the favour the Emperor bore him. Was not S. AMBROSE an Archbishop, & Archbishop of Milan, a city saith S. ATHANASIUS, metropolitan of Italy, 
Athan. ad solit. vit. agent.  that is to say, not of all Italy, but of that part of Italy which was subject to the pretoriall Perfect of Italy, and which was particularly called Italy, to distinguish it from the provinces subject to the Provost or Vicar of Rome? and therefore what marvel had it been, that the Council of Aquilea being celebrated in the metropolitan city of Istria, which was one of the provinces of Italy, and subject to the Vicar of Italy, that is to say, to the Vicar of the Provost of the Pretory of Italy in Italy, and the Pope not being there, neither by himself, nor his Legates, if S. AMBROSE, who was both the most ancient Archbishop, & the Archbishop of Milan, metropolitan of Italy had presided there? And secondly the council of Aquilea which lasted but half a day, was not a general council, but a particular Council, compounded only of the Bishops of Lombardie & of Provence, & of one Bishop of Illiria, and of some deputies of Africa, & of the Gauls: for there were in all but thirty Bishops, amongst which there was but one only Legate, neither of the Pope, nor of the other Patriarches. Now how could it be general if there were no Bishop of the East, nor any Patriarch nor patriarchs Legate? Nay how could it be general, since the only reason that Palladius the heretic made that he would not answer there was, that it was not a general Council? We have promised (said he) that 
Act. Conc. Aquil.  we will prove that we are Christians, but in a general Council; we answer you not, lest we should prejudice a future Council. Nay, how could it have been universal, since the Fathers of the Council themselves confessed 
Ibidem.  in their Epistle to the Emperor; That is was not reasonable that for two wretched heretics, the Churches of the whole world should be abandoned by their Bishops? Nay how could it have been general; since the same year the general Council of Constantinople was celebrated? for the Council of Aquilea was held in September under the consulship of Euagrius and Eucherius; and the Council of Constantinople was assembled the same year, not in the month of May as Socrates and those that have followed him have conceived, but upon the end of Autumn as it appears by the words lately cited from 〈◊〉, and by the very epistle of the Council of Constantinople to the Pope, 
n Theod. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 9  where the Fathers testified, that the Council of Constantinople had been called after the holding of that of Aquilea. It is true it had been projected at the beginning to have holden a larger Council at Aquilea, but because the adversaries were not judged worthy that for them there should be called a quantity of Bishops necessary neither for a general Council, not for a patriarchal Council, the Pope not only abstained from sending, but also presently after the celebration of the Council of Aquilea, as being nothing less than universal, set himself to cause a general Council to be celebrated; and to this effect called by his letters addressed to the Emperor Theodosius, the Bishops of the East to the Council of Constantinople; Witness these words of the same Bishops to Pope Damasus; 
o Theod hist. Eccl l. 5. c. 9  We were come to Constantinople at the arrival of the letters from your Reverence sent after the Council of Aquilea to the most religious Emperor; And held himself a Council of the Bishops of the West at Rome, where assisted the chief of those that had been at Aquilea; And amongst others saint AMBROSE Archbishop of Milan and Valerianus Archbishop of Aquilea; and in the which presiding, he approved what had been done at Constantinople; and by this approbatron, made the Council of Constantinople 〈◊〉. For whereas it is 〈◊〉 that in this concourse of Counsels it was not the Council of Rome whereat the Pope was present, that obtained the title of a General Council, but the Council of Constantinople; It sufficeth to say, that it was because the Symbol of faith which was published there against Macedonius, was composed in the Council of Constantinople, whereat there assisted the Bishops of the Provinces, where the question was disputed and was but confirmed, and not composed at the Council of Rome; and that the Counsels ecumenical by concourse took their name from the place where the Symbol of the Faith was composed, and not from the place where it was only confirmed.   

Of the calling of Counsels. CHAPT. XV.  
THere followeth the calling of Counsels, that Calvin affirms to have been only done by the Emperors: The General Council (saith Calvin) 
a Calvin. inst. l 4. c. 9  was never declared but by the Emperor, and the Bishops were called by his authority. Now from whence doth he infer this? Upon this, that the Counsels bare on their brow the convocations of the Emperors. Fine and subtle logiquel as if it had been an incompatible thing that the Emperors should call the counsels, in regard of temporal authority, to make them obligatory to the secular Tribunal, and executory by the ministry of the officers of the Emperor, and to take away the crime of treason and the hindrance of politic laws, which forbade them to make any assemblies, 
b D. de collegijs illicitis. l. 1.  but with permission of the Emperors; And that the Popes (without whom (said Socrates) 
c Soc. hist. Eccl l. 2. c. 8  the Churches cannot be ruled; or according to the translation of Epiphanius followed by Cassiodorus, 
d Hist. tripart. l. 4. c. 9  the counsels cannot be celebrated) should call them in regard of spiritual and Ecclesiastical authority. But rather, as if it had not been a thing perpetually used and practised, that the spiritual authority of the Popes, should be required with the temporal authority of the Emperors; that is to say, that there were two convocations of Counsels; the one Ecclesiastical to make them obligatory in conscience, and spiritually; and the other Politic, to make them executory by the secular arm, and temporally.  
For first, as for the ensign bearer and forerunner of all the general Counsels, which is that of Nicaea, the Fathers of the third general Council of Constantinople, otherwise called the sixth general Council, Greek Fathers, as hath been already often noted, of near a thousand years' antiquity, and enlightened by many histories that time hath subtracted from us, did they not say; The most sacred Constantine, 
Concil. oecumen. 6. act. 18.  and the praise worthy Silvester, called the famous council of Nicaea? And as for the Council of Sardica, which was the appendix and supply of that of Nicaea, the demand that Eusebius of Nicomedia head of the Arrian faction made after the Council of Antioch to Pope Julius of a Council which since it could not be general at Rome, was afterward appointed at Sardica; and the complaint of those that blamed the same Julius for the little time that was given them to assemble at Sardica, doth it not teach us, that the Pope had cooperated with the Emperors in the calling the Council of Sardica: Eusebius (saith S. ATHANA: 
Athan. de fuga sua Apol.  SIUS) and his writ to julius, and to amaze us, required that he would call a Council: For you must read there with the greek text, that he would call a Council; and not with the latin translation, that a Council might be called. And again, 
e Idem ad solit.  julius writ back, that there should be a council held where we would. And the same julius reported by S. ATHANASIUS; Your deputies (said he, answering the Eusebians) 
f Id. apol. 2.  have solicited me to call a Council, and to write to Athanasius into Alexandria, and to those of the Eusebian party, to the end that in the presence of all, the cause might be defined in just judgement. And Socrates; 
g Soc. l. 2. c. 20.  There was a general Council published at Sardica a city of Illyria by the ordinance of the two Emperors. And a little after; Others complained of the brevity of the time, 
h Ibid.  and laid the blame upon julius' Bishop of Rome. Which Harmenopolus himself, though a late greek and a schismatic, 
Harm. in epitome. can  acknowledgeth in these words; By the advice of the Emperors, and of the Bishops of Rome, there assembled a Council of three hundred forty one holy Fathers at Sardica, which confirmed the Council of Nicaea. For that he accounts not the Council of Sardica for universal, because the Arrians separated themselves from it, makes nothing to the purpose of the convocation, which at least was universal. There was (said Socrates) a general Council published.  
And as for the Council of Constantinople, these words of the epistle of the Bishops of Constantinople to Pope Damasus, and to the Synod of Rome, celebrating by the will of God the Synod of Rome; You 
Theodor. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 9  have called us with a brotherly Charity, as your own members, by the letters of the most Religious Emperor: And a little after; But the execution of this 
Theodor. hist. Eccl. l 5. c. 9  desire was impossible to many, for we were gone to Constantinople upon your Dignities letters sent the year last passed, after the council of Aquilea, to the most religious Emperor Theodosius; Do they not sufficiently demonstrate, that Pope Damasus by his letters written the year before; that is to say, before the Synod of Rome, and when he was yet alone, had concurred with the Emperor, or rather the Emperor with him, for the calling the Council of Constantinople, and for the first council of Ephesus; which only of the name, deserves the title of council (for the second was excluded from the rank of counsels:) Do not those words of Liberatus Archdeacon 
Liberat. in breviar. c. 5  of Carthage, an African Author, and of near a thousand one hundred years' antiquity; Cyrill with his, provided with the Uicarship of the Sea Apostolic, having called a Council of two hundred Bishops cited Nestorius: Do they not testify that it had been called at the instance, and with the cooperation of S. CYRILL Patriarch of Alexandria, already before made Vicar and executor of the Pope's authority in the East?  
And as for the council of Chalcedon these declarations of the Emperor Martian to Pope LEO, whéns there was a question of holding the council afterward transferred to Chalcedon; 
a Concil. Chalc. P. I.  Our desire is, that all impiety being banished by this council celebrated under your authority, an entire peace may be restored to the Bishops of the Catholic faith: And again; 
b Ibid.  There rests, if it please your Holiness that you come into these parts, and here celebrate the Synod, that you will deign to do it for the zeal of Religion. And a little after; Or if it, be burdensome to you, to come hither, that you will signify it to us by your letters 
Ibid.  that we may dispatch our sacred Patents into the East, and into Thracia and Illiria, that all the most holy Bishops may assemble in some such place as shall seem good to us, and decree by their sentences, things profitable to Christian Religion and Catholic faith; as your Holiness according to Ecclesiastical rules hath defined it. And these of the same LEO; It hath pleased, both to the ordinance of 
Epist. 〈◊〉.  the most Religious Emperors and to the consent of the Sea Apostolic, that the general council of Chalcedon should be called. And these of the Bishops of the second Moesia, to the Emperor Leo, translated from greek into latin by Epiphanius, at the instance of Cassiodorus; The faith of the incarnation of 
Cassiod. de 〈◊〉. lect. c. 11.  our Saviour, hath been confirmed by many Bishops assembled by the commandment of the Roman Pope Leo, who is truly head of Bishops and of Anatolius Patriarch of Constantinople, in a council celebrated under the two Emperors: Do they not evidently prove, that Pope LEO cooperated with the Emperors 
Ep. Episc. Moes. pro Coc. Chalc  for the calling of the council of Chalcedon?  
And for the second general council of Constantinople, which we call the fifth general council; this answer of the Pope Vigilius to the letters of the Patriarch of Constantinople; Having known your desire by your 
Conc. Const 〈◊〉. act. 1.  demands; we agree, that for the three chapters in question, there shall be made a regular council, where preserving equity, the holy Gospel being set in the midst, we united with our brethren, may confer. Doth it not make plain that the holding this Council had been preceded by the Pope's consent and permission? For the Council was assembled in the month of May, the twelfth year after the Consulship of Basilius; and the Pope's answer 
Ibid.  had been made in the month of january before. And these words of the sixth Council; Vigilius consented to justinian, and the fifth Council was established: 
Conc. oecum 6. act. 18.  Do they not convince, either that the convocation or the confirmation of the Council, was taken from the Pope? And that a while after, john Patriarch of Constantinople having gone about as Bishop of the second Rome, to participate with the Pope, in the title of Universal Bishop, would attribute to himself the authority of calling General Counsels in the East; is it not a manifest proof that the authority of the spiritual calling of Counsels, appertained to the Popes? It hath been (saith Pope Pelagius the second in his Epistle to those of the East, 
z Pelag. 〈◊〉. ep. 1.  cited by saint GREGORY) reported to the Sea Apostolic, that john Bishop of Constantinople, hath entitled himself Universal Bishop, and by 
a Gregor. l. 7. Indict. 2. ep. 69.  virtue of this his presumption, hath called you to agenerall Council although the authority of calling General Counsels be attributed by a singular privilege to the Sea Apostolitk of saint PETER.  
And for the sixth general Council, which was holden under the Emperor Constantine Pogonat, and in the same city of Constantinople that the Emperor would not call the Bishops of the Eastern part of the Empire which was separated for the Monothelite heresy, from the obedience of the Sea Apostolic, till first the Pope had called the Bishops of the western part to Rome; 
b Epist. Const. Imp. ad Patriar. Constant. Concil. 6. Act. 1.  and till the legates from the Pope, and from the Council of Rome, were come to him; doth it not presuppose that the spiritual authority of the Pope, did flow together with the temporal authority of the Emperor, or rather preceded it for the celebration of Counsels? And that the same Council speaking to the Emperor allegeth to him for the image and parallel of his Acts, as well as of his name the example of the great Constantine in these words; Constantine Augustus, and Pope Silvester of Reverend memory, called the famous Council of Nicaea, Doth it not confirm it? And for the second Council of Nicaea which is the seaventh general Council, what Pope Gregory the second had answered a while before to the Emperor Leo the Iconolast, 
c Concil. 6. Act. 18.  who desired to cause a Council to be holden for the business; 
d Greg. 〈◊〉. ad Leon. ep 1.  Thou hast written that a general Council might be holden, but it seemeth not fit to us. And again; 
e Ibid.  Put case we had hearkened to thee, and the Prelates had been gathered from all the earth, and that the Senate and the Council had been set, where had the religious Emperor the lover of Christ been, to sit there according to custom? And that which the Fathers of the Council allege amongst the nullities of the Synod of the Iconoclasts; 
f Council oecum. 7. Act. 6.  It had not for cooperator, as that 〈◊〉 which now is celebrated, the Pope of Rome nor his Prelates, neither by his Legates, nor by circular letters (that is to say, addressed to all the provinces) as is the law of Counsels; doth it not insinuate, that the Pope's authority was required with that of the Emperors for the lawful celebration of Counsels: Now these are all the general Counsels which have been celebrated from the age of the Apostles till the separation that Photius made of the Greek church from the latin. For as for the Council of Constantinople surnamed Trullian, that the greeks call, the supply of the sixth Cowcell; For as much as the sixth Council which was holden under Constantine Pogonat, having made no canons; some of those Bishops that had been present, reassembled themselves ten years after under justinian the second his Son; and made some certain canons which they published with the title of canons of the sixth Council; I meddle not with it because none of the Bishops of the West assisted there and consequently it was not general. It is true, that Balsamon, 
g Balsam. in proef. Concil. in Trull  and after him Nilus' 
h Nil. 〈◊〉 prim. Pap. l. 2.  Archbishop of 〈◊〉 saith, that he had seen in one of the copies of the same Council Trullian, a catalogue of signatures, which also is at Rome and which hath been printed with the Greek Texts of the Council; from whence it is collected, that Basilius Bishop of Gortina, Metropolitan of the Isle of Crete, and legate of the Council of Rome, and a certain Bishop of Ravenna assisted there. But he forgetts like a Greek Schismatic as he is, to tell two other things; the one, that the title of legate of the Council of Rome that this Basilius bore, had no reference to what he was then; for there was no Council holden in the west for the preparation of the Council surnamed Trullan; but to what he had been in the sixth Council whereto he had signed with this title 
i Concil. 6. Act. 18.  Basilius unworthy Bishop of Gortina, Metropolitan of the Isle of Crete, and Legate of all the holy Synod of the Sea Apostolic of old Rome: And the other, that even in the sixth Council, he bore this title, but as a title of honour, and not as actual Legate either of the Pope, or of the Council of Rome; I said, neither of the Pope, nor of the Council of Rome, because the Pope, and the Council of Rome at the express request of the Emperor sent two distinct legations, 
k 〈◊〉. Imp ad. 〈◊〉. Pap in Proeamb. Conc. 6.  a thing never before heard of to the sixth Council; whereof the one, to wit that of the Pope, was of two Priests, a Deacon, and a subdeacon, who sat before all the patriarchs of the sixth Council. And the other, to wit; that of the Council of Rome, was of three Bishops, who sat after the patriarchs, to show that they were two distinct legations. Now neither in the one nor other of these two legations, had Basilius' Bishop of Gortyna, (who was neither of the Body of the Clergy of Rome, nor of the body of the Council holden at Rome,) been named, as it appears aswell by the Pope's letters, as by those of the Council of Rome. 
l Concil. oecum. 6. Act. 4.  Only it happened that this Basilius being the Pope's ordinary legate in the Isle of Crete, for those things which concerned the jurisdiction of the Sea Apostolic in his Province; as he of Thessalonica in the province of Macedonia; and he of Corinth in the Province of Achaia: The legates of the Council of Rome finding him in those parts, for honour's sake associated him, and him of Corinth not with the legates of the Pope, but with them; For he subscribes with the legates of the Council of Rome, who signed after all the patriarchs, and not with the Pope's Legates, who signed before all the patriarchs. 
m Concil. 〈◊〉. Act. 18.  But this association was only for the sixth general Council. And that afterward in the Council surnamed Trullian he continued to attribute to himself the name of legate of the Council of Rome; it was as a memorial of the honour he had received in the sixth Council following the custom of the greeks, who when they have borne a title in any solemn action, preserve it many years after in memory of the honour they have once received. And it will nothing avail to say, that at least he was the Pope's legate in the Isle of Crete, when he assisted at the Council surnamed Trullian; for there was great difference between the Metropolitans, honoured with the Title of the Pope's legates in their Provinces, and whose legation was attributed to their Seas; As the Archbishop of Arles amongst the Gauls; 
n Greg. Magn. l. 4. Indict. 14. ep. 52. & 53  The Archbishop of Thessalonica in Macedonia; 
o Leo ad Anast. Thess. ep. 82.  The Archbishop of Corinth in Peloponesus; And the Synodical Legates deputed from the Pope or the western Church to the general Counsels, forasmuch as the one contributed to the universality of the Counsels, the authority of those that sent them; and the others conferred no more, but that of their own persons, or their particular Provinces. And therefore the assistance of Basilius Bishop of Gortyna at the Council surnamed Trullian, wherein he held not the place of the Pope, but signed after all the other patriarchs, yea after some Metropolitans, 
p Concil. in Trull. in subscript.  did nothing avail to make it general. And as for the Archbishop of Ravenna, he signed not: from whence it is, that Balsamon could not tell his name, but because his predecessor had assisted by Attorney at the sixth Council, whereof the Council Trullian pretended ro be a supply; a place to sign in, was reserved for him, as one absent, in these words: 
q Concil. Trull. in subscript.  The place of the Bishop of Heraclea, of him of Ravenna, and of him of Corinth. Therefore even from that, from whence Balsamon infers, that the Bishop of Ravenna assisted at the Council surnamed Trullian; to wit, from the roll of the subscriptions; we collect the contrary, that he assisted not there at all. And indeed, if the Bishop of Ravenna, or any other Western Bishop had assisted there, how could that Council have commtited the error it did commit, besides, 〈◊〉 others, in approveing the Council of Carthage holden under saint CYPRIAN, for the rebaptisation of Heretics? 
r Concil. Trull. c. 1.  For there was not a Bishop in the West so ignorant, as not to know, that the Council holden under saint CYPRIAN was an erroneous Council, whose doctrine was condemned by the Roman Church, and had been the seed and original of the Donatists hear sies. For if they object with Balsamon and 〈◊〉, that the Council surnamed Trullian, that would be taken for a supply of the sixth general Council, and pass the Canons thereof, for canons of the sixth General Council, attributes to itself in the forefront of their decrees, the title of General; Council we answer that it was not because it was so, but because it expected to be so, by the addition of the Western Church, and of the Pope, for whom there was a blank left to sign in, above all the patriarchs, in these words, 
s Concil. Trull. in subscript.  A place for the most bolie Pope of Rome; A thing that plainly shows, that the Pope had no deputies there. Now so far was the Pope and the Western Church from signing to it, as contrariwise they prepared themselves rather to endure 
〈◊〉  Martyrdom. For the Emperor having sent the copy of the Council 〈◊〉 to Rome, to pray the Pope to set to his subscription, the Pope rather chose to incur all the Emperor's hatred and persecution, then to consent to it, as BEDA an author of the same age testifies in these words: The Emperor justinian the second (saith he) 
t Bed. de se aetatib.  having sent Zacharie his Constable, commanded him to confine Pope Sergius to Constantinople, because he would not favour the 〈◊〉 Council that he had made at Constantinople, and had refused to sign it. But the Garrison of Ravenna, and of the neighbouring place prevented the impious commands of the Emperor, and repulsed 〈◊〉 with outrages and injuries, from the City of Rome. And it is not to be said, either that Pope Adrian praised the allegation that Tarhasius Patriarch of Constantinople had made in his synodical Epistle of the eightith two canon of that Council against the Iconoclasts: Or that the legates of the same Pope Adrian did not oppose themselves against the apology that Tarhasius Patriarch of Constan tinople made for the canons of that Council, at the second Council of Nicaea. For that Pope Adrian praised the allegation of Tarhasius, it was not because of the authority of this Council that Tarhasius had cited under the title of the sixth Council, but because of the doctrine of the canon which was sound and orthodoxal; and that not only the Pope's legates, did not oppose themselves against it, but alsoe some Popes have alleged it, against the Iconoclasts, it was because the arguments taken from those canons were good, in regard of the greeks that had received them; And besides that if the authority of the Sea Apostolic had been wounded in the Council Trullian by the proceedings of the Emperor justinian Rhinotmete this wound had been in some measure repaired by the same Emperor with his other crimes; when at Pope Constantine's arrival in the East, He prostrated himself (saith BEDA) 
v Beda de sexoetatib.  on the Earth before him, and praying him to intercede for his Sins, renewed to him all the privileges of his Church.  
But against this prescription, the adversaries to the Sea Apostolic, frame three principal objections; The first, that Ruffinus speakeing of the Council of Nicaea saith, 
w Ruff. hist. Eccl. l. 1. c. 1.  that the Emperor by advice of the Churchmen called a 〈◊〉 at Nicaea, and maketh no particular mention of the Pope. The second, that julius reproached the Bishops of the Council of Antioch, 
x Socrat. hist. Eccl l. 2. c. 17. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. c. 10.  That they had not called him to their Council. And the third that saint JEROM treating of a Council holden amongst the Gauls cries; 
y Hier. contr Ruff. Apol. 2.  What Emperor commanded this Synod to be called? To the first then of these objections; which is, that Ruffinus saith; That the Emperor by the advice of the Clergy, called a Council at Nicaea; We answer, that although Ruffinus, because of the hate he bore to the Roman Church, from whence he had been excommunicated for his errors, whould not express the history but in general terms, and by these words; by the advice of the Churchmen; Nevertheless, he always gives it to be inferred from thence, that the ecclesiastical authority preceded the Imperial convocation; and that the Imperial convocation, was but an execution of the Ecclesiastical advice; For whereas saint EPIPHANIUS saith; 
z Epiphan in heres. Melet.  That the care of Alexander, Bishop of Alexandria, moved Constantine to assemble the Council; this word, moved, excludeth not the means and intervention of the Pope, to whom Alexander had written of it by especial letters; as Liberius testifies to the Emperor Constantius in these terms; 
a Liber. epist. ad Constant. in fragm. Hilar. & apud. Lucif Caral.  We have the letters of the Bishop Alexander to Silvester of holy memory, & by consequent is not incompatible with these words of the third general Council of Constantinople; 
b Conc 6 oecum. Act. 18.  Constantine Augustus and Pope Silvester of Reverend memory, called the famous Council of Nicaea.  
To the second opposition, which is, that julius reproached it to the Bishops of the Synod of Antioch, that they had not called him to their Council; from whence the Adversaries of the Sea Apostolic infer, that it did not belong to the Pope to call Counsels; We answer, that the objection is not valide; and the reason of the nullity is; that this was not a general Council, to which the convocation of the Pope, either mediate or immediate was necessary; but a particular Council of the Bishops of the Patriarkship of Antioch which the Patriarch of Antioch might call alone, and at which the other Bishops who were but in small number, assisted but by aggregation. And therefore the Pope doth not reproach it to them, that their Council was not called by him, or at his 
c Socr. histor. l. 2. c 17.  instance, but for 〈◊〉 much as that Council which was a particular Council, had undertaken, as compounded of Arrian Bishops, who violated all order and discipline, to decide things that concerned the universal Church ordaining in hate to saint ATHANASIUS; That every Bishop, that after he had been deposed by a Synod, should continue still to perform episcopal functions, without having been first reestablisht by an other greater Synod, should be incapable of restitution; and that the laws of the Church bore, that there could no decrees be made in the Churches; that is to say, as Calvin himself interprets it, 
d Inst. l. 4. c. 7.  for things regarding the universal Church, without the Sentence of the Bishop of Rome, he reproacheth it to them, that they had exceeded the power of a particular Council; That is to say, had decided the affairs which concerned the general government of the Church, without having invited him to assist at it, either by himself, or by his Legates. A thing, that if we were stripped of all other arguments, would sufficiently show the Pope's authority; for if the absence of the Pope alone and not of any other Patriarch or Metropolitan, were an impediment to the making of decrees, to oblige the universal Church; how can it be, but the Pope must be head of the Church, and Superior of the other patriarchs?  
To the third objection, which is, that saint JEROM speaking of a certain 
e Hier. Apol. advers. Ruff. l. 2.  Council holden amongst the Gauls, cries; What Emperor hath commanded this Synod to he assembled? From whence they infer, that the Emperors only called the general Counsels. We answer, it is a very Sophism; for the Council whereof saint JEROM spoke, was not a general Council, but a particular, that Ruffinus pretends to have been holden in Gaul against saint HILLARY. Now we agree of all sides, and Calvin himself confesses it, 
f Calvin. Inst. l. 4. c. 7.  that the Metropolitans, Primates, and patriarchs called particular Counsels. And the Counsels of the western Church holden at Rome by Pope DAMASUS in the time of the heresy of the Macedonians; by Pope Celestine against the heresy of the Nestorians; by Pope LEO against the heresy of the Eutychians; by Pope Agatho against the heresy of the Monothelites, enforced the most obstinate to confess, that the Pope, if not as head of the universal Church, yet at least as Patriarch of the West, called the patriarchal Counsels of the western Church; and not only called the patriarchal Counsels of the Western Church, but alsoe when there was need, caused to be called extraordinarily, the national or provincial Counsels of such a Nation or Province of the West, as he thought to be necessary; as it appears; for Africa from these wordoes S. AUGUSTINE; 
g Aug. Epist. 157.  The Ecclesiastical necessity enjoined us by the Reverend Pope Zosime Bishop of the Sea Apostolic, had drawn us to Caesaria; And for Macedonia, Achaia, and Thessalia; from these of Pope LEO to Anastasius Bishop of Thessalonica, his Legate in those provinces; 
h Leo ad Anast. Epist. 82.  If There be any mayor cause moved, for which it shallbe necessary, to cause an Episcopal assembly to be called, let it suffice thee to call two Bishops of every Province such as the Metropolitans shall choose. And for Spain, from these of the same LEO; 
i Id epist. 91.  We have sent letters to our brethren and fellow Bishops of Arragon, of Carthagena, of Portugal, and of Galitia, and haue declared to them the assembly of a general Council; that is to say, general for Spain. In which place, they must not cavil upon the word, Council, and convert it into Counsel; For the first Council of Bracara, reporting the same history, saith, 
k Conc Brac 1. in praefac  By the commandment of Leo the Bishops of Arragon; Carthagena, Portugal and Andaluzia held a Council amongst them. But besides the spiritual authority, were it of Metropolitans, Primates, and patriarchs for the calling of particular Counsels, be it of the Popes as we pretend for the calling of general Counsels, the temporal authority of the Emperors was alsoe requisite aswell to avoid state jealousies, and hinder suspicions of conspiracies against the Empire, as to take order for the Charge of transportations, Staples, and provisions, and to furnish the costs of the voyages, which the Churches then newly out of the persecution of the Pagans could yet hardly bear. And therefore when there was question of calling not only general Counsels of all the Earth, but alsoe the general Council of the Western Church, the temporal authority of the Emperors, concurred with the Spiritual authority of Popes for the execution of the convocation. The Emperor Valentinian, saith Pope Sixtus the third tymefellowe to saint CYRILL, 
l Ep. ad Orient.  hath commanded by our authority, that the Synod should be called. And when there was question of calling national Synods, if it were within the countries of the Empire, the authority of Emperors or of their lievetenans, was also required; and if it were within the eclipsed countries or not depending from the Empire, that of the Kings of the nations where it was to be celebrated, must be joined thereto; as when the first Council of Bracara in Spain was called, it is said it was called, 
m Conc. Brac. 1. in praes.  by the commandment of the glorious King Ariamira, or according to others, Theodomina. And when the second Council of Tours speaks of the first Council of Orleans holden under Clovis it is said, it was done, 
n Conc. Turon. 2. c. 22  at the request of the most invincible king Clovis. And when the second Council of Mascon was holden under King Gontran, it was ordained, 
o Concil. Matisc. 2. c. 20.  that the ordinary national Counsels should be celebrated from three year to three year; and that the care to cause them to be assembled, appertained to the Bishop of Lion, and the disposition to the most magnificent Prince. Now if the temporal convocation of national Counsels made by the Emperors, or by the Princes of the Nations, were 〈◊〉 impediment, but that the spiritual convocation of the same Counsels might be due to the Primats of the Nations; Why should the temporal convocation of general Counsels made by the Emperor be an impediment why the authority to call them spiritually; that is to say, in behalf of spiritual and ecclesiastical power, might not belong to the Pope?  
For that then as we have newly said, the authority of Emperors was necessary; and 〈◊〉 to make the decisions of Counsels executory by the Secular arm, and by the ministers and officers of temporal justice, who otherwise would not have laboured to punish corporally those that should contradict. And that is the cause wherefore the Fathers of the Counsels were so careful to set this title in the forefront of their acts; The most holy and general Council called by the authority of the most religious Emperor; to the end to make their decrees executory temporally, and by the ministry of the Secular Tribunal, but not to make them obligatory in conscience and spiritually. For when was it (saith saint ATHANASIUS) 
p Ath ad solit. 〈◊〉. à 〈◊〉,  that the judgement of the Church hath ever taken authority from the Emperor? And indeed who can doubt, but that if there had been any general Council holden under the Pagan Emperors, the Christians had been obliged in conscience and to the spiritual Tribunal of the Church, though it had not been called by them. And that if the Turk should ever make himself universal monarch of the world, and that there should be a general Council holden under 〈◊〉 Empire, the Christians should be obliged in conscience, and to the spiritual Tribunal of the Church though it were not called by him. And then if the authority necessary to make general Counsels obligatory in conscience, aught to be perpetual and always to have place; how can that be by imperial authority, which hath been divided into so many parcels, as at this day in a manner the least part of it belongs to the Empire. For the convocation of the plurality dispersed, must depend from an unity, and from an unity that hath authority over every individual of the plurality: as the ancient Emperors themselves acknowledged that of the Pope to be, when they ordained, 
q Non 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 24.  That every Bishop that being called to the Pope's judgement, should 〈◊〉 to come, should be constrained by the Governor of the Province to appear. And therefore as often as our adversaries cry out; such an Emperor called such or such a Council so often they lose their time and their labour. For we are agreed, that whilst the Emperors were Monarches of the world, or of the greater part of the world, they called them all in regard of temporal authority; but we say besides, the secular authority of the Emperor, which was necessary to make the convocations of Counsels authentical temporally must an other authority intervene; to wit, a spiritual and ecclesiastical authority, to make it lawful and authentical spirituallle, and to make that the Counsels may be said to be called from God, and obligatory in conscience, and to the Spiritual Tribunal of the Church. Now that we maintain to have been the authority of him who was the principle & centre of ecclesiastical unity, 
r Cypr ad Cornel. ep. 15.  and the head of all the Bishops, and without whose sentence it was unlawful to make definitive laws in the Church; to wit, the Pope, 
〈◊〉. Cod. 〈◊〉. 1. l. 7.  whose authority for this regard ought to concur with the authority of 
t 〈◊〉. hist. Eccl. l 2. c. 8.  the Emperors, either actually or virtually. I said either actually or virtually, for as much as it sufficed for the spiritual validity of the convocation of Counsels, that the Popes did either call them or cause them to be called, or approved their convocation. For when the Emperors called them, either at the Pope's instance, or with the consent and approbation of the Pope: the spiritual convocation of the Pope was always reputed to intervene as also the Catholic Emperors, and which abstained from tyrannising over the Church never called them but when the Pope required it of them, or they required it of the Pope; And when they were required by the Pope, they were always ready to call them, although that for the places where they should be celebrated, the Emperors because of the commodities or incommodities of the State, reserved the election to themselves. For whereas the Emperor Constantius refused Pope Liberius, who demanded of him that a general 
Theod. hist. Eccl. l 2. c. 16.  Council might be holden for saint ATHANASIUS cause; it was the refusal of an Arrian Emperor, no less an enemy to the Sonn of God, then to saint ATHANASIUS. And whereas the Emperor Arcadius refused 
Sozom. hist. Eccles l. 8 c. ult.  Pope Innocent, who sent, (saith Sozomene) five Bishops and two priests of the Roman Church to the Emperors, to demand of them a Council for the cause of saint Chrisostome, and sent saint CHRISOSTOME into a more remote banishment, it wasatyrannicall act of an Emperor possessed by the Enemies of this holy man.  
For this then the temporal convocation of the Emperors was necessary, to wit, that the ministers of the Empire who were obliged by the politic and imperial laws not to suffer any assemblies without the Emperor's permission, should not hinder them; & that the Estate should have no colour of jealousies; and that the officers of the city should furnish the charges Staples, and transportations of the Bishops, and that the Counsels should be kept at the expenses of the imperial Exchequer; and that finally the decrees of Counsels might be obligatory to the secular Tribunal, and executory temporally, and by the Ministry of the politic Magistrate; but not that the convocation of the Emperors was of the essence of the Council, as that of the Popes was; nor served to make them obligatory in conscience, and to the spiritual Tribunal of the Church, no more than the Presidency of the same Emperors at the Counsels, either by themselves or their Officers was of the essence of the Counsels, as that of the Pope was, but only for comeliness and ornament, and for keeping order and temporal policy; witness this language of the Council of 〈◊〉 to Pope LEO the first; Thou didst 
Conc. Chalc ep. a l. Leon.  preside by thy legates in the Council, as the head to the members, and the Emperors presided there for seemliness and ornament, striving with thee as Zorobabel with jesus, to renew in doctrine the building the jerusalem of the Church. For what means this comparison of Pope LEO with jesus high Priest of the jewish law, and of the Emperor Marcian with Zorobabel Prince of the jewish people, but that there was like analogy in Christian Religions, between the Pope and the Emperor for the holding of Counsels, as there was in the jewish Church between the high Priest which was jesus, and the Prince of the people, which was Zorobabel for the building of the Temple; that is to say, that the one, to wit the Pope should concur there as head of the Priesthood and spiritual jurisdiction: and the other, to wit the Emperor; should concur there, as head of the politic and temporal jurisdiction; and therefore when there is question of the calling of Counsels, there must be a distinction between the spiritual calling of Counsels, and the temporal calling of Counsels; that is to say, between the convocation necessary to make their assembly authentical temporally, and the convocation necessary to make their assembly authentical in conscience and spiritually. In the first case there was nothing to be determined between the Popes and the Emperors; for none doubts, but the authority necessary to call general Counsels temporally, and to make them executory by the secular arm, was the authority of the Emperors, no more then at this day any doubts, but the authority necessary to make the convocation of national Counsels authentical temporally must be that of the Kings or Princes within whose estates they are to be holden. In the second case, there was yet less, for as much as it is evident, that the authority necessary to legitimate in conscience the convocation of Counsels; and to make them obligatory spiritually, must be a spiritual and ecclesiastical authority, a temporal Magistrate not being able to confer any spiritual authority to Counsels. And indeed when the Emperors have pretended to call general Counsels without being moved thereto, or seconded by the just ecclesiastical authority, those Counsels have been declared illegitimate, not only by the final issue of their judgements, but by the original vice of their form, if the Pope's confirmation did not come in to correct the defect. For the Council of Arimini which was compounded of four hundred Bishops, and which had been called by the Emperor Constantius, was declared invalid, not only for the issue of the judgement, but for this cause amongst others, saith the Council of those of the West, reported by Theodoret, That it had been holden without the consent of the Bishop of Rome, whose sentence 
Theod. hist. Eccl. l. 〈◊〉. c. 22.  should first of all have been attended. And in the Council of Chalcedon, the first complaint that was made against the false Council of Ephesus, that the Emperor Theodosius the second, surprised by the fraud of the Eutychians, had called without the Pope's authority, although with a request to the Pope, to assist at it, or to send to it was, That Dioscorus presumed to hold a Council without the Bishop of Rome's 
Concil. Chalc. Act. 1.  permission, which had never been lawful or before done, By means whereof, all the question of the spiritual and ecclesiastical authority necessary from the part of the convocation to make Counsels lawful in conscience and obligatory to the internal Tribunal of the Church, is between the Pope and the other patriarchs; and consists in this to wit, to whom, either to the Pope, or to the other patriarchs it belonged to call Counsels spiritually. Now who doubts but it must be to him of the patriarchs that ought to preside there, and the defect of whose presence either mediare or immediate, rendered the Counsels invalid? And who sees not, that even if the Pope had not been the direct Successor of saint PETER; if he had not been his Vicar, in whose name all Counsels ought to be called; if he had not been the centre of the ecclesiastical unity and Communion, if he had not been the Bishop as saint CYPRIAN saith, of the chair of Peter, and of the principal Church, 
Cyp. ad Cornel. ep 55.  from whence the Sacerdotal unity proceeded; and in brief, had he not been superior in authority to the other patriarchs, but only the first of them in order, it belonged to him to call them, as it did anciently to the Precedent of the senate, to call the Senate? And therefore when Pope Gelasius saith; The Sea Apostolic only decreed that the Council of Chalcedon should 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉.  be holden; It is not to the exclusion of the Emperor, that he makes this restriction but to the exclusion of the other patriarchs. And when Pope Pelagius S. GREGORY'S predecessor writes; The authority to call general Counsels, hath been attributed by a singular privilege, to the Sea Apostolic of holy Peter. It is not to the exclusion of the Emperors, that he 
Pelag. 2. epist. ad Orient.  makes this limitation, but to the exclusion of the other patriarchs, and particularly of the Bishop of Constantinople; for the Bishop of Constantinople pretending by the creation of his city, into the title of the second Rome, to have been made equal to the Pope, not in regard of the Pope, as hath been above said, but in regard of the other patriarchs had dared to presume to participate in the East, in the title of universal Patriarch; which 
before c 7.  title the Pope had received at the Council of Chalcedon; and in continuance of this presumption, had endeavoured to call a general Council; that is to say, a general Council of the Empire of the East in the East. To the end then to repress his arrogance, the Pope put him in mind that the power to call general counsels; that is to say, the general counsels, aswell of all the Empire, as of the particular Empire of Constantinople, as a ease exceeding the simple patriarchal authority, belonged to the only direct and absolute successor of S. PETER; It hath been reported to the Sea Apostolic (saith the same Pelagius, writing to the Bishops of 
Pelag. 2. epist. ad Orient.  the East) that john Bishop of Constantinople hath entitled himself universal, and by virtue of this his presumption, hath called you to a general Council: he means, the general Council of the East whereof Euagrius speaks, called for the cause of Gregory Patriarch of Antioch) notwithstanding that 
Euagr. hist. Eccl. l. 6. c 7.  the authority of calling general Counsels, hath been attributed by a singular privilege to the Sea Apostolic of the holy Peter. And a little after; And therefore all that you have decreed in this your not Council, but conventicle; I ordain by the authority of holy PETER Prince of the Apostles, etc. that it be disannulled & abrogated. Which S. GREGORY the great also reports in these words: Our predecessor Pelagius of happy memory, hath abrogated by a sentence entirely 
Gregor. Magn l 7. indict. 2. ep. 69.  valid, all the acts of this Synod, except what concerned the affair of Gregory Bishop of Antioch of happy memory. Now doth not this alone suffice to decide the whole question? For if the Bishop of Constantinople under pretence of the equality that he challenged to have obtained with the Pope in superiority over the other patriarchs, presumed to call the general Counsels of the East: why is it not manifest, that the authority to call general Counsels, forasmuch as concerns spiritual and Ecclesiastical power, belonged to the Pope? And if it were so, when the Emperors possessed almost all the Regions of the Empire, and when the Catholic Church was spread almost over all the other patriarkships, how much more now when that the Emperors hold but the least part of the Estates of the ancient Empire, and that the Catholic Church is almost reduced into the provinces of the patriarkship of the Pope, or to those, that by the conversion of countries newly discovered, have drawn their mission and Ecclesiastical jurisdiction from them? But here is enough of the calling of Counsels; let us go forward to the other Articles.    

CARD. PERRONS REPLY TO THE KING OF GREAT BRITAIN, THE THIRD BOOK.  

Of Appeals. CHAPT. I.  

The continuance of the Kings Answer.  
FOr 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 observation; (that is to say, of a contrary observation to 〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉 had said, that those which were excommunicate by any of the Churches, were presently acknowledged to be 〈◊〉 of through all the Catholic Church,) it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   

THE REPLY.  
AND what doth this then signify, that Theodoret speaking of the 〈◊〉 that the 〈◊〉 made of saint ATHANASIUS Patriarch, of Alexandria, at the tribunal of Pope Julius, writeth: Julius following the law of the Church commanded them to come to 
Theod. hist Eccl. li 2 c. 4.  Rome, and cited the divine 〈◊〉 in judgement? And what doth this then signify that 〈◊〉 faith, that after the same ATHANASIUS; 〈◊〉 of Alexandria; Paul Bishop of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Marcellus Primate of 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 Asclepas Bishop of Gaza in 〈◊〉; And Lucius Bishop of Andrinopolis in Thrace, had been deposed by diverse Counsels of the 
Soz. hist. Eccl. l. 3 c. 7.  〈◊〉 of the East, The Pope restored them every one to his Church; because to him for the dignity of his Sea, appertained the care of all things? And what then doth this signify, that the Emperor Valentinian, writ to the Emperor Theodosius, that Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople 
〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. Conc. Chalced.  deposed in the second Council of Ephesus had according to the custom of Counsels, appealed to the Pope? And what then doth this signify, that the senators of the Council of Chalcedon say in the restitution of Theodoret Bishop of Cyre 〈◊〉 a town bordering upon 〈◊〉, who had been deposed in the same Synod of Ephesus, and had appealed from it, to Pope LEO: Let the most religions 
Conc. Chalc Act 1.  Bishop Theodoret come in, that he may partake of the Council, for as much as the most holy Archbishop Leo hath restored him to his Bishopric? For as for the impertinent shift of those that answer, that the restitution that the Pope makes of Bishops which had been deposed by the Counsels of their Provinces, was but a simple declaration, that he was of opinion they ought to be restored, and not a formal and iuridicall restitution; And likewise, that the deposition that he made of the Bishops or Priests of other Provinces, was but a declaration, that his opinion was, that they ought to be deposed, and not a formal and iuridicall deposition; what can there be imagined more unapt and more ridiculous? Is there so young a Novice in the laws, that knows not how differing these things are, to be of opinion that a man ought to be absolved, and to absolve; or to be of opinion, that a man ought to be condemned, and to condemn him: And that if all the Parliaments of the world had pronounced that it was their opinion, that a criminal person ought to be condemned, he were not condemned thereby, unless they pronounced plainly, we have condemned and do condemn him? for as much as the one is an act of science and the other is an act of authority; and that the least doctors can do the one, and only judges the other. But why said I so young a Novice in the laws? Is there a man so destitute of common sense as can not discern, that when the Pope restores any one, who had been deposed by the Council of his province, if the Pope's restitution were but a simple advice, that he ought to be restored; he that had been deposed, had not more right to return into his Bishopric after the restitution then before; And that his diocesans were no more obliged in conscience to receive him, than they were before. Moreover, if the Pope's restitution, were but simply an advice; that he that was deposed, aught to be restored, what end would there be of Ecclesiastical contentions? for the Bishops that had deposed him, being of opinion that he ought to be deposed, and the Pope being of opinion that he ought to be restored, if the Pope's restitution were but a simple advice, that he ought to be restored, to whose advice should the restored person be obliged to yield? If to that which seemed most just to him, than it was he himself that was the judge of his deposition or restitution; if to that of the Pope, than it were no more an act of advice and Council, but an act of jurisdiction and authority, and not a simple act of jurisdiction and authority by which the Pope restored him for his part, and as much as was in him; but an act of jurisdiction and operative authority upon the precedent sentence, and abrogating the first judgement. O strange gloss to say; that when Pope Julius restored saint ATHANASIUS Patriarch of Alexandria; Paul Bishop of Constantinople; Marcellus Primate of Ancyra in Galatia; Asclepas Bishop of Palestina; or that when Pope LEO restored Theodoret Bishop of Cyre, then living; and Flavianus Patriarch of Constantinople after his death; he did no other thing then to declare, that his opinion was, that they ought to be restored. Or to say, that when Pope Felix opposed Acacius 〈◊〉 of Constantinople: or that when Pope Agapet deposed 〈◊〉 Patriarch of Constantinople, he did 〈◊〉 other thing then to declare, that his opinion was, that he ought to be deposed? And wherefore then, to recapitulate what hath so often been alleged, when saint CYPRIAN solicits Pope 〈◊〉 to depose Marcian Bishop of Arles, did he write to him; 
e 〈◊〉. ep. 67.  Let there he letters from thee directed into the province, and to the people 〈◊〉 at Arles by which Marcian being interdicted, an other may be substituted in his steed? And wherefore then when Theodoret speaks of the cause of saint ATHANASIUS Patriarch of Alexandria, doth he say; 
f 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 Eccl. l. 2. c. 4.  julius according to the Ecclesiastical law, commanded the Eusebians to appear at Rome, and gave a day to the divine Athanasius, to appear in judgement? And wherefore then when Sozomene speaketh of the restitution of the same saint ATHANASIUS Patriarch of Alexandria; of Paul Bishop of Constantinople; of Marcellus Primate of Ancyra in Galatia; of Asclepas Bishop of Gaza in Palestina; and of Lucius, Bishop of Andrinople in Thrace, doth he write; 
g Sozom. hist. l 3. c 7  julius' Bishop of Rome restored each of them to his Church, because to him for the dignity of his Sea, the care of all things appertained? And for what doth he add, 
h Ibid.  that he commanded those that had deposed them, to appear at a set day at Rome, to yield an account of their judgement, and threatened them not to let them scape unpunished, if they would not leave to inovate? And again; that in the pursuit of this restitution, 
i Ibid.  Athanasius, Patriarch of Alexandria, and Paul Bishop of Constantinople; recevored their Seas: And besides, that the Courcell of Sardica answered, that they could not abstain 
k Id. ib. c. 10  from the Communion of ATHANASIUS Patriarch of Alexandria, and Paul Bishop of Constantinople; because julius' Bishop of Rome having examined their cause, had not condemned them? For as for the rebellious and ontragious letters that the Bishops of the East; that is to say, the Bishops of the Patriarkship of Antioch and their complices who were Arrians writ against this restitution, it hath been already above spoken of, and shall again be treated of hereafter It sufficeth that the complaint which they made, 
l Soz hist. Eccl l. 3. c. 7.  that the Pope had injured their Council, and abrogated their sentence, showeth that the Pope's action had not been a simple advice, but a formal judgement. And wherefore then when the great Council of Sardica, for so saint ATHANASIUS calleth it, 
m Athan. in Apol. 2.  holden for the defence of the same saint ATHANASIUS, and of the other Bishops that the Pope had restored would convert the discipline of appeals into a written law did they ordain, that when a Bishop should be deposed by the Council of his Nation, and should appeal from it to the Pope, they should not establish a Successor in the place of the Bishop deposed, till the Pope had judged of the appeal? If a Bishop (saith the Canon) 
n Concil. Sardic. c. 4.  hath been deposed by the judgement of the Bishops of the neighbour provinces, and pretends that he 〈◊〉 to be heard again, let 〈◊〉 other be suhstituted in his Sea, till the Bishop of Rome examining the affair, have pronounced the definition. And wherefore then when 〈◊〉 and Vrsacius the two principal adversaries to saint ATHANASIUS would depart from their pursuit, did they come to Rome to ask pardon of the Pope for the slanders they had laid upon saint ATHANASIUS? They came in person (said Sulpitius Severus) to ask 
o 〈◊〉. Sever. hist. sacr l. 2.  pardon of Julius Bishop of Rome? And themselves in the act of their penance; 
p Athan. Apol. 2.  your Piety in your natural goodness, hath daigned to pardon our error. And wherefore then when the same Vrsacius and Valens had obtained the Pope's pardon, did they add this protestation at the end of their act; And besides this we promise, that if upon this occasion either those of the East, or Athanasius himself will maliciously appeal us in judgement, 
q Ibidem.  we will not depart from what you shall ordain? And the legates of the Asian Bishops to Pope Liberius in like manner; If ante one after this profession of faith expounded by us, will attempt any accusation against us, or against those that have sent us; 
r Soc. hist. Eccl l. 4 c. 12.  let him come with letters from your Holiness before such orthodoxal Bishops as your Holiness shall think fit, and contest with us in judgement; And if a crime appear, let the author be punished? And wherefore when the Arrians constrained Pope Liberius to condemn saint ATHANASIUS, did they insert these words into the false letter that they made him sign; 
s 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. le 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. p. 36  I have 〈◊〉 the tradition of the Elders, sent in my behalf, Lucius, Paul, and Aelianus priests of the Roman Church into Alexandria to Athanasius, to cause him to come to Rome, to the end I might appoint he being present upon his person, what the discipline of the Church exacts? And for what cause doth S. BASILE testify, that when Pope Liberius had restored Eustathius Bishop of Sebaste in Armenia, who had been deposed by the Council of Militina in Armenia, an orthodox and Catholic council, the council of Tyana in Cappadocia received him without enquiring of the condition; by means whereof he had been restored: The things (saith he) which were propounded to him by the blessed Liberius, 
Basil. ep. 74.  and those whereto he submitted himself, we know not, saving that he brought a letter which restored him, which having been showed to the Council of jyana, he was reestablished in his Bishopric? And wherefore then when S. JOHN chrysostom had recourse by letters to Pope Innocent to procure the sentence to be abrogated that the mock council of Constantinople had pronounced against him, did he write to him; One thing, I require 
Chrysost. ad Innoc. ep. 2.  of your vigilant soul, which is, that although those that have troubled the world, be sick of an impenitent and incurable disease yet if they will remedy it they may neither be punished, nor interdicted? And wherefore then when the council of Ephesus had excommunicated and deposed john Patriarch of Antioch, and his adherents, did it reserve the definitive judgement to the Pope, to correct or confirm the action, and besought the Pope to conceive a just indignation against him, that so he might punish him for his rashness? We have (say the Fathers of the council) reserved him to the judgement of thy 
Conc. Eph. p 2. act. 5. relat. ad Coelest.  piety; and the while we have declared them excommunicate and deprived of all Saurdot all power. And a while after, May it then please thy Holiness to conceive a 
Ibidem.  just indignation against these things; for if it be lawful for every one to do outrage to the greatest Seas; (so spoke they because of the Sea of Alexandria, which preceded that of Antioch) and to pronounce sentences unlawful and not canonical, or rather contumelies, against those over whom they have no power etc. Ecclesiastical affairs will fall into an excessive confusion; but if those that commit such enterprises may be punished according to their desert, all 〈◊〉 will cease. And wherefore then when the Emperor Valentinian the third would suppress by one of his laws Hilary Bishop of Arles, who had presumed to consecrate Bishops of the Gauls without the Pope's licence, doth he say; That the Pope's clemency alone permitted Hilary still to 
Novel. Theod. tit. 24.  bear the title of a Bishop? And again; We ordain, that whatsoever the Sea Apostolic shall decree, shall be a law, (that is to say, shall be executed by 
Ibid.  the ministers of the Imperial justice) and that every Bishop who being called to Rome by the Pope, shall refuse to appear, shall be constrained by the Governor of the province? And wherefore then when Flavianus Archbishop of Constantinople 
Ep. Valent. Imper. in ep. praeam. Conc. 〈◊〉  had been condemned by the false Council of Ephesus, did the same Valentinian the third write to the Emperor Theodosius his Father in law; We ought in our days to preserve to the blessed Apostle Peter, the dignity of the Reverence proper to him, inviolate, that the blessed Bishop of the city of Rome, to whom antiquity hath yielded the Priesthood over all, may have way to judge of Bishops, and of faith: For for this reason Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople, followiug the custom of Counsels, hath appealed to him by petition in the contention moved concerning faith? And wherefore then when Theodoret had been condemned in the same Council of Ephesus, did he write to the Pope; I attend the sentence 
Theod. ep. ad Leon.  of your Apostolic Throne, and do beseech your Holiness to succour me appealing to your right and just judgement, and to command that I may he transported to you, and verify that my doctrine sollowes the Apostolical paths? And for what cause when the Pope had restored him, did the Senators that assisted 
Conc. Chalc act. 1.  at the Council of Chalcedon say; Let the most Reverend Bishop Theodoret come in, because the most holy Archbishop Leo hath restored him to his Bishop's Sea? And the Council even the same; Theodoret is worthy of his Sea; Long 
Ibid. act. 8  live Archbishop Leo; Leo hath judged the judgement of God? And wherefore then when Pope Leo would set his hand to the restitution of the Bishops, that had inclined to the false Council of Ephesus, did he write to Anatolius Archbishop of Constantinople; But as for those that have more 〈◊〉 sinned 
〈◊〉 co ad Anatol. ep. 4 4.  in this cause, if perchance they come to repentance, and abandoning the defence of themselves, being converted to condemn their own error, and that their satisfaction may be such, as it seemeth they ought not to be rejected, let the matter be reserved to the more mature determination of the Sea Apostolic? And for what cause when Paschasianus the Popes Legate, voted upon the same subject, did he pronounce in the presence of the Council of Chalcedon, that the Pope had pardoned all the Bishops and Archbishops of the East, which had suffered themselves to be 〈◊〉 borne by the violence of Dioscorus? The Sea 
Conc. Chalc act. 3.  Apostolic (saith he) hath granted them pardon for what they have against their 〈◊〉 committed, for as much as they have hither to remained adhering to the most holy Archbishop Leo, and to the most holy and universal Council? And wherefore then when Dioscorus and the false Council of Ephesus had restored Eutyches, who had been judged in the first instance, by the Archbishop of Constantinople, and in the 〈◊〉 instance by the Pope, did the Council of Chalcedon cry out, that Dioscorus and the false Council of Ephesus had restored to Eutyches the dignity that the Pope had deprived him of; He hath (said they) declared Eutyches in 〈◊〉, and hath restored to him the dignity taken 
Ibid. p. 3.  from him by your Holiness? And wherefore then when John Patriarch of Alexandria, had been deposed from his patriarkship, and Peter surnamed Mongus established in his place, did John appeal to Pope Simplicius, and took Synodical letters from Calendion Patriarch of Antioch, to accompany his appeal? John (saith Liberatus) addressed himself to Calendion Patriarch 
Liberat. in 〈◊〉. c. 16.  of Antioch, and having gotten from him Synodic all letters of intercession, appealed to Pope Simplicius? And wherefore then when Pope Felix successor to Simplicius, had deposed the same Peter Mongus Patriarch of Alexandria, 
Vict. Tun. 〈◊〉 in Zenon.  and Acacius Patriarch of Constantinople, and Peter surnamed the Tanner, Patriarch of Antioch: and that these three patriarchs trusting upon the support of the Emperor Zeno, who was an heretic like themselves, despised the Pope's sentence; doth Victor of Tunes say, that they died all three, under damnation? And wherefore then when the Emperor Justin a Catholic Prince was come to the Empire, was the sentence that the Pope had pronounced against them executed so exactly, that their names even after their deaths were blotted out of the records of the Churches of Alexandria, of Antioch, and of Constantinople: And that for the rest that had communicated with them, but were not comprehended by name within the Pope's letters, the Emperor was fain to demand pardon of 
Iust. ep. ad Hormisd.  the Pope for them? We ask grace (saith the Emperor, writing to Pope Hormisdas) for the names, not of Acacius, not of either Peter; that is to say, not of Peter Patriarch of Antioch, and of Peter Patriarch of Alexandria, not of Dioscorus, or Timotheus, of whom your Holiness letters to us directed, made especial mention, but of those whom the Episcopal Revereuce hath celebrated in the other cities? And wherefore then when Pope Agapet deposed within Constantinople 
Liberat. in 〈◊〉 c. 12.  itself Anthimus Patriarch of Constantinople, doth Liberatus say; The Empress Theodora wife to the Emperor justinian on the one side secretly offered great presents to Pope Agapet, and one the other side tried him with threats, to hinder him from deposing Anthimus; but the Pope persisted in not hearing her request: And Anthimus seeing himself cast out of his Sea, rendered up the archiepiscopal mantle to the Emperors, and retired himself into a place, where the Empress took him into her protection? And for what cause when the Council of Constan 〈◊〉, holden under Menas, speaks of the deposition of the same 〈◊〉 Patriarch of Constantinople, doth it say, that the Pope had pardoned Peter Patriarch of jerusalem, and the other Bishops of the East that had communicated with him? It must not be wondered at (saith the 
Conc. Const sub Men. act. 1.  Council) if the great Sea Apostolic still continue to follow the first tract, preserving the Rights of the Church inviolate, and maintaining the faith, and granting pardon to those that have sinned. And again; The blessed Pope 
Ibid. act. 4.  Agapet of holy and Reverend memory, coming into this Royal City, hath next God given his helping hand to the sacred Canons, and hath cast Anthimus out of the Sea which appertained not to him, and hath pardoned those who had participated or communicated with him? And wherefore then when John Archbishop of Larissa, and john Primate of the first Justinianea had injustly condemned the one in the first, and the other in thè second instance Adrian Bishop of Thebes in Thessalia, did Saint GREGORY deprive the Bishop of the first justinianea of the communion, 
Gregor. Mag. l. 2. indict. 〈◊〉. ep. 6.  for the space of thirty days, and Eclipsed the Bishopric of Thebes from the jurisdiction of the archbishopric of Larissa; and ordained, that if the Archbishop of Larissa should any more attempt 
Ibid. ep. 7  to enterprise any thing upon the Bishop of Thebes, he should remain deprived of the sacred communion, so as it might not be restored to him, except at the point of death, without the leave of the Bishop of Rome? And wherefore then when the same S. GREGORY restored 
Id. l. 5. ind. 14. ep. 64.  Athanasius Abbot of Tamnaca in Lycaonia, who had been deposed by John Patriarch of Constantinople, and had appealed from him to the Sea Apostolic, did he say to him; We declare thee free from all crime of heresy, and give thee free le ave to repair to thy Monastery, and there to hold the same place as thou didst before? But for as much as these shifts are more than sufficiently confuted by the only Canons of the Council of Sardica, which were framed to justify the restitution of S. ATHANASIUS, and in the presence of S. ATHANASIUS himself, we remit the Reader to the Chapter we shall hereafter make thereof: And the while we will examine 
In the chapter of the Council of Sardica.  the objections that Calvin alleges against the appeals to the Sea Apostolic, which consist in five principal instances; which though they are treated of under two titles; the one of corrections, & the other of appeals: Nevertheless for as much as the right of appeals depends 
Calu. inst. l. 4. 6. 7.  from that of corrections; and besides that Calvin mingles the instances of the one with the instances of the other, we will treat of them under one Title; to wit, under that of Appeals.    

Of the opposition of S. Ireneus to Pope Victor. CHAPT. II.  
THE first instance then that Calvin allegeth against the Pope's 
Id. ibid.  censures, is taken from Eusebius an Arrian author, and from Ruffinus enemy to the Roman Church his translator; who writ, that S. IRENEUS reprehended Pope Victor for having excommunicated the Churches of Asia for the question of the day of Pasche, which they observed according to a particular tradition that S. JOHN had introduced for a time in their provinces, because of the neighbourhood of the jews, and to bury the Synagogue with honour, and not according to 
Calu. ubi supra.  the universal tradition of the Apostles. Jreneus (saith Calvin) reprehended Pope Victor bitterly, because for a light cause he had moved a great and perilous contention in the Church. There is this in the text that Calvin produceth; He reprehended him, that he had not done well, to cut of from the body of unity, so many and so great Churches. But against whom maketh this, but against 
Ruffin. in vers. hist.  those that object it? for who sees not, that S. IRENEUS, doth not there 
Ecel. Eus. l 5. c. 24.  reprehend the Pope for the want of power, but for the ill use of his power; and doth not reproach to the Pope, that he could not excomcommunicate the Asians, but admonisheth him, that for so small a cause he should not have cut of so many provinces from the body of the Church? Jreneus (saith Eusebius) did fitly exhort Pope Victor, that he should 
Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 24.  not cut of all the Churches of God which held this ancient tradition. And Ruffinus translating and enuenoming Eusebius, saith; He questioned Victor, that he had 
Ruffin. ib. c. 24.  not done well in cutting of from the body of unity so many and so great Churches of 
Iren. l. 3. c. 3.  God. And in truth, how could S. IRENEUS have reprehended the Pope for want of power; he that cries: To the Roman Church, because of a more 
〈◊〉. book. Chapt. 25.  powerful principality; (that is to say, as above appeareth, because of a principality more powerful than the temporal: or as we have expounded otherwhere; because of a more powerful Original) it is necessary that every Church should agree? And therefore alsoe S. IRENEUS allegeth not to Pope Victor the example of him, and of the other Bishops of the Gauls assembled in a council holden expressly for this effect, who had 
Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 5 c. 22.  not excommunicated the Asians, nor the example of Narcissus Bishop of jerusalem, and of the Bishops of Palestina assembled in an other Council, holden expressly for the same effect; who had not excommunicated them, nor the example of Palmas, and of the other Bishops of Pontus assembled in the same manner, and for the same cause in the Region of Pontus, who had not excommunicoted them, but only alleges to 
Iren. apud Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 26.  him the example of the Popes his predecessors: The Prelates (saith he) who have presided before Soter in the Church where thou presidest, Anisius, Pius, Hyginus, Telesphorus, and Sixtus, have not observed this custom, etc. and nevertheless none of those that observed it, have been excommunicated. And yet, o admirable providence of God, the success of the after ages showed, that even in the use of his power, the Pope's proceeding was just For after the death of Victor, the Counsels of Nicaea, of Constantinople, and of Ephesus, 
Conc. Antioch. c. 1. Conc Const c 7.  excommunicated again those that held the same custom with the provinces, that the Pope had excommunicated, and placed them in the Catalogue 
Conc. Eph. p. 2. act. 6.  of heretics, under the titles of heretics Quarto decumans!  
But to this instance Calvin's Sect do annex two new observations; the first, that the Pope having threatened the Bishops of Asia to excommunicate them, Polycrates the Bishop of Ephesus and Metropolitan of Asia, despised the Pope's threats, as it appears by the answer of the same Polycrates 
Fuseb hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 24.  to Pope Victor, which is inserted in the writings of Eusehius, and of S. JEROM, & which S JEROM seemeth to approve when he saith, 
Hieron. in script. Ec- 〈◊〉. in Polycr.  he reports it to show the spirit and authority of the man. And the second, that when the Pope pronounced anciently his excommunications, he did no other thing but separate himself from the communion of those that he excommunicated and did not thereby separate them from the universal communion of the Church. To the first than we say, that so far is this epistle of Polycrates from abating and diminishing the Pope's authority, that contrary wise it greatly magnifies and exaltes it. For although Polycrates blinded with the love of the custom of his nation, which he believed to be grounded upon the word of God, who had assigned the of the Month of March for the observation of the Pasche, and upon the example of saint JOHN'S tradition maintains it obstinately; Nevertheless, 
Exod. 12.  this that he answers, speaking in his own name, and in the name of the Council of the Bishops of Asia, to whom he presided; I fear not those that threaten us, for my elders have said, it is better to obey God 
Hieronym. ubi supra.  then man. Doth it not show, that had it not been, that he believed the Pope's threat, was against the express word of God, there had been cause to fear it, and he had been obliged to obey him; for who knows not, that this answer; it is better to obey God then men, is not to be made but to those, whom we were obliged to obey, if their commandments were not contrary to the commaundments of God; And that he adds, that he had called the Bishops of Asia, to a national Council, being summoned to it by the Pope; doth it not insinuate, that the other Counsels where of Eusebius speaks, that were holden about this matter, 
Euseb. hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 23.  through all the provinces of the Earth, and particularly that of Palestina, which if you believe the act that Beda said came to his hands, Theophilus 
Beda in frag. de Aequinoctio. vernali.  Archbishop of Caesarea had called by the authority of Victor, were holden at the instance of the Pope, and consequently that the Pope was the first mover of the universal Church? And that the Counsels of Nicaea, of Constantinople of Ephesus embraced the censure of Victor, and excommunicated those that observed the custom of Polycrates: doth it not prove, that it was not the Pope; but Polycrates that was deceived, in believing that the Pope's commandment, was against God's commandment? And that saint JEROM himself, celebrates the Paschall homelyes of Theophilus Patriarch of Alexandria, which followed the order of Nicaea concerning the Pasche; Doth it not justify, that when saint JEROM saith; that he reports the Epistle of Polycrates, to show the spirit, and authority of the man; he intends by authority, not authority of right, but of fact; that is to say, the credit that Polycrates had amongst the Asians and other Quartodecumans?  
To the second observation; which is, that when the Pope excommucated other Bishops, Archbishops, or patriarchs, he separated himself from their communion, but did not thereby separate them from the communion of the Church; We will do no other thing, then examine examples that they alleged for proof of their hypothesis; And yet we will not examine them all, for we have already confuted the 
〈◊〉. book chap. 27.  most part of them in the Chapters preceding; as that of saint HILARY against Liberius, and others the like? We will only treat of those that they propound to us a new, which consist in three principal heads: The first is that the fifth Council of Carthage ordained, that every Bishop that should fall into the cases mentioned by the tenth and thirteenth canons of the same Council, should content himself with the communion of his one Church alone, from whence they conclude, that every excommunication, did not import privation of Sacraments. The second, that Nicephorus writes, that Pope Vigilius having excommunicated Menas Patriarch of Constantinople for four months, Menas yielded him the same measure. And the third, that Sigesbert speaking of the proceeding of 
Niceph. hist. Eccl l. 17. c 26.  Pope Innocent in the cause of saint CHRISOSTOME saith, that Pope Innocent and the Bishops of the West suspended themselves from the 
Sigebert in Chron. ad ann. 409.  communion of those of the East.  
To the first then of these examples, which is; That the fifth Council of Carthage odaines, thàt every Bishop that should fall into the case of Canons above mentioned, should content himself with the communion of his own Church only; We answer two things, The one, that the censure whereof the Canons of this Council speak, was not an excommunication, but a restitution of communion, by which those that did fall into the cases whereof there is question, might administer the 〈◊〉 in their own Dioceses, and to their own People but not out of their dioceses. And the other, that the Pope himself, often used 〈◊〉 restriction, as it appears by the 
August. Epist. 162. 〈◊〉. Plantin 〈◊〉. 2  Epistle of saint AUGUSRINE to Pope Celestine where speaking of the Bishops of Africa, that the Popes his Predecessors had restored, whether by judgement, or by confirmation into their Seas he reckons amongst the rest, Victor one of the Bishops of Mauritania Caesarea, who had been restored, conditionally not to communicate but in his own Diocese. And by the Epistle of Pope LEO the first, to Anatolius Patriarch of Constantinople; 
Leo ad Anatol. 〈◊〉. epist. 38.  who ordained that the Bishops of the East, who had sinned in the false Council of Ephesus, and desired to return to the communion of the Sea Apostolic, they should remain till they had made sussicient satisfaction, enclosed within the communion of their own Dioceses only, and barred from communicating with other Catholic Bishops From whence it appears, that the Pope had the Sovereign judgement, aswell of the Bishops that ought to be admitted to the Catholic commwion, as of those that aught to be admitted to the communion of their own Dioceses. For whereas Balsamon interpreting one 
Balsam. in Conc. Carth c. 79.  of these Canons, saith, that it was a custom particular only to Africa, and that it was practised no where else; it was an ignorance of one that had learned but half his lesson.  
To the second example, which is, that Nicephorus saith, that Pope Uigilius having excommunicated Menas Patriarch of Constantinople for four Months, and that within Constantinople itself, Menas did the like 
Niceph. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibidem.  in his behalf; And that the Emperor justinian angry with Uigilius act, set men to apprehend him, by means whereof he fled into the Temple of saint SERGIUS, where he stuck amongst the organ Pipes because of his grossness. We answer two things; the one, that Nicephorus is an author not only removed from justinian's age more than seven hundred years but a Schismatic, and often fabulous, and so dim-sighted in the ecclesiastical Chronologie of that age, as he placeth a Pope called Agatho in the same Chapter, and in the Chapters before, between Agapet and 〈◊〉, and will have it that this Agatho held a Council at Constantinople after Agapets' death; and that he and Menas presided there, against all history, which teacheth us, that there was never any Pope called Agatho, either that succeeded Agapet, or was tymefellowe with Menas, nor that ever was at Constantinople; And that the first Pope that bore the name of Agatho, was above an hundred and fifty year after Agapetus, and never set foot in Constantinople; And that if by Agatho Nicephorus mean Boniface the second who was created in justinian's time, and whose name seems to have some affinity with the Greek signification of the word Agatho, neither was Boniface the second Successor, but Predecessor to Agapetus, nor ever saw Constantinople. And the other that this particular history of Nicephorus is a fable; as it appears as well, because neither Procopius, nor Liberatus, nor Victor Tunonensis, nor Marcellinus Comes, nor Euagrius, some Grecians and some latins that have written the history of justinian; and all either of the same time, or of the same age, with justinian, say nothing of it, as because it is disproved by the dates of Chronologie For Nicephorus saith, that Instinian repented this action because the Empress Theodora interposed her intercession, and obtained that justinian should receive Uigilius, and Uigilius should admit Menas to the communion; and adds, that this fell out the same year of the fifth general Council, which was the twenty seaventh year of the Empire of justinian. 
a Concil. Const. 6. oecumenic. act. 3. & Vict. Tun. in justin.  Now besides that the Empress was not likely to solicit either for Uigilius, who had excommunicated her, 
b Gregor. magn. l. 2. indict 10. epist. 36. Paul. Diac. siue Theophan. hist. l. 17. & 〈◊〉  because she would have enforced him to have received Anthymus Patriarch of Constantinople, whose heresy she followed; or for Menas, who had been established in steed of Anthymus; 
c Council Const. sub Men. act. 1. Marcellin. Com. in Chron. Liberat. in breviar. c. 21. Victor Tun. 〈◊〉 Chron.  Procopius 
d Procop. de bell. Goth. l. 3. de bello Pers. l. 1. & de bell Ital adversus Goth. l. 4.  and Victor of Tunes 
e Victor Tunensis Chron. in justin.  Authors of the same time, and Theophanes 
f Theoph. vel secundum alios, Paul. Diacon. in justinian.  after them affirm, that the Empress Theodora was dead in the beginning of the two and twentieth year of justinian, that is to say, more than siue year before the fifth Council of the same stamp, it is that Anastasius Bibliothecary, 
g 〈◊〉. Bibliothec. de vit. Pontific. in Vigil,  an Author no less fabulous in things remote from this time, and four hundred year distant from the age of justinian, saith, that the Emperor in the beginning received Vigilius with great honour & went to meet him, the Clergy of Constantinople singing: Behold the Lord, the Ruler cometh: But that afterward the Empress who was an Eutychian having won her husband to cause Anthymus to be restored, the head of the Eutychian faction, and Uigilius having called them, Dioclesian Eleutherius one of the assistants struck Vigilius upon the face, and said to him, Manslayer knowest thou to whom thou speakest? art thou ignorant that thou slewest Pope Siluerius? By occasion whereof Uigilius being fled into Chalcedon, the Empress made him be plucked out of the Temple of S. EUPHEMIA, and made him be dragged with a cord about his neck through the streets of Constantinople; for first, neither Procopius, nor Victor of Tunes, nor Liberatus, nor Marcellinus Comes, nor Euagrius report any such thing. And secondly, the same repugnancy as is in the fable of Nicephorus, is in this alsoe; to wit, that the Empress was then already dead. And it is not to be said, that the acts that run under Uigilius his name against Menas, 
h Vigil ep. ad univers.  make mention of the evil entertainment that Uigilius received from the Emperor. For besides this, that the date of the acts which is of the five & twentieth year of the Empire of justinian, seemeth to be disproved by the acts of the sixth general Council, where the legates of the Pope did prove, that the writing which the Monothelites had supposed under this title, 
i Concil. Const. 6. oecum act. 3.  A discourse of Menas to Vigilius, in the fifth Council, was false, for as much as the fifth Council had been 〈◊〉 the twenty seaventh year of the Empire of justinian, and that Menas was dead the one and twentieth. If it be not so, that in steed of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies one and twentieth, it should be read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies 〈◊〉 and twentieth, which were yet sufficient for the conclusion, that the Pope's legates would draw from it; to wit, that Menas was dead before the fifth Council. Besides this I say, these acts speak not but of the flight of Uigilius to the Temples of S. PETER and of S. EUPHEMIA, and affirm that it happened, not for the quarrel of Anthimus and the Empress, but because Uigilius had condemned the Emperor's Edict, concerning the three chapters; and they noted, that the retreat of Uigilius into the Temple of S. EUPHEMIA, was but the five and twentieth year of the Empire of justinian, more than three year before which 
Vigil. ep. ad univers  time Theodora the Empress was dead: And then suppose that Vigilius, the memory of whose intrusion made him the more apt to be despised, for as much as he got into the Papacy by the plot of the Empress, & with 〈◊〉 & simonical covenants, his predecessor Siluerius being still alive, and was become true Pope but after the death of Siluerius; after which the Clergy of Rome for the benefit of peace had accepted him, had been persecuted and unworthily used at Constantinople by the Emperor, with whom he was constrained to spend his life in exile, because the Goths under the conduct of their new King Totilas, had again taken Rome; whereto would this turn, but to the glory of Uigilius, and to the shame of the Emperor? For saith not Nicephorus, that the Emperor repented 
Niceph. ubi supra.  it, and do not the same acts show, that he sent the principal ministers of his Empire to Uigilius to pray him to return? And that Uigilius during this persecution, remained so constant, that he would 
Vigil. ep. ad 〈◊〉.  never give any way to the Emperor's violences, but deposed in Constantinople itself Theodorus Archbishop of Caesarea, the principal Governor of the Emperor; and excommunicated Menas Patriarch of Constantinople, and all that adhered to him. Did it not throughly show, the confidence he had in the dignity of his Sea? We decree thee (saith he) o Theodorus, 
Vigil. Pap. in fragm. damnat. Theod. to. 2. Concil.  late Bishop of Caesarea, by the publication of this sentence, deprived aswell of Sacerdot all honour, and of the Catholic communion, as of all Episcopal power and function; and we ordain, that thou shalt hereafter apply thy-self to nothing, but to the tears of penance, by which having obtained remission of thy crimes, thou mayst recover; if thou deservest it, the place of 〈◊〉, and of communion with me, or after my death, with my successor. And thou Menas Bishop of the city of Constantinople, which art enwrapped with the same crime, with all the Bishops, Metropolitans, and Micropolitans, &c, we suspend you from the sacred communion, till each of you, acknowledging the error os his prevarication, have blotted out before us his proper fault with a competent satisfaction. And this that he cries out, numbering Theodorus 
Ibidem.  his crimes; Thou art come in despising the authority of the Sea Apostolic, which had pronounced interdiction by us into the Church where there hung the Emperor's edict, 〈◊〉 there hast celebrated the solemnity of Mass. And this that he adds; We have charged the Ministers of the most clement 
Idem ep. ad 〈◊〉.  Emperor, to signify to him from us, that he ought not to communicate with those which have by us been excommunicated, lest he thereby run, which God forbid, into a grievous sin. Doth it not show that the Pope in excommunicating the other Bishops, Archbishops, and Patriarches, did not only pretend to separate himself from their communion, but to separate them, and cut them of from the communion of the Church? And as for the persecution of the Empress which happened long before, and for an other cause, to wit, forasmuch as Vigilius after his predecessor Siluerius was dead, and that he was become true Pope, would not keep the promise that he had made, and secretly accomplished to her during his Antipapacy, to admit Anthymus and the other Eutychians into his communion: What greater glory could Uigilius receive, then that whereof S. GREGORY speaks when he writes; Pope Uigilius constituted in the Royal city, that is to say, at 
Gregor. Magn. l. 2. indict. 10. ep. 36.  Constantinople, published a sentence of condemnation against Theodora then Empress, and against the Acephales'? And what more visible punishment could the Empress receive, then that whereof Victor Tunonensis writes; The ninth year after the Consulship of Basilius, the Empress Theodora, enemy 
Vict. Tun. in Chron.  to the Council of Chalcedon strucken her whole body over with the wound of an universal canker; (that is to say, with leprosy) prodigiously ended her life? For whereas the same Victor, who was a Schismatic, and took part with Rusticus the Deacon, and other Roman Clerks revolted against Pope Vigilius, and against the fifth general Council, writeth that the Bishops of Africa, that is to say, the schismatical Bishops of Africa (for the Catholic Bishops of Africa took the other part) excommunicated Vigilius, there hath already been two things spoken of concerning this; the one that they held not Uigilius 
Ibidem.  for true Pope, but for an intrusive Pope, because he had usurped the Papacy, his predecessor Siluerius being yet alive, as it appears by this, that the same Victor placeth a little after amongst the nullities of the fifth general Council, the vice of the creation of Uigilius, who had, said he, 
Vict. Tun ad ann. 13. post consul. Basil.  〈◊〉 ordained Bishop of Rome, Siluerius being still alive. And the other, that Pope Siluerius had already long before excommunicated Uigilius for having intruded himself into the Papacy in these terms; Do 
Silver. Pap ep ad Vigil  thou then receive, and those that consent which thee the sentence of pain of condemnation, and know that being condemned by us, by the judgement of the holy Ghost, and by the Apostolic authority, that the name and office of Sacerdotal ministry, is taken from thee. And again; 〈◊〉 Siluerius Pope of 
Ibidem.  the city of Rome giving consent to all the statutes, I have signed this decree of Anathema against the usurper Uigilius. By means whereof, the act of the Schismatical Bishops of Asrica against Uigilius, was rather a renovation and an application of the excommunication of Pope Silutrius, than a primitive and original excommunication.  
To the third example, which is, that Sigebert writes, that Pope 
Sigebert. in Chron ad ann. 409.  Innocent the first, and the Bishops of the West, suspended themselves from the communion of those of the East for the quarrel of Saint chrysostom; from whence the Protestants infer, that when the Pope excommunicated the other Bishops, Archbishops, or Patriarches, he separated himself from their communion; and did not separate them, from the communion of the Church: We have three answers; the first, that it is a ridiculous thing, to allege for the testimony of the history of Pope Innocent, and of S. chrysostom, Sigebert; who writ seven hundred years after them, and who was an open enemy to the Sea Apostolic, and partaker with the Emperor Henry the fourth against Pope Gregory the seaventh and his successors. The second, that Pope Innocent the first, did not suspend himself from the communion of those of the East, but suspended those of the East from the Ecclesiastical communion: the which although they still continued in fact with some of their Diocesans according to the custom of schismatics, this hindered them not from being suspended by right, and that they should send to demand restitution of the Pope, as it appears by these words of the same Innocent in the epistle to Boniface; Know (saith he, speaking of those of 
Innoc. ad Bonif. ep. 14.  Antioch) that we have received them into our bowels, lest the members which had a long while required health, should be excluded from the unity of the body. And in the epistle to Maximianus; What we have done in the behalf 
Idem ad Maximian. epist. 16.  of those of Antioch, we will do it in the behalf of others, if they will accomplish the same treaties and conditions, and send as those did, to beseech by a solemn legation, that the communion might be restored to them. And in the Epistle to Alexander Patriarch of Antioch; I have diligently inquired, whether the cause of the blessed Bishop john had been satisfied in all conditions, and having learned from those of your legation, that all things had been accomplished according to our desire I have by the grace of God, admitted the communion of your Church. And a little after; As for the letters of the Bishop Atticus, because they were joined with yours, we have received them, lest the refusal of a man, already a long while suspended by us, should turn to your prejudice; and yet we have sufficiently, and more than sufficiently ordained in the acts, what ought to be observed in his person. And Theodoret 
Theodor. hist. Eccl. l. 5 c. 34.  treating of the same matter; john being dead, those of the West, would never admit the communion, either of the Egyptians, those of the East, nor of the Bishops of Bosphorus and Thrace; that is to say, of the division of Constantinople, till they had inscribed the name of that admirable personage into the roll of the Bishops his predecessors; and esteemed Arsacius, that succeeded him, scarce worthy of a salutation; and as for Atticus successor of Arsactus, after many legations and requests for peace, they received him finally, but when he had added the name of John to the other Bishops. And the third, that if what Sigebert writes were true, there were great difference between suspending themselves from the communion of any one, which was sometimes done by intermitting the commerce of communicatory letters, and excommunicating him, or making him incommunicable, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that in the matter of very excommunications there was great difference between minor excommunications, which deprived those that were smitten with them from the use of the Sacraments, but deprived them not as is above said, from the other fruits of the 
Above 1. book Chap. 27.  Church's communion; and the mayor excommunications, which took away not only the use of the Sacraments, but cast out those that were therewith attainted, from the body and society of the Church. Now it was with this kind of excommunication, wherewith Pope Victor excommunicated the Bishops of Asia, who observed the Pasche 
Eus. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 25.  according to the jewish computation. Victor (saith Eusebius) moved with the answer of Polycrates, attempted to cut of at one blow from the common union, all the Dioceses of Asia, and the neighbouring Churches as heterodoxal, and proscribed them by letters, declaring all the brethren which inhabited those Regions, incommunicable. And again; Ireneus exhorted Victor, that he should not cut 
Ibid. c. A6.  of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 all the Churches of God, that observed the tradition of this ancient custom. By which words it may appear, that the meaning of Vistors' censure was, not simply to separate himself from the communion of the Asians, but to divide and cut of the Asians from the body and society of the whole Church; and that the remonstrance and exhortation that S. IRENEUS and others made him, was not to keep him from separating himself from the communion of the Asians, but that he should not cut of the Asians from the body and common mass of the Church for the verbs, to proscribe, and to declare incommunicable, express an other thing, then to separate himself from them; & the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof Eusebius makes use, signifieth to divide and cut of from the body and from the mass; for which cause Ruffinus hath translated it; to cut of from the unity of the body; He reproved him (saith 
Ruffi. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 24.  Ruffinus) for not doing well in cutting of from the unity of the body, so many and so great Churches of God. And certainly, what subject of terror had Pope Victor giué to the Bishops of Asia in threatening to excommunicate them, if he had intended only to separate himself from them? And why should Polycrates have said, that having the word of God for him, he 
Polycrat. apud Euseb hist. Eccl. l 5 c. 24. & apud Hieron. in cattle. scrip. Eccles.  feared not those that threatened him; if this threat had been no more but to separate himself from their communion, and not to separate and cut them of, from the communion of the body, and from the society of the Church? For what greater wound had the Asian Bishops received in the Pope's separation from them, than the Pope in the Asian Bishops separation from him, if the Pope's excommunication had been no other thing, than a declaration, that separated himself from their communion? chose, the Bishops of Asia minor, and of the neighbouring provinces, that the Pope comprehended in his censure, being so great number as Polycrates saith, that if he should represent their names, the multitude would seem too great; why had it not been more opprobry for the Pope, to be separated from them, then for them to be separated from the Pope, if the Pope's excommunication, had been but a simple declaration that he departed from their communion? And it can not be said, that Eusebius writes, that Victor attempted to cut them of; for the question is not of the diminutive terms, which Eusebius, whom S. JEROM calls the ensignebearer of the Arrian faction, useth with an Arrian en 
Euseb. 〈◊〉. Ruffin. Apol. 1.  vie and malignity against the Roman Church; but of the intention of Victor, & of the Bishops that made their remonstrances to him. And yet less can it be replied that the other Bishops opposed themselves against it, for they opposed it not, but in the form of remonstrances and exhortations, representing to him not that he could not do it and that he enterprised beyond his jurisdiction; but that for so small a cause he ought not to cut of so many Churches from the universal body and society of the Church. Wherein was discovered the evil will of Eusebius against the Roman Church, who saith that the other Bishops did bitterly reprove Victor; & when there is question to produce an example of the bitterness of their reprehensions, he alleges for his only pattern; the words of S. IRENEUS, where there is not one bitter word to be found, & which containeth only simple & gentle remonstrances, and full of submission to the person of Victor, and to the authority of his Sea. For to represent to the Pope that he ought not to cut of so many Churches from the body, and from the society of the universal Church; was it any other thing then to confess, that if the cause had been sufficient, as afterward 
Conc. Antioch c. 1. Conc. Eph. p. 2. act. 6.  the Counsels of Nicaea and of Ephesus showed it to be, it belonged to him to cut them of, and chiefly in the time of the pagan Emperors, under whom no general counsels could be celebrated? And to use the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which signifies to divide and cut of from the body and from the mass; what was it, but to say, that it was the Roman Church; that as the stock and root did not cut herself of from the Churches, that she excommuni cated, but cut them of from herself, and in cutting them of from herself, cut them of from the communion of the whole body, no more nor less, than the head in cutting of any member from the communion thereof, cuts not itself of from that, but cuts of that from itself; and in cutting it of, doth not only cut it of from the communion of the head only, but from the communion of the whole body; or that the stock and root, in cutting of some branch, cuts not of itself from that, but cuts that of from itself, and in cutting it of, cuts it not of only from the communion of the root, but from that of the whole tree? And therefore we alsoe see, that in all the breaches of communion which have been between the Roman Church and the other Churches, there hath happened four things? The first, that when other Churches have separated themselves from the Roman, all the Catholic Churches have always remained united with the Roman, and have separated themselves from those which have forsaken her. The second, that when it hath been the Roman Church, which hath excommunicated others, all the Catholic Churches have forsaken them; or if they not thought the cause of the excommunication grievous, have had recourse to the Roman Church with remonstrances, and intercessions to beseech her to suspend and revoke her censure; as it appears both by the words of S. IRENEUS to Pope Victor upon the excommunication of the Asians: he 
Iren. apud. Euseb. ubi supra  exhorted him not to cut of all the Churches of God 〈◊〉 held the tradition of this ancient custom. And by those of Dionysius Bishop of 
Dionis. Alexand. apud Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 7. c. 〈◊〉.  Alexandria, to Pope Steven, upon the condemnation of the Bishops of Cappadocia; I have (said he) written beseeching him for all these things; or occording to the other translation; beseeching him for them all. And by these of Socrates upon the Pope's censure against Flavianus Patriarch of Antioch; 
Socr. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 15.  Theophilus Patriarch of Alexandria having sent the Priest Isidorus appeased Damasus (you must read Anastasius) his indignation, and represented to him, that it was profitable for the concord of the people, to forget the fault of Flavianus; and so the communion having been restored to Flavianus, the factions of the people of Antioch were soon after reunited. And by these of the Council of Carthage upon Pope Innocents sentence against Theophilus Patriarch of Alexandria for S. CHRYSOSTOM'S cause; It had been agreed upon, that concerning the dissension of the Roman and Alexandrian Churches, Pope 
Conc Cart. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 7. & 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 2.  Innocent should be written to, that both Churches may observe the peace that our Lord hath commanded. For why should it be ordained, that Pope Innocent should be written to, and not Theophilus Patriarch of Alexandria, but because it was the Pope that kept the key of the Ecclesiastical communion; and that it was the Roman Church to whom it belonged to receive the Alexandrian Church into her communion, and not to the Alexandrian Church to receive the Roman into her communion? And in brief, that it belonged to the Roman Church to prescribe to the Alexandrian, the laws of the reunion, and not to the Alexandrian to 〈◊〉 them to the Roman; as Theodoret witnesseth, that it happened a while after in these words; john being dead, those of the West would never admit the communion nether of the Egyptians, nor of those of the East, nor of the ` Bishop's 
Theo lor 〈◊〉. Eccl. l. 5. c. 34.  of Bosphorus and Thrace till they had inscribed the name of this admirable personage into the roll of the Bishops his predecessors? And the third, that when the separation hath continued, those that were excluded from the communion of the Roman, have always been cast out from the communion of the other Catholic Churches, and reputed for heretics or schismatics; as it-appeares even in the business of the Asians excommunicated by Victor, whose Sectaries were afterward constrained 
Conc Eph. p 2. act. 6.  to abjure their heresy in these terms; I anathematise all heresy, and particularly that of the Quartodecumans? And the fourth, that when the divided parts were to be reunited, the other Churches have always sent to take and demand their restitution into the commnnion of the Roman Church, and that the Roman Church never sent, to take or demand that of other Churches? Those of the West (saith Theodoret, speaking of 
Theodor. 〈◊〉 Eccl. l. 5 c. 23.  Flavianus Patriarch of Antioch) promised to lay by all bitterness, and to 〈◊〉 the Ambassadors that Flavianus should send. Which the divine Flavianus having heard, he sent a legation of famous Bishops, and Priests, and Deacons of Antioch to Rome. And Socrates; The communion having been restored to 
Soc. hist. 〈◊〉. l. 5. c 15.  Flavianus, the parts of the Church of Antioch, were soon after reunited, And Pope Innocent the first, writing to Alexander Patriarch of Antioch upon S. JOHN CHRYSOSTOM'S cause; I have diligently in quired whether 
Innocent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. cp. 17.  the case of the blessed Bishop john, had been satisfied in all points, and having found by those of your 〈◊〉, that all things had been accomplished according to our desire, I have by the grace of God admitted the communion of your Church. And 〈◊〉 treating of the same matter. john being dead, those of the West would 
Theodor. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. ubi supra.  never admit the communion, neither of the Egyptians, nor of those of the East, nor of the Bishops of Bosphorus and Thrace; that is to say, of the division of Constantinople till they had inscribed the name of that admirable personage, into the roll of the Bishops his predecessors, and scarcely esteemed Arsacius who had succeeded him 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 saluted; and as for Atticus successor to Arsacius, after many legations 
Ibid.  and 〈◊〉 for peace, they finally received him, but when he had first added the name of john to the other Bishops. And Pope Leo in his Epistle to Anatolius 
Leo 〈◊〉 Anatol. ep. 38.  Patriarch of Constantinople concerning the Bishops of the false council of Ephesus; We will (said he) that by our Legates, the care of the affair being communicated to thee, it be ordained, that those that with full satisfaction shall condemn their evil actions, and rather chose to accuse, then to defend themselves, shall enjoy the unity of our peace and communion. And else where; But as for those that have more grievously sinned, if they after such satisfaction, as it shall seem it ought not 
Id. adeund ep. 44.  to be refused etc. let the things be reserved to the more mature determination of the Sea Apostolic. And Pope Hormisdas tyme-felowe with the Emperor justin in his Epistle to Epiphanius Patriarch of Constantinople; You must (said he) put on my person, and of those that shall 〈◊〉 with you in communion, 
Conc. sub. Men Act. 〈◊〉 Ibid.  and by you to the Sea Apostolic, inform us by your letters therein, 〈◊〉 therein the tenor of the libels which they shall have presented. And again; Which we thought wought to impose upon you, laying our charge upon your diligence, because you have given no small proof of your resistance to heretics. And Victor of Tunes reporting the same history: The Emperor justin reunited those of the East etc. with 
Vict. Tun. in Chrome  〈◊〉 satisfaction for those of the West. And the Emperor justinian nephew and Successor to justin, in the Epistle to Pope john surnamed 〈◊〉; We have hastened to submit and unit to your Holiness Sea, all the 〈◊〉 of the 
Codic l 1. Tit. 〈◊〉. l 8.  East Countries. And certainly if the Pope had holden no other rank in the ecclesiastical communion than the other patriarchs, Archbishops, or Bishops, for what cause was it, that when the Pope excommunicated any other patriarchs, as when he excommunicated Flavianus, 〈◊〉, and Peter patriarchs of Antioch or as when he excommunicated Nestorius Accacius & Anthimus Archbishops of Constantinople or as when he excommunicated Theophilus, Peter, and other patriarchs of Alexandria, he did for all this incur no censure, from the Bishops, or Catholic Counsels, but was reputed to do, what he might do? Whereas, when any other Patriarch, yea under the pretence of a general Council, did 〈◊〉 the Pope, he was punished and deposed for this presumption, as for an enormous and extraordinary Sacrilege. For what had not Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria done in his false Council of Ephesus? he had embraced the heresy of Eutyches; he had condemned the Catholic doctrine; he had excommunicated Flavianus Archbishop of Constantinople who maintained it; and had not only excommunicated him, but alsoe slain him: And nevertelesse, o eminent dignity of the 〈◊〉 Apostolic! these Sacrileges were not the principal causes of his deposition, but that he and his pretended Council had dared to excommunicate the Pope; Dioscorus (saith Anatolius Archbishop of Constantinople) 
Concil. Chalced. Act. 5.  bath not bene deposed for the faith, but because he excommunicated my Lord, the Archbishop Leo, and that having been cited thrice before the Council, he appeared not. And the Fathers of the Council of Chalcedon in their relation to the Pope; After all these things (said they) he hath extended his frenzy even 
Conc. Chalé relat. ad Leon.  against him; to whom the guard of the Vine hath been committed by our Saviour, that is to say, against thy Holynesses, and hath me ditated an excommunication against him, who laboureth to unite the body of the Church. But why should we have recourse to particular examples, since the common voice of antiquity teacheth us, that in all the tumults, and in all the confusions of the Schisms and heresies, which have perturbed the Christian Religion, the Roman Church hath always been as the centre, the principle, and original of the ecclesiastical communion, and as the Ensign colonel of the army of jesus Christ, upon whom all the other Catholic 〈◊〉 have cast their eyes, and to whom they have gathered 〈◊〉 separating themselves from the communion of those that, communicated not with her and embracing the communion of those, who communicated with her? For what mean these words of saint IRENEUS With the Roman 
Iren. l. 3. c. 3  Church because of a more powerful principality, it is necessary that every Church should comply: And these of saint CYPRIAN; The Roman Church is the 
Cypr ad Corn. 〈◊〉  Chair of Peter, and the principal Church, from whence the Sacerdot all unity hath proceeded: And these of saint AMBROSE; He asked whether the Bishop of 
Ambros. de obit. Frat.  that place, consented with the Catholic Bishops; that is to say, with the Roman Church: And these of Theodoret; The Emperor Gratian commanded that the Churches should he delivered to those, that held communion with Damasus, which 
Theod. justor Eccl l. 5. c. 2.  was (added he,) executed throughout the world: but that the Roman Church, was the centre, the beginning and the root of ecclesiastical communion, and that whosoever was admitted to her communion, was likewise admitted to the communion of the whole Body of the Catholic Church; and that those, who were excluded out of her communion, were excluded out of the communion of the whole Body of the Catholic Church? And what mean these words of saint HIEROM: I am joined in 
Hieron. ad Damas. ep. 57  communion with thy Blessedness; that is to say, with the Sea of Peter, I know the Church is founded upon that Rock, etc. whosoever eateth the lamb out of this house, he is profane. And a little after; I know not Vitalis, I am iguorant of Paulinus, 
Ibid. ep. 8  I reject Meletius whosoever gathers not with the, scatters. And again: In the mean time I cry; If any one be joined to Peter's Chair, he is mine. And these 
Optat. Milevit cont. Parm. l. 〈◊〉.  of Optatus Milevitanus: At Rome there hath been settled to Peter the Episcopal Chair, in which there was set the first of all the Apostles, Peter, etc. to the end that in this only Chair the unity of all, might be preserved. And a little after: In the person of Cyricius, all the world communicates with us, by the commerce of form 
Idem ibidem.  letters. And again; From whence is it, that you pretend to usurp to yourselves, the keys of the Kingdom, you that combat against Peter's Chair by your presumptions and bold Sacrileges? But that the Roman Church was the centre, the principle, 
Idem ibidem.  and the root of Ecclesiastical communion, and that those that were admitted into her communion, were admitted into the communion of the whole Catholic Church; and that those, that were excluded from her communion, were excluded from the communion of the whole Body of the Catholic Church? And what mean these words of saint AUSTIN, In the Roman Church hath always flourished the principality of the 
Aug ep. 162.  Apostolic Sea. And those of Eulalius Bishop of Syracuse to saint FULGENTIV See to turn him from going to the Monasteries of Egypt: The 
Author vit emulgent F●●liciano successori ipsus. ●icat.  Countries whither thou desirest to travel, a perfidious dissension, hath separated them from the communion of the blessed Peter; all those Religious persons, whose admirable abstinence is celebrated, should not have the Sacraments of the Altar common with thee● And these of Victor of Tunes, speaking of the rebellion of Vitalian against the Emperor Anastasius, the heretic: He would never promise 
Vict. Tun. Chronic. in Anast.  peace to the Emperor, till first he had restored the defendors of the Council of Chalcedon, who had been banished into their own Seas, and till he had united all the Churches of the East, to the Roman: But that the Roman Church was the centre, principle and the root of the Ecclesiastical communion; and that those who were admitted to her communion, were admitted to the communion of the whole Catholic Church; & that those who were excluded from the communion of the whole Body of the Catholic Church? And what do these words of John Patriarch of Constantinople intent; We promise, not to recite amidst the sacred mysteries the names of those, who are separated 
joan. Patr. Constant. ep. ad Hormisd tom 2. Concil.  from the communion of the Catholic Church: that is to say, who do not fully consent with the Sea Apostolic? And those of the Emperor JUSTINIAN; We preserve in all things, the unity of the most holy Churches with the most holy Pope of old Rome? And these of Menas Patriarch of Constantinople: We follow 
Cod. l. 1. 'tis 1 l. 7. Concil.  the Sea Apostolic and obey it, and communicate with those that communicate therewith; and condemn those, that it condemneth? And these of the Bishops 
Const. sub. Men. act 4 Greg.  returning from the Schism to the Church in the time of saint GREGORY the Great: I promise I will never return to the Schism, from whence, 
Ma●n. l. 10 indict. 5. ep. 31.  by the mercy of our Redeemer, I have been delivered; but that I will remain always in the unity of the Catholic Church, and in the communion of the Bishop of Rome; but that the Roman Church was the centre, the principle, and the Root, of the ecclesiastical communion; and that those that were admitted into her communion, were admitted into the Communion of the whole Catholic Church and that those that were separated from her communion, were separated from the communion of the whole Body of the Catholic Church?   

Of the oppositions of saint Cyprian. CHAPT. III.  
THE second instance of Calvin, is taken from saint CYPRIAN, 
Inst. Calu. 4 c. 7.  and consists in seven heads produced by him, or by his disciples; The first; that saint CYPRIAN calls Pope Steven, Brother. The second that he complains, because Basilides a Bishop of Spain, having been deposed by a Synod of his Province, for having bowed under persecution, and an other having been ordained in his place, Pope Steven restored him. The third, that he saith, there were but a small number of lost and desperate persons, who believed that the authority of the Bishops of Africa, was lesser. The fourth, that he saith, that the ecclesiastical causes ought to be determined, where they were bred. The fifth, that he affirms, that the Episcopal power is one thing, whereof every one holds his portion, undividedly. The sixth, that he cries, none of us constitutes himself Bishop of bishops. And the seaventh, finally that he useth rude words against Pope Steven, and accuses him of ignorance and of presumption. To the first then of these heads, which is that saint CYPRIAN calls Pope Cornelius brother: We 
Cyp. in ep. ad Cornel.  answer, he calls him Brother, not to deny to him the superintendency of the Ecclesiastical government; but for two other causes: The one to insinuate that the Pope's superintendency over other Bishops, was not a Lordly Monarchy, as that of temporal princes over their subjects; but a gentle and brotherly Monarchy, as that of an elder brother over his younger brethren, which is the title that our Lord himself would bear when he made himself be called the first borne amongst 
Rome 8.  many brethren, and which is the memorial of humility, that God had 
Deuter. 17  given to the Kings of his people, when he had pronounced; Thou shalt take a king from amongst thy brethren. And again that the king's heart, may not 
Ibidem.  be exalted above his brethren. From whence it is, that the Scripture, to represent this brotherly Monarchy, as well in the Sacerdotal, as in the politic 
Esdr. 1. c. 3.  order, saith in the first book of Esdras: And josua son of josedeck 〈◊〉 up, and the priests his brethren, and built up the Altar of God. And the other to signify the unity of the communion, that Tertullian calls the nomination of brotherhood and to show that he spoke not of the Antipope Novatianus, to whom the schismatics adhered; but of the true Pope Cornelius and of Steven his successor, with whom the Catholic Bishops communicated as Erasmus hath acknowledged upon the same place of saint CYPRIAN in these terms: The word, BROTHER doth not 
Erasm. annot. in ep. Cyprian. ad Cornel.  there signify equality, but society of Religion: For that it was a familiar thing for ancient authors to use the word Brother not to exclude the superiority 〈◊〉, but to express the unity of communion, it appears by a thousand testimonies It appears first by the testimony of saint AMBROSE, who calls the Bishop of Rome, his holy Brother, and nevertheless ' 
Ambros. ep 78.  in the same place advertiseth Theophilus Patriarch of Alexandria, who was a committee from the Council of Capua, to judge the cause of Flavianus Patriarch of Antioch, to procure his judgement to be confirmed by the Pope We conceive (said he,) that you ought to reserr the affair 
Id. ibid.  to our holy brother Bishop of the Roman Church for we presume you will judge so as can not displease him. And a little after that, We having received the tenor of 
Id. ibid.  your acts, when we shall see that you have judged things so, as the Roman Church shall undoubtedly approve, we will receive with joy the fruit of your examination. It appears secondly by the testimony of the Catholic Bishops of Africa who answered the Donatists in the conference of Carthage, that Cecilianus Archbishop of Carthage had been their brother: He was (saith 
Collat. Carthag. Act. 3.  saint AUSTIN) our brother because of the communion of the Sacraments. And nevertheless, the Archbishop of Carthage was head and Superintendent of all the Bishops of Africa. It appears thirdly by the testimony of saint AUGUSTINE, who calls Aurelius Archbishop of Carthage his brother; and neverthesse's, saint AUGUSTINE was the spiritual subject to Aurtlius, and had been made Bishop of Hippo by means of the dispensation 
Possi l. in vit. Aug. August de oper. Monarch.  that Aurelius had given to Ualerius, to take him for coadjutor, and himself acknowledged that he was obliged to execute his commandments. I have (said he) obeyed thy commandments my holy brother 〈◊〉. It appears 
Conc. Carthag. 3. c. 45  fowrthlie, by the testimony of Epigonius one of the Bishops of the third Council of Carthage, who calls the same Aurelius, his brother; and nevertheless acknowledgeth in the same place, that Aurelius had superintendency over all Africa. It appears in the fifth place by the testimony of John Patriarch of Constantinople, who writing to Pope Hormisdas, 
joan Constant. Patr. ep ad Hormisd.  entitleth him his Brother, and nevertheless protests; we do in all things follow the Sea Apostolic, and preach all that hath been thereby decided; And promise in the time to come, not to recite amidst the sacred mysteries, the names of those that are separated from the communion of the Catholic Church; that is to say (addeth he) that do not altogether agree with the Sea Apostolic. And finally, it appears by the testimony of the Emperor Justinian, who 
Codic. l. 1. tit. 1. l. 8.  〈◊〉 to Pope John surnamed Mercurius; We demand that your fatherly 〈◊〉 may declare to us your intention by your letters, directed to us, and to the most holy Bishop and Patriarch of this famous city your brother. And nevertheless in the same Epistle, and in the Epistle to the Patriarch of Constantinople, 
Cod l 1. t. 1. l 7.  he affirmeth that the Pope is the head of all the holy Prelates of God. And the same may be said of the words Colleague, or Fellow-Minister; that the ancient Catholic Bishops sometimes attribute to the Pope, not to weaken the Superiority of the Government, but to design the society 
Matth. 24.  of the Ministry, and to show that the faithful and wise servant, that the Master hath substituted over the company of his servants to give them their nourishment in due season, is not Lord, but fellow Servant to his fellow Servants. For that the Fathers do so understand it, it appears by many Examples: It appears first, by the Epistle of the Synod of 
Athan. de fuga. sua Apolog.  Alexandria, where the Bishops of Egypt call saint ATHANASIUS Patriarch of Alexandria their Colleague; who nevertheless, was their head, 
〈◊〉 Nicen. can. 6. & Concil. Chalced. Act. 4.  and had jurisdiction over all the Bishops of Egypt and Libya; as it appears both from the sixth Canon of the Council, which gives perfect authority to the Bishop of Alexandria over all the Bishops of Egypt, Libya, and Pentapolis; And from the Remonstrance that the Metropolitans of 
Concil. Chalced. Act. 4.  Egypt made to the Council of Chalcedon, that they could enterprise nothing without the authority of the Bishop of Alexandria. It appeareth secondly, by the Epistle of Proclus Archbishop of Constantinople, who intreateth Domnus Patriarch of Antioch that he would bear with the infirmities of Athanasius Bishop of Perhes, his fellow Minister, and to grant 
Ibid. Act. 14.  him for his judges, other Bishops than his Metropolitan, who was suspected by him. It appears thirdly by the sentence of the Bishops of the Council of Ephesus, who called Pope Celestin, their most holy Father and fellow Minister; and nenerthelesse made themselves the executioners of his Decrees: Constrained Necessarily (said they.) by the force of the Canons, 
Concil. Eph. p. 2. Act. 1.  and by the letters of our most holy father and fellow-minister Celestin, we are come not without tears to pronounce this heavy sentence against Nestorius. And finally, it appears by the writings of Optatus Bishop of Milevis in Africa, who calls the Pope Siricius companion of Society with the Catholic 
Optat. Mileu. cont. Parm. l. 2.  Bishops: and nevertheless acknowledgeth him in the same place, for the heir of saint PETER'S Chair, and for centre and principle of Ecclesiastical unity.  
To the second head, which is, that saint CYPRIAN complains, that 
Cyp ad Cler. & pleb. Hispa ep. 68  Basilides a Bishops of Spain having been deposed by the Council of the Province, for having yielded under the persecution, and an other having been ordained in his place, Pope Steven had restored him: We answer, that this complaint, instead of wounding the Pope's authority, wholly confirms it. For saint CYPRIAN complains not of the enterprise made by the Pope, but of the surprise made upon the Pope by Basilides, who had misinformed him concerning that affair. Behold his 〈◊〉; That Basilides, said he, after the discovery of his crimes and the ignominy of his conscience, 
Ib. ibid.  made naked by his own confession travailing to Rome hath deceived our brother Steven remote by a far distance, of place, and ignorant of the history in fact and the truth of the matter, which hath been concealed from him to procure that he might be unjustly restored to his Bishopric from which he had been justly deposed, cannot annul an ordination lawfully made etc. Neither is he so worthy of blame who hath by negligence suffered himself to be misinformed, as he is worthy of execration that hath fraudulently imposed it upon him. Now who sees not, that this manner of speech is not to reprove, the interprize made by the Pope, but the surprise made upon the Pope: And indeed how could saint CYPRIAN reprove the enterprise made by the Pope, he that writes to him; 
Id. ad Steph. 〈◊〉 67.  〈◊〉 there be letters directed from thee into the province, and to the people that inhabit Arles, whereby Marcian being deposed, an other may be substituted in his place?.  
To the third head, that is, that saint CYPRIAN writes; Since it hath 〈◊〉 
Id. ad Cor nel ep. 55.  or dained to us all, or by us all, and that it is just and equitable that every cause should be heard where the crime hath been committed, and that to every pastor there should be assigned a part of the flock which he may rule and govern before he come to yield an account of his actions to God, those that we rule, must not run here and there, and cause the well united concord of the Bishops to knock one against an other by a fraudulent and deceitful rashness, but plead their cause where there may be accusers and witnesses of their crimes. We answer, that he speaks here of minor and particular causes, whereof it was afterward ordained in the Council of Carthage, That particular causes should be determined within 
Concil. dict. African c. 62.  their provinces; that is to say, causes os manners, and which concerned nothing but the lives of Clerks, and of inferior Clerks only; that is to say, of Priests, deacons, subdeacons, and other ecclesiastical persons constituted to the lesser orders, as it appears both by these words; Those whom we rule, and by the quality of Fortunatus person of whom the question was, who was a priest of the Church of Carthage, who had been excommunicated for his crimes by saint CYPRIAN and had made a Schism against him at Carthage. And not of Maior causes as those of faith, or of the Sacraments, or of the general customs of the Church, or of the depositions of the persons of Bishops; the definition of which causes might be reserved for the judgements beyond the Seas. For that there was ever this difference in Africa between the inferior Clerks; that is to say, Priests, deacons, subdeacons and other ecclesiastical persons constituted to the lesser orders; and the superior Clerks, that is say Bishops; that the causes of the inferior Clerks of Africa, aught to be determined in Africa, and not pass beyond the Seas; but that the causes of the superior Clerks, that is to say of Bishops, might be transferred to the judgement beyond the Seas, we learn it from saint AUGUSTINE, who cries out, that Cecilianus one of saint CYPRIANS Successors in the archbishopric of Carthage, and within forty years of S. CYPRIANS time, who had been condemned in Africa by a Council of seventy Bishops, might reserve his cause beyond the Seas, for as much as he was of the order of Bishops, and not of that of Priests, deacons and other inferior Clerks. There was no question then (saith saint AUGUSTINE) 
Ang. ep. 162.  of Priests or Deacons, or other Clerks of the inferior order, but of the Colleagues that is to say, of Bishops who might reserve their cause entire to the judgement of the other Colleagues, and principally of the Churches Apostolic. For whereas saint AUGUSTINE useth the word Churches Apostolic in the plural number, we answer that, in the Chapter following, and show, that it is not to exclude the eminency of the Roman Church over the rest, 〈◊〉 of contrariwise he said but three lines before. In the Roman Church 
Id. ibid.  hath always flourished the principality Apostolic. But to prevent the malice of the Donatists who refused the judgement that Pope Melchiades had given of the cause of Cecilianus; for as much as they said, that Melchiades had sacrificed to Idols, and consequenrlie, could not judge of the cause of Cecilianus, who was accused of a crime of the like nature, or equivalent to it. It sufficeth at this time to infer from the words of saint AUGUSTINE that there was this difference between the superior and inferior Clerks of Africa, that the causes of the superior Clerks might be judged beyond the Seas, and not those of the inferior Clerks; And therefore, where saint CYPRIAN saith, that every cause should be judged where the crime had been committed; he spoke of the causes of inferior Clerks; that is to say, of Priests, Deacons, subdeacons, and other Ecclesiastical persons constituted to the lesser order; and not of the causes of superior Clerks; that is to say, of Bishops.  
To the fourth head, which is, that saint CYPRIAN complains, That the authority of the Bishops of Africa seemed less to some lost and desperate 
Cypr. ad Cornel. ep. 55.  persons, who had already the year before been judged by them; We answer two things, the one, that the word lesser, hath no reference here to the Roman Church, and is not a Comparative of relative signification, but it is a comparitive of positive signification; which hath no other meaning, but less than it should be; that is to say, little, or not great enough; as when the same S. CYPRIAN writeh in the Epistle to Antonius If the number of Bishops resident in Africa seemed less sufficient; that is to say, not enough sufficient: And the other that if it were a comparison of the comparative signification, it should no more have reference to the Roman Church, but to these words; paucis desperatis & perditis, interpreting them in the ablative and not in the dative; and translating the period in this sense; If it be not peradventure that the authority of the Bishops constituted in Asrica, who had already judged of them be esteemed less than a small number of desperate and lost, men: it seems, that the continuance of the period doth afterward declare which compares the number of the Bishops of Africa, who had judged of Fortunatus with those that took part with Fortunatus and not with the Roman Church in these words; If the number of those that judged of 
Ibid.  them the year past, comprehending the Priests and deacons, be reckoned, it will be found there were more assistants present at the judgement and at the examination of the cause, then of those that took Fortunatus' part. And indeed if saint CYPRIAN had intended this word in a comparative signification, and in regard of the Roman Church; how could he have said three lines above, they presumed to sail to the Roman Church which is the Chair of Peter, and the principal Church, from whence the Sacerdot all unity hath proceeded? And how coul Optatus Milevitanus an African, as well as he say; At Rome hath been constituted 
Opt. Mileu. cont. Parmen l. 2.  to Peter the chief, the Episcopal Chair, that in this only Chair, the unity of all might be preserved? And how could saint AUGUSTINE, an 〈◊〉 as well as either of them, say; That Cecilianus might despise the 
Aug. ep. 162.  conspiring multitude of his Enemies: that is to say, of seventy Bishops of Africa assembled in the Council of Numidia with him, For as much as he saw himself united by letters communicatory with the Roman Church, in which had always flourished the principality of the Sea Apostolic; and with the other Countries, from whence the Gospel came into Africa. And again; 
Id. ep. 92.  That he doubted not, but that Pelagius and Celestius, who had been judged by two Counsels of Africa, whould more easily yield to the Pope's authority drawn out of the authority of the holy Scriptures.  
To the fifth head, which is, that the same S. CYPRIAN saith; That there is but one Bishopric whence every one holds his portion undividedlie. We answer, 
Cypr. de unit. Eccl.  he useth this language, to insinuate that the Bishopric cannot be possessed separatelie, out of the unity and society of the Episcopal Body; but not to deny, but that in the unity of this Episcopal Body, the functions of Episcopal power are exercised in a more principal and eminent manner in the Roman Church, then in the other Churches; no more than when we say, that the soul is possessed by all the parts of the body inseparably and undividedly; we intent not to, say, that for the exercise of her functions, she resides not in a more principal and eminent fashion in the head, then in the other parts; otherwise, why should he call the Roman Church, the Chair of PETER, and the 
Id. ad Cornel. ep. 55.  principal Church, and the original of Sacerdot all unity?  
To the sixth head, which is, that S. CYPRIAN saith in the Council holden for the rebaptisation of heretics, None of us constitutes himself 
Cypr. in 〈◊〉. Concil. Carth.  Bishop of Bishops; We answer he speaks there only of the Bishops of Africa, to whom he directs his speech, and whom he exhorts to tell their opinion freely in the Council without being held back by the respect of the authority that as Primate of Africa he had over them. And we will add that if he had holden this language even to tax and prevent the Pope obliquely, who afterward condemned him, the matter would be of no weight, for as much as this Council was an erroneous Council, where S. CYPRIAN cast the foundations of the Donatists' heresy; and that as such, it was not only condemned by the Pope, and by all the rest of the Church, but even by those that had adhered to saint CYPRIAN; witness these words of saint 〈◊〉; The Blessed Cyprian strove to avoid the miry 
Hier. cont. Lucif.  lakes, and not to drink of the straying waters; and upon this subject, addressed the Synod of Africa to Steven Bishop of Rome who was the twenty sixth after saint PETER, but his strife was in vain. And finally, those that had been of the same opinion with Cyprian, set forth a new decree saying; What shall we do? So hath it 〈◊〉 delivered to them by their Ancestors and ours?  
To the seaventh head, which is of the invectives that S. CYP. suffered to slip out of his mouth after the contention that he had with Pope Steven for the rebaptisation of heretics, taxing him of ignorance and presumption. We answer, it is impiety in Calvin to allege them, since S. AUSTIN 
〈◊〉. de Bapt. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 l. 5. c. 25.  holds them unworthy to be reported, and covereth them with this excuse: The things which Cyprian in anger hath spread against Steven, I will not fuffer them to pass under my pen. And we add, the resistance that Pope Steven made to the error of S. CYPRIAN, was the safety of the church, as saint Uincent, Lerin: witnesseth in these words; Then the Blessed 
Vincent. Lyrin in. Com. part. 1.  Steven resisted, with, but before his Colleagues; judging it as I conceive, a thing worthy of him that he should surmount them as much in Faith as he did in the authority of his place.   

Of the Commission of the Emperor Constantine the Great, for the judgement of Cecilianus Archbishop of Carthage. CHAPT. IV.  
THe third instance of Calvin, is taken from Optatus Milevitanus 
Calu Inst. l 4 c. 7 Opt. Mileu. cont. 〈◊〉 l. 1. Aug ep. 162.  and from saint AUGUSTINE; who say, that the Donatists having accused Cecilianus Archbishop of Carthage, and Felix Bishop of Aptunge, his Ordinator, and besought the Emperor Constantine, who then was resident amongst the Gauls, to give them judges of the Gauls: the Emperor gave them three Bishops of the Gauls whom he sent to Rome to judge the affair with Pope Melchiades. But whom doth this Instance combat against, but those that allege it. For the Emperor being constrained by the importunity of the Donatists, and that as himself protested against all Ecclesiastical order, to give them judges; and having given them according to their demand, judges of the Gauls, what could he more expressly do, to testify the Pope's authority, then to remit them to Rome, and to ordain that the same judges of the Gauls that he had given them should transport themselves from the Gauls to Rome, to the end the cause might be 〈◊〉 at the Pope's Tribunal, and under the presidency and direction of the Pope. Was there a Stronger means to prove what we read in S. ATHANASIUS; That ancient custom of the Church was that the causes of 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ad 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 2. 〈◊〉. l. 3. c. 9  Bishops could not be determined, till first the decision had been made at Rome And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉: That the Sacerdot all law required, that those things which were constituted without the Bishop of Rome's sentence should be annulled. Nevertheless for as much as Calvin objects, that if this cause had belonged to the Pope's Ordinary jurisdiction he ought not to have judged it by the Emperor's commission; it is necessary to clear it. To this objection then, before we 〈◊〉 the matter to the bottom, we will answer in form of a prologue five things: first, that it was not a commission except in regard of the three Assessors of the Gauls, that the Emperor named to content the importunity of the Donatists & to the end that they might serve for 〈◊〉 & warrants of the sincerity of the proceedings of the Council of Rome but a remittment: as it appears both by the Emperor's confession, who avowed that it belonged not to him to examine this cause, & by the election that the Pope made of fifteen other Bishops that he took for his assistants, besides those that the Emperor had nominated. And therefore although S. AUG. in regard of the Donatists' intention sometimes calls this remittmenta delegation nevertheless he showeth sufficiently, that it was rather a relegation, than a delegation, when he notes that the reason wherefore the Emperor did it, was for as much as he durst not judge the cause of a Bishop: Your Superiors, (said he to the Donatists) first brought the cause of Cecilianus to the Emperor Constantine. And a little after; But because 〈◊〉 
Aug. ep. 166.  durst not judge the cause of a Bishop. he delegated the examination and 〈◊〉 thereof to Bishops. I add, that he used this language by Synecdoche, and referring the word delegation to the judges of the Gauls only, that were deputed to assist at the Council of Rome, and not to all the Council of Rome, as he witnesseth elsewhere by these words: The Emperor gave to the Donatists the judges that themselves had demanded: that is to 〈◊〉, 
Aug ep. 171.  the judges of the Gauls. And again, Donatus was heard at Rome by the judges that himself had demanded. For of the nineteen Bishops of the Council of Rome, there were but three of the quality of those that Donatus had demanded. Donatus had demanded but three: but saint AUSTIN extends 
Aug. de Agon. Christ. c. 29.  this clause by Synecdoche to all the Council, for as much as the three judges demanded by Donatus, had judged in Common with all the Council, and were found so conformable to the rest, as the judgement 
Optat. Milevit. cont. Parm l. 1.  of the Council, which passed all with one voice, and without any diversity of opinions, and theirs was oneself same thing.  
The second answer is that Constantine did not interpose his authority in this affair as Master by himself of the cause, but as an Arbiter sought by the Donatists, and assuring himself as a Catholic that he should be avowed by the Catholics. This Matter, (saith saint AUGUSTIN) belonged 
Aug. ep. 162.  greatly to the Emperor's care whereof he ought to give an account to God; for the Donatists had made him arbiter and judge of the cause of the tradition, and of the Schism. From whence it appears, that the Emperor's interposition in this cause, was a matter of fact, and not of right, and whose example cannot be alleged for a pattern of the ancient discipline of the Church. The third, that it was not a controversy questioned amongst the Catholics, and according to the ordinary laws of the Church, but a Suit commenced by the heretics against the Catholics, and by ways extraordinary to all the laws and forms of the Church. For the Donatists had already broken the bond of unity, and shaken off the yoke of the Church's authority. They were (saith saint AUGUSTIN) already 
Aug. ibid.  culpable of the Schism, and already stained with the horrible crime of the 〈◊〉 of Altar against Altar. By means whereof, there being no judge common between them, and the Catholics in the Church, there remained nothing for them to do, but to have recourse to the Arbitrements of the secular powers, whose examples could no more be drawn into consequence against the ordininarie authority of the Christian Church, than the judgement that Ptolomeus Philometor 
joseph. antiquit. l. 13. c. 6.  king of Egypt, gave between the jews and the Samaritans, could form a precedent against the ordinary authority of the high priest, and of the Sacerdotal college of the jewish Church. The fourth, that the cause questioned in this process, was not a cause of right, and that should be proved by ecclesiastical means, such as the testimonies of Scripture, or the traditions of the Apostles, or the Custom of the Church, or the sentences of the Fathers, but a question of fact, and whereof the hypothesis was mingled with accessories that belonged not to the causes of the Church, and could not be examined by ecclesiastical means only, but must be justified by human and secular means, as the confronting of witnesses, the acts of Notaries (yea Pagan and heathen ones) the Records of Clerks, 
Opt. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Parm. l. 1. August. ep 162.  and even the applications of questions, and corporal tortures. For the accusation of the Donatists was principally grounded upon the framing of a false letter, that they had forged against Felix Bishop of Aptunge, for the examination whereof there must be a secular and proconsulary 
〈◊〉. purgat. 〈◊〉. & Cecilian.  judgement interposed between the ecclesiastical judgements; that is to say between the Council of Rome and that of Arles to convince the forgers of the falsehood by the, application of 
Aug. ep. 152.  racks and tortures. We have undertaken (saith saint AUSTIN) the defence of the cause of Cecilianus, although it belong not to the cause of the 
Aug ep. 162.  Church, that we may make their calumnies appear even in that. And again speaking of the torture which was offered to the scrivener Ingentius or Uigentius, to make him confess whether he had falsified the letter of the Aedile Alfius Cecilianus to Felix Bishop of Aptunge: The Proconsul (said he) amongst the fearful cries of the ushers, and the bloody hands of the hangmen would not have condemned a Colleague of his being absent. And the fifth, that all the acts that the Donatists' extorted from the Emperor in this 〈◊〉 he protested them to be so many irregularities and nullities and so many unlawful enterprises unjust and extraordinary, wherein he suffered himself to be constrained against his will, to give way to the passion and malice of the Donatists, and in yielding to them, to assay to reduce them to the peace and unity of the Church; and he was so 〈◊〉 from desiring to have the example thereof serve for a law to the Bishops, as contrariwise he promised to ask the Bishop's pardon; the history is this:  
The Donatists having accused Cecilianus Archbishop of Carthage, of treason, or communication with traitors; that is to say, with those that had delivered the holy Books, and the sacred Vessels to be put into the fire in the persecution time; yea, even to have been ordained by a traitor; so did they entitle Felix Bisop of Aptunge, they first obtained a judgement of seventy Bishops in Africa against him. Then discerning that Cecilianus despised 〈◊〉 judgement, as well because it was given against an absent person, as because (as saint AUSTIN saith) that he saw himself united by communicatory 
Aug 〈◊〉 162.  letters with the Roman Church, in the which (adds the same saint AUGUSTINE) hath always flourished, the principality of the Sea Apostolic, and with the other Countries from whence the Gospel came in to Africa, they resolved to pursue beyond the seas a new judgement. Now they seared the Pope's Tribunal both in general, because all Italy had been troubled with persecutions under the Empire of Dioclesian, by means whereof they figured to themselves that there would be many Bishops that had bowed or bend, and consequently would support the cause of Ceci 〈◊〉; and in particular if we believe the Donatists in the conference of Carthage, because the Pope Melchiades was suspected by them as a complice, as they pretended of the same crime, or one equivalent to that of him that ordained Cecilianus. They began (said saint AUGUSTINE, speaking of the Donatists of 
Aug. in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  the conference of Carthage) to charge Melchiades of the crime of Treason, and to 〈◊〉 that their superiors had shunned his judgement, because he was a 
〈◊〉 part 3.  Traitor. For these causes then, that is to say; be it for the suspicion that they had in common against all Italy, be it for that they had in particular against the Pope, they addressed themselves to the Emperor Constantine; who then was resident amongst the Gauls, and besought him to give them judges from amongst the Gauls, because in that province whereof his Father Constantius had had government, there had been no persecution, which was to refuse in general all the provinces, where Dioclesian's persecution had taken place, amongst which Italy was one of the principal. Your Superior (saith Optatus Mil.) 
Optat. contr Parm. l. 1. c 72.  presented to the Emperor, yet ignorant of the affair, the request which follows: We beseech thee o excellent Emperor Constantine, because thou art of a just race, whose father amongst all the Emperors, never practised any persecution, and that the Gauls are freed from this crime, for in Africa there are contententions amongst us, let there be given to us judges from amongst the Gauls. And what marvel is it, if they addressed themselves to Costantine, 
Aug. 〈◊〉. lit. Petil. l. 2 c. 92.  since after they had recourse to the Emperor julian the Apostata, a pagan and an infidel prince, the Emperor Constantine amazed and angry with this proceeding, reproached it to the Donatists, and objected to them that they would receive judgement from him, who himself did attend the judgement of Christ. He durst not, (saith saint AUSTIN) judge the cause of a Bishop. And Optatus Milevitanus from whom S. AUGUSTINE 
Aug. op. 166.  borrowed this history; He answered them (saith he) with a spirit 
Optat. l. 1.  full of indignation; you ask of me judgement in this world; of me I say, that do myself attend the judgement of Christ; that is to say, you would have me constitute myself for a judge of the Ministers, of Christ, I that do myself attend the judgement of Christ. Which was the same protestation that he made afterward at the Council of Nicaea in these words, repeated by our glorious CHARLEMAINE; 
Capitul. Carol.  To me, who am constituted in a lay condition, it is not lawful to 
Magn. 1. 6. Ambros.  judge of Bishops. And this the Emperor Valentinian renewed in these words, repeated by saint AMBROSE; and by the same CHALEMAINE; 
Epist 32. & capit.  Your business o Bishops, is far, above us; and therefore treat amongst you of 
Car. Magn.  your causes. And that S. ATHANASIUS remembered to the Emperor Constatius 
ibid.  in these terms; What hath the Emperor in common with the judgement of 
Athan. ep. ad Solit.  Bishops? And again; when did the judgements of the Church take their force from 
Ibidem.  the Emperor? And saint MARTIN to Maximus; This is a new and never heard 
Sulpit. hist sacr. l. 2.  of impiety, that a secular judge should judge a cause of the Church, And this was the first protestation of irregularity, made by the Emperor Constantine against the Donatists; to wit, that leaving the way, and the ordinary progress of the judgements of the Church, they had recourse to him to obtain judges, and which hath, been always followed since by the pious and religious Catholic Emperors.  
This request nevertheless of the Donatists, that the Emperor rejected as a judge, he believed, that he ought not altogether to reject as an arbiter and compounder of the business, but thought it to be to purpose in some sort to make use of the arbiterment that the Donatists referred to him, to assay to reconcile them to the Catholics whose communion he held, and for that occasion assured himself that he ought to be avowed and agreed unto by them. And therefore desiring on the one side to preserve the form of the ordinary judgements of the Church; & on the other side being constrained to give some way to the hardness of those that he desired to bring back by fair means, he remitted them from the Gauls, to Rome, to be judged by the Pope Melchiades, with the assistance of three Bishops of the Gauls that he caused to travail thither, Maternus of Cologne Rheticius of Autun, and Marinus of Arles, that they might be witnesses and warrants of the sincerity of his proceedings: I have ordained (saith the Emperor in his Epistle to Melchiades, evil inscribed to Mechiades and to Marcus) that Cecilianus with ten of his 
Euseb. hist. Eccles. l. 10 c. 5.  accusers, and ten of his abetters; that is to say, ten African Bishops which opposed him, and ten of Africa Bishops which maintained him, traveled so far as to Rome, that in your presence, joining with you Rheticius, Maternus and 〈◊〉 your Colleagues, whom for this effect I have enjoined to trasport themselves to Rome, he may be heard so as you shall know that it belongs to the most religious law. I have said in the Epistle, evil inscribed to Melchiades and to Marcus, for there it must be read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, as well because Marcus was not Bishop of Rome till after Silvester, Successor to Melchiades, as because, if this Marcus had been any other than a Bishop, the Emperor would not have said, jointly with you, your colleagues Rheticius, Maternus and Marinus. And if he had been Bishop, he had not directed 〈◊〉 letter to Melchiades Bishop of Rome and to Marcus, without adding to it the quality of Bishop. These three Bishops of the Gauls then having been upon the nomination of the Emperor, admitted by the Pope, and called by him to the Council of Rome became judges of the right of the affairs. Now to whom doth it not hereby appear quite contrary to that which the Caluenists pretended to infer? For first, if the Emperor, as he 
Optat. contr. Parm. l. 1.  protests himself, had no right to judge the causes of Bishops, how could he in right give them judges? I say in right, and not in fact, for as much as the Emperor could well give them judges in fact, and whose judgement should be obligatory to the secular Tribunal, and executory by the officers of the Empire, and under the imposition of pains and temporal punishments; but he could not give them judges in right, whose judgements should be obligatory in conscience, and to the Tribunal of the Church, and should make those that contradicted, culpable of spiritual censures and punishments. And secondly the Donatists having specified in their request, that they demanded judges of the Gauls, and that of purpose to exclude particularly the judges of Italy; the Emperor harkening to their request, and giving them judges of the Gauls, how had he sent them to Rome to judge the cause with the Pope, and under his presidency and direction, who was he against whom, if we give credit to the Donatists in the conference of Carthage, their petition was principally presented, if he had not acknowledged that the Pope was natural and inevitable judge of the cause? Is there any likelihood, that the Emperor being resident amongst the Gauls, and the judges whom he nominated for the Donatists, being risident there, that he would have sent them from about his person where they were, to the Pope's person, from whom they were separated by so large a distance of Sea and land to serve him for assistants, if he had believed that it was himself and not the Pope, that was the Natural judge of the affair. To what purpose should he have made the Donatists take so much pains, who came to him out of Africa into Gallia; and the three judges that he granted them, who were also in Gallia, to travail from thence to Rome, if he had not acknowledged that which we read lately 
jul. ep. ad Euscbian. apud.  in saint ATHANASIUS; That the causes of the Bishops could not be determined, till the decision had been made at Rome. And in Sozomene; That those things that were constituted without the sentence of the Bishop of Rome, were nullities. And in 
Athan. see above.  saint AUGUSTINE upon the same place, that in the Roman Church had 
Sozom. l. 3. c. 10.  always flourished the principality of the Sea Apostolic? But let us kintt up 
See above.  our history. To these three Bishops nominated by the Emperor, the Pope yet added fifteen more; whose names Optatus reports; Merocles Bishop 
Opt. cont. Parm. l. 1.  of Milan; Florian Bishop of Cesena; Zoticus Bishop of Quintian; Stemnius Bishop of Arimini; Felix Bishop of Florence; Gaudensius Bishop of Pisa; Constantius Bishop of Faensa; Proterius Bishop of Capua; Theophilus Bishop of Beneventum; Savinus Bishop of Terracina; Secundus Bishop of Preneste; Felix Bishop of the three lodges; Maximus Bishop of Hostia; evander Bishop of Ursin, and Donatian Bishop of Foro-Clodi. Now if the Pope had not been judge of this case but by deputation, and that the Emperors address to him had been but a simple commission, and not a remittment, how could he have taken fifteen others Bishops for his assistants, besides those that had been nominated by the Emperor, and Bishops of Italy also, which was the province that the Donatists had principally pretended to refufe by their petition? And why did not the Donatists' reproach to him, that he had exceeded the bounds of his commission? For as for Caluins saying, that the Emperor nominated judges out of Gallia, 
Instit. l. 4. c. 7.  Spain, and Italy, it is an ignorance disproved by Optatus who affirms that the Council of Rome was compounded but of ninteen Bishops in all; towitt, of the Pope, three Bishops of Gauls, and fifteen Bishops of Italy; and that there were no Bishops of Spain; and teacheth us, that the Emperor nominated but only three Bishops of the Gauls. judges (saith Optatus) were given; Maternus of Cologna, Rheticius of Autun, and 
Opt. cont. Parm. l. 2  Marinus of Arles. And indeed, how could the Donatists have desired judges out of Spain, where the persecution had been so cruel? Wherefore although S. AUGUSTINE extends as far as he can the Emperor's commission to the judges of the Council of Rome, of purpose to make that Council not capable of refusal by the Donatists, who having taken the Emperor for their arbiter, it seemed they could not decline a judgement wherein his authority had intervened; yet he extends it no farther than to say; that the Emperor sent Bishops to Rome, to judge the cause with Melchiades, and never goes so far as to say, that he gave commission 
Aug. ep. 162.  to Melchiades, or gave him for a judge. Contrariwise, speaking of the judges given by the Emperor, he restrains them, as hath been 〈◊〉 above noted to the Bishops of the Gauls only. judges (saith he) were given to the Donatists, those that they had demanded, that is to say, the Bishops 
Id. ep. 171.  of the Gauls: Insinuating thereby, that the Pope was none of the judges that were given; and that the Emperor's delegation extended itself no farther, then only to the judges of the Gauls, which he had deputed, to the end they might be witnesses and colleagues of the Pope's judgement, and did not comprehended the Pope. From whence it appears, that when he said, that the Emperor delegated the examination of Cecilianus 
Id. ep. 166  his cause to the Bishops; or that the Council of Rome absolved Cecilianus, by the Emperor's commandment; he speaks by Synecdoche, that 
De unic. bapt. cont Petil. c. 16  is to say, by extending the part to the whole, for as much as the Bishop's delegated by the Emperor, and enabled by the Emperor's commission, which was valid in respect of the Donatists, that had sought it, made a part of the Council of Rome, where Cecilianus his cause was examined, & a part so conformable to the opinion of the whole, as the judgement of the Emperor's Commissioners, and that of the whole Council, was oneself same thing. Otherwise we must conclude by the same reason, that Donatus had demanded for judges, all those that assisted at the Council of Rome; that is to say, both the Pope, and the fifteen judges of Italy; for S. AUGUSTIN saith in the like words; that Donatus was heard at 
August. de agone. Chr. c. 29.  Rome by the judges that he had demanded: And yet it is certain that Donatus had demanded none but the three judges of the Gauls; yea, with the exclusion of the others. But S. AUSTIN saith, that he had been heard by the judges, that he had demanded; for as much as amongst the judges that heard him, were those that he had demanded; who being conformable in their opinions with the rest, it was as much as if he had demanded them all. Let us finish our history; The Pope assisted by these eighteen Bishops, three nominated by the Emperor, and fifteen chosen by him, judged the cause of Cecilianus, and judged it so soundly, as saint AUSTIN takes occasion from thence to call him the 
Aug. ep. 161.  FATHER of the Christian People. How innocent (saith saint AUSTIN) was the last sentence pronounced by the blessed Melchiades; how entire, how prudent, how peaceable? And a while after; O blessed man o Sonn of Christian peace, and Father of Christian people! From this judgement of the Popes, notwithstanding the Donatists appealed to the Emperor; and that was the second irregularity, and so great and enormous an irregularity, that it made the Emperor's hair stand on end. To this appeal (saith Optatus Mileu.) the 
Optat. contr Parm. l. 1.  Emperor answered thus: O, mad impudence of fury, they have put in an appeal (that is to say, a secular appeal, & to the imperial Tribunal) as in the causes of the Gentiles. And the Emperor Constantine himself, in the Epistle to the Catholic Bishops:: What so great frenzy (saith he) persevers in 
Const. Ep. ad Episc.  them, as to persuade themselves with an incredible arrogance of things which are not 
Cathol. ad calc.  permitted, either to be spoken or heard. And a little after; They seek for secular judgements, 
Gestor. Purgat.  and leave those that are celestial; o mad impudence of fury! And again; What will these detractors (you must read detrectators) say of the law, who 
〈◊〉. & Foelic.  refusing the heavenly judgement, have demanded mine? is this the account they make of Christ our Saviour? He was far enough then, from approving the appeal from the Pope's judgement to his; since he calls this Appeal; a thing not fit to be spoken or heard, maddimpudence of furie, a recourse from heavenly to earthly judgement, and a contempt of Christ's authority. Nevertheless, pressed by the Donatists' importunity, he granted them an other Council at Arles, not in the form of a judgement of appeal, as the Donatists pretended; but in the form of a civil request, and of a more ample review of the cause, which the Donatists, who complaining for the omission 
Epist. 〈◊〉 t. ad Ablau.  of Felix his crime, said had not been fully heard. And this again, irregularly; that is to say, against the ordinary course of the judgements of 
Aug ep. 68 & lib. de unic. bapt. c. 16.  the Church, and to give way to the Donatists' fury. He gave them (saith saint AUSTIN) an other judgement at Arles; that is to say, of other Bishops, not that it was necessary, but giving way to their perverseness. At this Council, 
Aug. ep. 162.  compounded of two hundred Bishops, assisted the Pope's legates, as appears by the Catalogue of the Bishops of the first Council of Arles, although 
Aug contr. Parm. l. 1. c. 5.  confusedly and ill applied to the Canons of the the second. And Marinus, Rheticius and Maternus assistants at the first judgement; for that 
Epist. Con. 〈◊〉. Arelat. 1.  the Pope's legates are not named in the Epistle from the Council to the Pope; it is because themselves were the Messengers that carried them. And the relation of the Council was directed to Pope Silvester Successor 
Ibid.  to Melchiades in these words; Being come to Arles, by the will of the pious Emperor, from thence, most Religious Pope (or according to other copies) most glorious Pope, we salute thee with all due reverence. And the Fathers of the Council, testified to the Pope in their Epistle, a great grief, that he could not assist there in person; and protested, t hat if he had been there present, they would have pronounced, yet a more rigorous sentence 
Ibid.  against the slanderors. But that, said they, could not be, for as much as thou mightest not remove from the place where the Apostles sit continually, and where their blood without intermission, gives testimony to the glory of God. And they sent their decrees to the Pope, that he might spread them through all the parts of the world. It hath pleased (said 
Ibidem.  they) according to the ancient custom these things should be intimated to thee, who holdest the mayor administrations and by thee principally to all. For instead of these maimed and corrupted words; Placuit etiam, antequam ante qui maiores Dioceses tenes, per te potissimum omnibus insinuare; You must restore, 〈◊〉 etiam 〈◊〉 iuxta consuetudinem antiquam, adte qui maiores dioceses (or maiores Dioceseos) tenes, & per te potissimum omnibus, insinuari; That is to say; It hath pleased, according to ancient custom, that these things should be insinuated to thee, that holdest the mayor administrations, or the majority of the administration, and by thee to all. For the proper and original signification of the word Diocese, is to signify, administration. From whence it is, that Zonara speaking of the Empire of Constantine, and Jerene, say; All the Diocese of the 
Zonar. Annal. tom. 3. in Constant. & Iren.  Empire, meaning all the administration of the Empire. From whence appears Calvin's extreme ignorance, who saith that Marinus Bishop of Arles judged by appeal of the sentence of Pope Melchiades, and that Pope Melchiades 
Inst. l. 4. c. 7.  endured it, and never opposed himself against it. For besides Melchiades was dead before the Council of Arles (which was holden under Silvester his successor) was celebrated, and had need of a stranger miracle, then that of Caluins to raise him up again, if it had been an appeal from the Pope, the Pope's Legates would not have assisted there, and would not have judged by appeal of their Master's judgement; and the Council would not have addressed their relation to the Pope; and would not have bewailed the Pope's absence; and would not have said, that if the Pope had been present, they had pronounced a more heavy sentence against the delinquents. And then how could Marinus Bishop of Arles, who had been one of Pope Melchiades assistants, at the judgement given at Rome, have judged by appeal of the Council of Rome? And how could the other assistants of the Pope have judged by appeal of the Pope's judgement, or rather of their own? For not only the same Marinus Bishop of Arles, who had been one of the Pope's assistants at the Council of Rome, assisted at the Council of Arles; but also the other Bishops who had acompanied the Pope at the judgement of Rome, as well those that the Emperors had nominated, as Maternus Bishop of 
Epist. Concil. Arelat. 1  Cologna, Rheticius Bishop of Autun, Marinus Bishop of Arles, as those that the Pope had associated there; as Merocles of Milan, Proterius of Capua, and others were present, voted, and signed at the Council of Arles. And besides how could Marinus, and all the Council have written to the Pope, That he held the mayor dioceses, or, the mayor administrations; a thing that whatsoever it signify, attributes to the Pope a prerogative, that the Bishop of Arles and the other Bishops of the Council had not, if Marinus had been judge by appeal of the Pope's judgement? for whereas some of Calvin's disciples say that is was not the same Marinus 
The author of the tract of the Church chap. 8.  Bishop of Arles that was at the Council of Rome, who judged of the Pope's sentence; but Martian Bishop of Arles his Successor; this is an ignorance, yet greater than the former; for there is not so mean a Scholar, but knows, that Martian Bishop of Arles was dead more than fifty years before Marinus, and before the Council of Arles. joyntlie, 
Edit. 2.  that the Bishop of Arles, and particularly Martian, could not judge of the Pope by appeal, since the same Martian being fallen into the Sect of the Novatians, saint CYPRIAN had addressed himself in these words to Pope Cornelius, to pray him to depose him. Let there be letters written 
Cypr. ad Steph. ep. 67.  from thee, into the province, and to the people inhabiting Arles, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being deposed, another may be placed in his steed. And indeed that which saint AUSTIN saith to the Donatists; put case that the Bishops which judged 
Ep. 162.  at Rome, had not been good judges, yet there remained the universal Council of the whole Catholic Church; Doth it not verify, that after the Pope's judgement (supposing and not granting that it had been subject to appeal) there remains no other judgement but that of the general Council of the whole Church? But let us return to the Council of Arles: From this Council then, the Donatists had again recourse to the Emperor, and forced him to examine the cause himself. And this was the fourth irregularity, as it appears by the protestation that the Emperor made for which he would ask pardon of the Bishops. He gave way (saith saint AUGUSTINE) to their importunity, to stop their mouths, and yielded 〈◊〉 
Ep. 162.  sarr, as to judge this cause after the Bishops, but with an intent afterward to crave pardon of the holy Bishops. Now how can an example for which the emperor protests that himself will crave the Bishop's pardon, serve for a law to the Bishops: yet this was not all, for the Donatists did no more obey the judgement of the Emperor than they had done to that of the 
Aug. ibid.  Council of Rome holden in the Pope's presence; or to that of the Council of Arles, holden in the presence of the Pope's legates, but disavowed the Petitions that they had presented to the Emperor Constantine and said that that business was not for the emperor's examination, and that it was not their solicitation that brought it before him, and cast this imputation upon the Catholics; so as the last dispute was whether the Catholics, or the Donatists had caused the Emperór to intervene in this cause, both disavowing it. If he be culpable, (saith saint AUSTIN, speaking of the Bishop Felix, who ordained Cecllianus whom the Emperor 
Ep. 162.  had caused to be heard before the Proconsul of Africa) that hath been absolved by an earthly judge not having demanded it, how much more are those 〈◊〉, that wouldhave an earthly king to be judge of their cause For if it be no crime to have appealed to the Empero, rit is no crime to have been heard by the Emperor, neither them by him to whom the Emperor had delegated the cause, that is to say, by the Proconsul. 
Ep. 166.  And again; know that your superiors have first brought Cecilianus his cause before Constantine, oblige us to prove it to you; and if we prove it not, do with us what you can.  
Now let us recapitnlate all the heads of this history: The first head, say the Caluinists, was that the Donatists addressed themselves to the Emperor Constantine to ask judges of him; it is true, but what consequence can you draw from this example? For were not the Donatists already schismatics, 
Aug. ep. 162.  and separated from the obedience and from the communion of the Church? And besides, had not they recourse afterward to the Emperor julian the Apostata, a pagan and infidel Prince to recover their Churches, that the Christian and Catholic Princes had taken from them, and with this Elegy, that in him only all justice remained? And 
Aug. contr litter. 〈◊〉. l. 2. cap. 92. Ep 166  did not saint AUGUSTINE cry out to them; If it were in your power, you would not now call against us the Emperor Constantine, because he favours the truth, but you would rather call julian the Apostata out of hell? The second head was, that the Emperor partly yielding to their importunity, granted them judges from the province that they had demanded; that is to say, from the Gauls; it is true, but did not the Emperor protest before he granted 
Optat. count. 〈◊〉. l. 1.  this to them; that it belonged not to him, who attended the judgement of Christ, to meddle with the judgements of Christ's Ministers? And after he had granted them this, did he not remit them to Rome to judge the cause with the Pope, and under the presidency and direction of the Pope? The third head was, that the Donatists appealed from the Pope's judgement, to the Emperor's judgement; it is true: But doth not the Emperor cry out, that this appeal was a thing not fit to be spoken or heard? that it was a mad impudence of fury; that it was a recourse from he avenlie to earthly judgement, and a manifest contempt of Christ's authority? The fourth head was, that notwithstanding this protestation, the Emperor granted them a Council at Arks; it is true: but doth not saint AUGUSTINE testify, that it was an irregular action, when he saith that the Emperor did it, giving, way to the perversues 
Ibidem.  of the Donatists? And that the Pope's legates and the assistants that were with him at the Council of Rome, were present at that of Arles. 
〈◊〉.  And that the Fathers of the Council, bewailed that the Pope could not assist there, and said, that if he had been there present, they had pronounced a more severe sentence against the Donatists; doth it not prove, that it was not a judgement of appeal, but a more ample review of the cause which the Donatists said was not fully heard. The fifth head was that 
Ibidem.  the Donatists had recourse again from the council of Arles to the Emperor, and prayed him to take the examination of the cause himself, which he did, it is true; but doth not saint AUGUSTIN say that he protested the he would afterward crave pardon of the holy Bishops? And doth he not further testify that the Donatists did no more agree to the Emperor's 
Ibidem.  judgement then to the former? The Emperor (saith he) is chosen judge; 
Aug. ep. 162.  the Emperor judging is despised. With what ingenuity then, can Calvin and 
Calvin. Inst. l. 4. c. 7.  his disciples say, that this history is enough to end the question, and fully to clear the business; for who sees not, that these proceedings, not having been at the instance of the Catholic party, and according to 
The author of the 〈◊〉 of the Church c. 8.  the ordinary forms of the Church, but at the instance of the heretical party, and by extraordinary ways and against which the Emperor himself protests for injustice, for fury, for impiety, and obligeth himself to ask the Prelate's pardon: And having finally been rejected and disavowed, even by those that had solicited for them, and as it were snatched it out of the Emperor's hands, there is no more justice in making use of them, to the prejudice of the ordinary laws of the Church, and to propound them for copies and patterns of the ancient form and ecclesiastical discipline, then to allege against the present authority of the Pope and the Council the audience and conference that King Charles the ninth granted at Poissy to the Protestants of his Kingdom, after the council of Sens and Trent, to the end to prove to bring them back to the church, by way of mildness and accommodation, and to infer from thence, that the Conference of Poissy, was given above the Counsels of Sens and Trent:   

Of the decree of the Milevitan Council concerning the beyond— Sea Appeals. CHAPT. V.  
THE fourth instance of Calvin is; that in the Milevitan Council holden under Pope Innocent the first thousand two hundred years ago, the Bishops of Africa forbade the clerks of their Provinces the appeals beyond Seas, In the Milevitan Coweell, saith Calvin, where saint AUGUSTINE assisted; 
Calu. Inst. l. 4 c. 7.  those that should appeal beyond Sea; were excommunicated. It is true, but to 
Concil. Milevit. can. 22.  this instance we bring two sharp and decisive answers: the first. that the canon is meant but of appeals in minor and personal causes, as were causes as well pecuniary as moral, that is to say, as well civil as criminal of clerks, and not in mayor causes, that is to say, in common and eclesiastical causes, as were causes of Faith and Sacraments, or of the universal customs of the church. And the second, that he speaks but of the Appeals of Priests deacons, and other clerks of the inferior order; and not of the Appeals of the Clerks of Superior orders; that is to sale, of Bishops. For the clearing then of the first of these doubts; which is, that the Canon is meant but of Appeals in minor causes, it must be known, that the eccelesiastical Tribunals, did then examine not only the spiritual and religious causes of the Church, but also all the temporal and secular causes of ecclesiastical persons, as well civil as criminal. This appears both by the first Council of Constantinople; which ordains, That if any one do begin a particular process against a Bishop, as having 
Conc. Const. 1. c. 6.  received loss or injury from him, the person and Religion of the accuser shall not be examined, but if it be an ecclesiastical crime, the accuser's person shall be examined and first it shall not be lawful for heretics to accuse orthodox Bishops for ecclesiastical causes: And by the third Council of Carthage, celebrated ninteen years before the Milevitan Council; which decrees, That 〈◊〉 
Conc. Charth. 〈◊〉. c 7.  Clerk that leaving the Ecclesiastical government, would purge himself in the public judgements, although the sentence be to his advantage, if it be in a criminal judgement, he shall lose his degree; and if it be in civil judgement, he shall lose that which hath been adjudged to him. And by the Epistle to the Emperor Theodosius 
Conc. Eph. Act. 1.  the second who to advance the judgement of the controversy of Nestorius, imposed truce to the Council of Ephesus of all pecuniary and criminal causes, and ordained that they should handle no cause, neither ecclesiastical nor other, till that of Faith were determined. Now these different sorts of causes, were not reputed to be all of a weight; but the one, to wit those that regard Faith, or the general customs of the Church, were called mayor causes, maior businesses, maior affairs. And the others, to wit, those that regard the particular persons of clergy men, and consisted in accusation of manners, or pursuit of pecuniary interests, were called minor causes, minor businesses, and minor affairs; And that by a distinction taken from the analogy of the Scripture, which 〈◊〉 that jethro advised Moses to suffer the minor causes of the Israelites to be judged by the inferior judges, and to reserve to himself only 
Exod. 18.  the mayor causes: Those that shall be mayor causes, said he, let them bring to thee, but let themselves judge the minor causes, The use of this distinction may be seen in a thousand places of antiquities. It appears in these words of the Epistle of the same Pope Innocent, under whom the Milevitan Council 
Innoc ep. ad 〈◊〉.  was holden, to Uictricius; If they be mayor causes that are in question, after the Episcopal judgement, let them be referred to the Sea Apostolic, as the Synod and ancient customs (vetus and not beata) ordain. Which Epistle I the rather allege, because it was cited by the Bishops of France in the second Council of Tours a thousand and seven hundred years agone. It appears 
Conc. Turon 2. c. 21  in these words of the Epistle of the Pope saint LEO the first to 〈◊〉 Bishop of Thesalonica his Vicar in Macedonia and other provinces 〈◊〉 Constantinople; If any mayor cause be moved for which it may be reasonable 
Leo ep. 82  and necessary to call an Episcopal assembly, let it suffice thee to cause two Bishops to come to thee out of every province, such as the Metropolitans would choose. And a little after; And if their judgement be found differing from thy opinion let the acts be sent to us with authentical testimony, that all dissensions taken away, a sentence pleasing to God may be decreed. It appears 
〈◊〉 l 2.  in these words of the Epistle of saint GREGORY the Great, to john 
Ep. 〈◊〉.  Bishop of the first justinianea: If any cause of faith, or of crime, or of pecuniary matter be objected against our Colleague Adrian Bishop of Thebes, let it be judged if it be a matter of light importance by our Nuncios, which are or shall be in the royal City; that is to say, at Constantinople; and if it be a matter of weight, let it be referred hither to the Sea Apostolic. And finally it appears in the capitulary of 
Cap. Carol 〈◊〉 gn. l 6. 〈◊〉 287.  our great Emperor Charlemagne, where the words of Pope Innocent the first, are repeated by form of law, in these words: If they be mayor the Sea Apostolic, as the Synod and the blessed (or to read better, the ancient) custom ordains. And from thence it is that Hincmarus Archbishop of Rheims, writing a little after, that is to say under Charles the Bald to Pope 
Hincm. ep. ad Nicol. 〈◊〉. apud Flodoard. hist. Eccl. Rem. l. 3.  Nicholas the first, maketh him this protestation; Let it not please God, that we should so despise the privilege of the first and sovereign sea of the Pope of the holy Roman Church, as to weary your sovereign authority with all the Controversies and with all the quarrels of the Clergy, as well of the Superior as inferior order, which the canons of the Council of Nicaea and the decrees of Innocent, and of the other Popes of the holy sea of Rome, command to be determined in their provinces And again; We Metropolitans travailing in our provincial Counsels, decide carnal controversies, and have care after judgement to refer the mayor causes, and of mayor persons, to the examination of the Pope of the Sovereign Sea. And from hence it is alsoe that Gerson declaiming long time after against the disorders in the court of Rome during the schism of john the twenty three, cries out; If the judgement of minor causes be reproved in 
Gers. de Protest. Eccl. Consid. 8.  Moses by jethro, how would it be in the Pope and in his Court of so many continual and importune employments of most profane and unworthy processes.  
The first solution then that we bring to the prohibition that the Bishops of the Milevitan Council made to their clerks from appealing beyond Sea, is that the words of the Council were intended not of appeals in mayor causes; that is to say, in causes that concern faith or the universal customs of the church; but of appeals in minor causes; that is to say, in causes moral or pecuniary of Ecclesiastical persons. And this solution besides the places already alleged, we draw first from the text of the canon which saith precisely; In the cause that they shall have to show, that he speaks of their particular causes, and not of the causes of the church. And secondly from the argument that hath been set before one of the places of the Greek translation of this canon near thousand years ago, which saith in their proper causes, to distinguish them 
Edit. Graec Conc. Carth. c. 26.  from Ecclesiastical causes: for the first council of Constantinople that the greeks held for the Palladium of their discipline; And the third 
Conc. Const. 1. c. 6  Council of Carthage, oppose proper causes to ecclesiastical causes, not that proper and temporal causes of ecclesiastical persons were not 
Conc. Carth 3. c. 7.  sometimes called ecclesiastical causes, but because when the word ecclesiastical cause was specially taken, it was restrained only to ecclesiastical matter. And thirdly we collect it from the practice and proceedings of the same Milevitan Council. For after that Pelagius, whose cause was a mayor cause, and belonging to the Faith, had been judged in the East by the Bishops of Palestina, and that Celestius his disciple had been heard and excommunicated for the same cause in Africa, by the African Bishops, the Milevitan Council remitted the final judgement thereof to the Pope, in these words: Because God by the gift of his principal 
Epist. Concil. Mil. ad Innoc. inter. Ep.  grace, hath placed thee in the Sea Apostolic, and in our days, given thee for such as we ought rather to fear that it should be imputed to us for a crime of negligence if we chould conceal from they Reverence, those things that ought 
Aug. ep. 〈◊〉  to be represented for the good of the Church, then to apprehend that they would seem troublesome or contemptible to thee: We beseech the to apply thy pastoral diligence to the great perils of the sick members of Christ And a little after; jusinuating these things into they Apostolical breast, we need not extend ourselves in language, and to amplify so great an impiety with words, being assured that they will so move thee, as thou canst not delay their correction, lest they should spread farther. And again; But we hope, with the help of the mercy of our Lord jesus Christ, who vouchsafe to govern thee consulting with him, and to hear thee praying to him, that those that hold these doctrines so perverse and pernicious, will more easily yield to the authority of thy Holiness, drawn out of the authority of the holy scriptures, in such sort as we may have more cause to rejoice in their correction, then to afflict ourselves in their ruin. A marvellous encounter of the effects of God's providence, which willed that the same Milevitan Council, which the Lutherans and Caluinists abuse to overthrow the Pope's authority, not only puts it in practice, but also witnesseth that it is of divine right, and grounded upon the authority of the holy scriptures. For to think, to shift off this Epithet, drawn from the authority of the holy scriptures, by saying that the Council speaks not of the cathedral and judiciary authority of the Pope, but of the authority of the passages of the scripture, alleged by the Pope against Pelagius, it is a childish and ridiculous shift, aswell because, the Pope had not then alleged any thing against the Pelagians, as because it had been a singular impertinency that the Pelagians would rather yield to the Pope's authority, then to that of the other Bishops, doctor's, and Catholic Counsels, and amongst the rest, of saint JEROM, saint AUGUSTINE, and of the two Counsels of Africa, whereof books are full saith saint PROSPER, 
Prosp. de Ingr.   

Of Channels that we bring,  
From the eternal Spring.   
Because the Pope's authority was drawn from the authority of the holy scriptures; If by the Pope's authority, they had intended the passages alleged by the Pope, and not the authority of the Pope's chair. jointly that the five Bishops of Africa who accompanied the relation of the Milevitan Council with their letters, did sufficiently explicaten of what authority the Milevitan Council intended to speak, when they writ to the Pope; If the abettors of 〈◊〉 knew, that the 
Aug. ep. 95  book, which they believe or know to be his, hath been anathematised and condemned by the authority of the Catholic Bishops, and principally by that of thy Holiness, which we doubt not, but it is of greater weight in his behalf; we will imagine, that they will no more dare to disturb the souls of the faithful which are simply Christian. And fowerthlie, we collect it from the words of the same saint INNOCENT the first, to whom the Milevitan Council address their relation, who not only in the Epistle already cited, to Victricius; saith, That the ancient custom bare, 
Innoc ep. ad Victiic.  that the mayor causes after the Episcopal judgement, were referred to the Sea Apostolic; but also in the very answer of the Milevitan Council witnesseth, that causes of Faith, were wont to have recourse to the Sea Apostolic; As many times (said he) as there is question of any matter 
Inter. ep. Aug. ep. 93.  of faith, I make account that all my brethren and fellow Bishops cannot choose but refer it to Peter; that is to say, to the 〈◊〉 of their name and dignity. Which words are not to be argued of ambition, since saint AUSTIN commends them as just and lawful, in these words; Upon this the relations of the two Counsels of Carthage and Milevis were sent 
Aug. ep. 106.  to the Sea Apostolic. And a little after; We writ also to Pope Innocent of blessed memory, familiar letters, wherein we treated the affair somewhat more amply. To all these things he answered us in the same manner as was convenient and fit, that the Prelate of the Sea Apostolic should answer us. And finally we draw it from the issue of Celestius his cause, which was that Pope Innocent having been prevented by death before he could bring it to effect, Pope Zosimus his Successor and that even at the instance of the Counsels of Africa, who sent to Rome the verbal process of that, that past between them, and Celestius finished it. And after he had heard Celestius in person, and deliberated whether he would absolve him or not absolve him from the excommunication that the Bishops of Africa had pronounced against him, he finally confirmed the sentence of the Counsels of Africa, and declared him condemned and excommunicated through the whole earth. Celestius (saith saint AUGUSTINE, speaking of the answers that 
Aug de pecc. orig. cont. Pelag & Celest. c. 7.  Celestius made to the Interrogatories of Pope Zosimus) would not condemn the things that had been objected to him by the Deacon Paulinus in the Council of Carthage; but he durst not resist the letters of the blessed Pope Innocent, but promised to comdemne all, what that Sea would comdemne. And therefore having been gently fomented like a frantic person, to the end to give him a little rest, it was not yet thought fit that he ought to be absolved from the bonds of excommunication, but for the space of two months attending an answer from Africa, leisure for repentance was given him, under a certain medecinall sweetness of judgement. And again: Of this new heresy Pelagius 
Aug. ep. 157.  and Celestius having been the authors, or the most famous and violent promoters, they themselves by the means of the watchfulness of two Episcopal Counsels, with the help of God, who takes the protection of his Church, have also been condemned in all the Christian world, by the Reverend Prelates of the Sea Apostolic; yea even to the number of two, Pope Innocent, and Pope Zosimus, if they do not correct themselves, and besides do penance. And Prosper his disciple; Under the twelfth consulship of Honorius and of Theodosius; 
Prosper. in Chronic.  the decrees of the Council of Carthage two hundred and fourteen Bishops, were carried to Pope Zosimus, which having been approved, the Pelagian heresy, was condemned throughout the world. And again; The Pope, Zosimus 
Id contr. Collator.  of blessed memory, added the force of his sentence to the decrees of the Counsels of Africa; and to cut of impious persons, armed the right hands of all the Bishops, with the sword of Peter.  
The second solution that when bring to the place of the Milevitan Council is, that the Canon speaks but of inferior clerks, which were Priests, deacons, subdeacons, and other lesser Orders, and not superior Clerks; that is to say, Bishops, whose causes, because of the importance and dignity of their persons, were reputed mayor causes; as Pope Nicholas the first, though long after, writes to the Bishops of France, in 
Nicol. 1. ep ad Episc. Gallic.  these words: The more the Bishops are in a principal degree. and more exalted in the Church of God, the more when their preservation is treated of, or their deposition, ought their causes to be reckoned amongst mayor and difficult causes; for they are the first in the Church; they are those which hold the reed in their hand, to measure the holy jerusalem; they are those that rule in God's buildings. And this solution we draw first from the very words of the Milevitan Council, which are; It hath been thought fit, that 
Conc. Milevit. c. 22.  the Priests, Deacons, and other Clerks of the inferior order, in the causes that they shall have, if they complain of the judgements of their Bishops, appeal not but to the Counsels of Africa, or to the Primates of their provinces. By which words restrained to only priests, deacons, and other Clerks of inferior order; it is manifest that the Counsels except the Clerks of the superior order; that is to say, Bishops. And secondly, we draw it out of the Epistle of Pope julius the first, reported by saint ATHANASIUS, which saith; that saint ATHANASIUS, could not be definitively judged without the Roman Church, because he was of the 
Ibid.  order of Bishops: They were (said he) Bishops, and not of vulgar Churches And a little after; If then there were such a suspicion conceived against the Bishops there, it must have been written of, to this Church here. Hereby testifying to us; that there was this difference between the Bishops and the inferior Clerks, as the causes of inferior clerks were determined in particular Counsels; but the causes of Bishops could not be judged definitively without the Pope. And thirdly we collect it from saint AUGUSTINE, who teacheth us, as we note in the appendix of the conference of Fontaine-bleau, that the prerogative of Bishops, and that 
Refut. de l'obiect 1. du Decret.  of priests, deacons, and other inferior Clerks were distinct in Africa, for matter of appeal; and that the one, to wit Bishops, might appeal beyond Sea, and not the others; yea grounds the justice of the Catholics of Africa, who took part with Cecilianus Archbishop of Carthage against the Donatists, who opposed him upon this, that Cecilianus having been judged by a Council of seventy African Bishops assembled at Carthage could have appealed beyond Sea; for as much as he was not of the number of Priests, deacons or other inferior Clerks, but was of 
Aug ep. 162.  the order of Bishops: He might (saith saint AUSTIN) despise the conspiring multitude of his enemies because he saw himself joined by communicatory letterrs with the Roman Church, in which hath always flourished the principality of the Sea Apostolic, and with the 〈◊〉 transmarine Churches. For (adds he a little 〈◊〉) there was no question of Priests, deacons, or other Clerks of the inferior order, but of the colleagues; (that is to say,) of Bishops, who might reserve their cause entire to the judgement of other Bishops, and principally of the Churches Apostolic. In which place saint AUSTIN useth the word Churches Apostolic, in the plural number, not to deny the eminency of the Roman Church over the other Apostolic Churches, of which contrariwise he had newly said, that Cecilianus might despise the conspiring multitude of his Enemies, for as much as he saw himself united by communicatory letters, with the Sea of Rome, in which had always flourished the principality of the Sea Apostolic, but to the end to shut up the gate against the shift of the Donatists, which calumniated and rejected the judgement that Pope Melchiades had made of Cecilianus, because they said that Melchiades, not only was culpable of the crime of treason as well as Cecilianus, and by consequent capable of refusal in this case; but also whilst he was yet a deacon had Sacrificed to Idols, with Pope Marcellinus. For although this reproach were false, as appears by the computation that saint AUGUSTINE 
〈◊〉 de 〈◊〉. Bap. 〈◊〉.  gives it elsewhere, and by the testimony that Theodoret gives to Marcellinus, to have been most excellent in persecution: Nevertheless it gave 
〈◊〉. hist Eccl. 〈◊〉. c. 〈◊〉.  colour to the Donatists to revolt against the Pope's judgement; therefore saint AUSTIN without tying himself to the speciality of the Roman Church, contents himself to say in general, that Cecilianus might reserve his cause to the judgement of the transmarine Churches, and principally those that are Apostolic; to infer thence, that the Donatists, (who upon the only sentence of the Council of Africa, & without attending a judgement from beyond Sea, had instituted an other Archbishop at Carthage,) were 〈◊〉. For the privilege that the Bishops of Africa had, that they might appeal beyond Sea, was such; that their causes could not be determined, either till the Roman Church should examine them, or in default of the Roman Church, (putting it in the form of a case given, 
Aug. ep. 16.  not granted that they had just cause to refuse the Pope in any affair;) till the judgement of all the other transmarine Churches, & principally Apostolic, had intervened as S. AVS. declares a while after, in these words; Put the case that the Bishops that judged the cause at Rome, had not been good judges there remained yet the universal Council of the whole Church. For this cause then the Milevitan Council, willing according to the ancient African discipline, (witnessed by saint AUSTIN himself) to except at the Canon where the defence of the appeals beyond Sea is questioned; the clerks of the superior order, that is to say, the Bishops, put in by way of bar, the specification of priests, Deacons and other Clerks of the inferior order, to hinder Bishops from being comprehended therein. 
Conc. 〈◊〉 leuit. c. 22  It hath been thought fit (saith the Council,) that the Priests, Deacons, and other clerks of the inferior order, should not appeal but to the Council of Africa, or to the 〈◊〉 of their own provinces. For whereas the greeks in their rhapsody of the African Counsels, which they call the Counsels of Carthage; 〈◊〉 add at the end of a place, where the canon is reported out of his place, 
Edit Graec. Conc. Carthag. c. 28. vel. secundum alios 31.  these words; as it hath been often ordained of Bishops; a clause that if it were true, shows plainly, that the body of the Canon speaks not of Bishops, it is a false addition made by the greeks, and followed in the form of diverse reading by some latin copyists.  
Our ways to disprove this are seven. The first is, that neither in the original texts of the 〈◊〉 Council, nor in Gratian'ss citations, nor 
Impress.  in the copies that are transcribed in form by the centuriators of Germany, 
Paris. apud Gallict. du Prè. 1524. & Francisc Regnaut. 1553 & Guillel.  nor in the Council of Carthage, holden under the twelfth Consulship of Honorius where the canons of the Milevitan Council werere ported; nor in all the hundred and five chapters of the latin rhapsody of the Counsels of Africa, this cause is not to be found. The second, that in the very rhapsody of the greeks, in the place where the Council of 
Thibout 1555. Impress Basil. per joan Opoporin. 1535. Impress. Venet 1585.  Carthage, relative to that of Milevis is inserted there is no mention made of this clause. The third, that never before the Milevitan Council, there had been any speech of interdicting the appeals beyond the Sea to the Bishops; contrariwise, saint AUSTIN testifies, that the ancient discipline of Africa, bare, that Bishops had right to appeal beyond Sea; by 
Decret.  means whereof the Milevitan Council could not add to their decree; as 
Grat. c. 2. q. 6 &c 21. q. 3.  it hath often 〈◊〉 ordained of Bishops. The fourth, that they had never begun to make this Defence for Bishops before it had been done for Priests, deacons, 
Centur. Magdeburg Centur. 5. col. 839.  and the inferior clerks, who were much less privileged than the Bishops. The fifth, that these words; As it hath been often ordained of Bishops, can not be compatible with the text of the Canon; which wills, that the appeals whereof it speaks, should have recourse to the Primates 
Conc. Afric. c 93.  of provinces. For the causes of Bishops went not by appeal, but in in the first instance, to the Primates of the Provinces. If any Bishop be accused 
Edit. Graec.  
Conc. Carth c. 126. vel secundum alios 127.  (saith the Council of Hippo and after that the third Council of Carthage;) let the accuser bring the cause to the Primate of the province. And it is not to be replied, that the Canon imports; to the African Counsels, or to the Primates 
Aug. ep. 162.  of their Provinces; for besides that by the African Counsels, he intends the provincial Counsels of Africa, as it appears by this alternative, or 
Conc. Hippon c. 7.  to the Primates of their provinces; which was put there, because the Primates 
Conc. Carthag. 3 c. 7.  judged with the Counsels of their Provinces: The greeks, to find a place for their addition, without multiplying the words of the article, have taken away 〈◊〉 his place, the clause of the African Counsels, and left 
Edit. Graec. Concil.  that only, of the Primates of Provinces, as being one same thing. Yet will it 
Carth. c. 26  less avail to object, that in two most incorrect manuscripts; there is, or to the General Council; that is to say, to the General Council of Africa, For besides that, all the greek and latin impression, disprove this different reading, even the addition of the other clause can not sufferr it. For as much as these words; as it hath often been ordained of Bishops, show, that the precedent period spoke not of Bishops, but of inferior Clerks whose causes went not to the general Counsels of Africa. And because even those that allege the canon with the first addition, and 
Hincm. in ep. 〈◊〉. cap. 17.  amongst others Hincmarus, and the Conventicle of Rheims, the one under Charles the Bald; the other under Hugh Capet, are ignorant of the second, as not contained in the copies of their time: And the rapsodists of the 
Centur.  greeks, even the same. And it serves for nothing to say, that, in 
Magdeb. cent. 10. coll. 494.  the Epistle to Pope Celestine, there is found a like clause. For neither doth that epistle speak separately of the inferior clerks, as doth the first 
Edit. Graec. Conc. Carth. c. 26.  period of this Canon; but speaks jointly of the inferior Clerks and of the Bishops; and it is to be understood respectively of the one and of the other; neither was it done as it shall appear hereafter, before the 
Conc. Afric. c. 105.  controversies of the Bishop's appeals, as was the Milevitan Council, 
Beneath. chap. 10.  but after. The sixth way of disproof, is, that Pope Innocent the first, commended the Milevitan Council, for having carried themselves worthily for the honour of the Sea Apostolic; You provided (said he) diligently and worthily for the Apostolic all honour. And again; You shall enjoy the glory of having observed the Canons. Which he had never done, if in the prohibition of appeals beyond Sea, the Milevitan Council had comprehended the causes of Bishops. And the seaventh finally, that Cresconius an African author and ancient, of a thousand years in the Epitome that he compiled of the Canons, registers the title of this Canon in the same terms of the original latin of the Milevitan Council, and of the Council os Carthage, holden under the twefth consulship of Honorius, where the Milevitan was inserted; that is to say, restrains it to only priests and deacons in these words; For priests (said he) And deacons, let 
Cresc. in 〈◊〉. can. capit. 285.  not them appeal, but to the Counsels of Africa. I add, that if this addition should be true, it would not belong to the Milevitan Council, which toucheth, not one word of Bishop's appeals, but to the sixth Council of Carthage, where the business of the Bishop's appeals was questioned. For the place of the Greek rhapsody that contains it, is no relative, either 
See beneath. chap. 7.  to the Milevitan Council nor to the Council of Carthage, 〈◊〉 under the twelfth Consulship of Honorius, where the Milevitan was reported; but to the sixth Council of Carthage, and the copy of some latin collections, whither it hath been transferred, bear the title of the sixth Council of Carthage. And finally, I say it is so far from being true, as the very place where it is found, is forged. For neither the sixth Council of Carthage made any Canon concerning Bishops appeals but ordained, that the resolution of the affair should be put off, till the Greek copies of the Council of Nicaea, which arrived long after, had been brought out of the East, and that when they should come, there should be a new Council called to deliberate of it, and the while that the 
Conc Carthag. 6. c. 9  Bishop's appeals should continue, neither was the collection of thirty three Canons annexed by the greeks, before the rhapsody of the Counsels 
Conc. Carthag. 6. c. 7.  of Africa, and published in some latin copies, under the name of the sixth Council of Carthage made in the sixth Council of Carthage but is a mingle mangle of diverse African Canons, peeced together by some impertinent compiler, and published, as shall 〈◊〉 appear, under the name of the sixth Council of Carthage. But for as much as the clereing of 
Beneath. chap. 49.  these two last points, depends upon the order and distinction of the Counsels of Africa, that the ignorance of the Copyer and compilers, hath strangely confounded, it is necessary to inform the Readers therein before I pass further.   

Of the order and distinction of the Counsels of Carthage; CHAPT. VI  
TO bring some light to this confusion, you must note, that there are three ways by which the Canons of the Counsels of Africa are come to our hands; the first, the original text of the Counsels of Africa, which are come in form to us, amongst which are seven Counsels of Carthage which are escaped from the injury of time, and some Counsels of Numidia. The secondis this latin rhapsody of the Canons of the Counsels of Africa, contained in an hundred & five chapters which we call the council of Africa. And the third is this greek rhapsody of the same Canons of the Counsels of Africa, contained in a hundred thirty 〈◊〉 whereof the first thirty three are translated from a latin collection, falsely attributed to the sixth Council of Carthage. And the hundred and five others, are translated from the latin rhapsody; And therefore according to those three ways, we will distribute the discourse of the distinction of the Counsels of Africa into three parts.  
Of the Counsels of Africa then, which are come in form to us, the first is the Council of Carthage holden under Gratus Archbishop of Carthage in the time of the Emperor Constantine, son to the Great 
Fulg. Ferr. in Breu.  Constantine, when Paulus and Macarius were sent into Africa, and whose Canons are cited by Fulgentius Ferrandus an ancient African Canonist, 
Can. art. 4. 24. 123. & alibi.  with this title: The Council of Carthage, holden under saint GRATUS; which Council we call the first, because it is the first of the orthodox Counsels of Africa that hath come to our hands; for that, that was held by saint CYPRIAN, was an erroneous Council, and reproved by the Church. The second is the Council of Carthage, celebrated under Genetlius, during the Empire of Valentinian the first. The second is the Council of Carthage, assembled in the time of Cornelius under the Consulships of Cesarius and Atticus. The fourth is the Council of Carthage called under the Consulship of Honorius and Eutychianus, where the conditions of those that aught to be received into ecclesiastical orders were decided. The fifth is the Council dated after the consulship whether of Stilicon and Aurelianus; or whether as the Illustrious cardinal Baronius will have it, of Cesarius and Atticus; where was decreed the legation to the Emperors, for the destruction of the relics of Idolatry. The sixth is, the Council that was gathered after the twelfth consulship of Honorius the vl of the calends of june for the cause of Apiarius. And the seaventh is that that was kept the third of the calends of june of the same year, after the Bishops assembled at the sixth Council of Carthage were retired, and had left with Aurelius one & twenty deputies of all their assembly, to the end to frame rules necessary for Africa. Now in the business of these seven counsels, we shall meet with seven principal difficulties, which we will assay to remove all in this chapter; the first difficulty is, concerning the second and third council of Carthage, whereof some authors of this age, reverse the order, and will have the second to be the vl or the ninth; and the third to be the second, and from the third they cut of many canons, which they attribute to the sixth. A thing that not only disturbs the order, and the credit of the ecclesiastical history, but also diminisheth the antiquity of many canons, advantageous to the Catholic cause, which are contained in the second and third, by means whereof, the interest of the same cause, obligeth me to replace them in their rank, and the rather because the 
Edit. Conc. Colon. 1606.  last impression of the counsels which hath been made upon this new chronology, begins to take such footing in men's spirits, as the more part of the modern writers, sufferr themselves to be carried away with it. Now, I cannot set to my hand to correct it, without shouldering and removing the computation of the most learned and Illustrious cardinal Baronius: for it is he, under whose authority, they cover themselves, and out of whose writings they take all their arguments; and therefore before I enter into the matter, I will beseech that great Ornament of the Church now that he discerns from heaven his Oblivion's and ours, to pardon me, if I be in any thing different from the course of his nanalls. For who can be such a Homer, as in so long and prodigious a labour not sometimes to slumber? but we must always remember, that his defects are beneath his glory, and that if within the great and immense mass of his works, there be found (as within the body of the moon) some marks and spots, they hinder him not from shining above all other Ecclesiastical historians,  

As Luna, when the nights dim Curtain shrines  
The skies; the fainter light of Stars outshines.   
The reasons then, for which the Illustrious Cardinal Baronius 〈◊〉 
Annal. tom 5 〈◊〉 397.  departed, in the second Council of Carthage from the ordinary chronology, are sour: the first, that the inscription of this council is Valentinian, 
Et 〈◊〉 appendic. 〈◊〉 Tom 5. ann. 397.  being the fourth time consul with Theodosius, which can not be understood of Valentinian the first, and of the great Theodosius, who were never together consuls, and therefore aught to have reference to 
Et 〈◊〉 Epito D. 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. & in 〈◊〉 Conc.  Theodosius the second & Valentinian the third who were consuls together the year of Christ three hundred twenty five. And for as much, as when Valentinian is named before Theodosius it is Valentinian the first, and Theodosius 
Col ex 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 Binn.  the great which are intended; he will have it, that the order hath been inverted, and that instead of Valentinian and Theodosius, it should be restored Theodosius and Valentinian. And because the fourth consulship 
Tom 1.  of Valentinian the third fell out after the possession of Africa by the Vandals, and after the death of Aurelius Bishop of Carthage he conceives that in steed of four we should read IU and that these two letters, are not 〈◊〉 of cyphering, but an abridgement of the word junior: and that the inscription speaks of the young Valentinian. The second reason is that this Council was holden under Genedius, Archbishop of Carthage, which cannot be before Aurelius, for before Aurelius there was no Bishop of Carthage, that bore the name of Genedius. The third reason is, that there is mention made in this Council of Aurelius and of Genedius, as being both present there; by means whereof, it must be that this Genedius was condintor to Aurelius, which could not have been but in the extreme old age of Aurelius; and by consequent, long after the date of the second Council of Carthage. And the fourth which is the strongest of all, that Alipius Bishop of Tagast, and Ualentin Primate of Numidia, are there nominated as present and speaking in the Council, which cannot agree to the Chronologie of the second Council of Carthage, in the time whereof, neither Alipius as appears by saint 
Aug. ep 8.  
Conc. Afric. c. 53.  AUGUSTINE was Bishop of Tagast nor Ualentin as appears by the African Council, Primate of Numidia.  
Now to the first of these objections, which is of the date, it hath been 
Praefat in Frag. Hallar  already answered by many and amongst the rest, by Monsieur le Feure, afterward Tutor to the most Christian King, that in steed of these words Valentinian for the fourth time, and Theodosius Consuls, it must be read Valentinian for the fourth time and Neoterius consuls, the copiers having ignorantly from the abridgement of these letters Neot: made Theod:  
To the second objection, which is of the name Genedius, which is not found attributed to any Bishop of Carthage before Aurelius; it hath likewise been answered, that it must not be read Genedius but Genetlius, which is the name of Aurelius predecessor, and so the ancient Manuscriptes 
Fulg. Ferr. in Breviar.  have it; And so Fulgentius Ferrandus an African Author, reads it whose antiquity is of above a thousand two hundred years: To which there 
Can c. 4. & alibi.  may be added that the appendix of the capitulary of Charlemagne citeth 
Capit. Carol. Magn. add. 4.  the ninth canon of the same Council with these terms, The Bishop Genilius hath said; which is a word corrupted from the name Genetlius.  
To the third objection, which is of the presence of 〈◊〉 mentioned 
Pref. in Frag. Hilar  in some canons of this council; Monsieur le Feure answereth, that he hath seen some Manuscripts, which instead of Aurelius have in the second canon Epigonius, and in the fifth and sixth Genetlius. Though it should be read Aurelius, it doth not therefore follow, that the council intended to speak of Aurelius Bishop of Carthage; for the name of Aurelius was a name very common to the Bishops of Africa, as in the council holden under the consulship of Cesarius and Atticus, Aurelius 〈◊〉 
In Concil. Afric. of't. c. 1.  of Carthage maketh mention of an other Bishop called Aurelius: Reginus (saith he) hath brought me letters from Crescentianus Bishop of the first Sea of Numidia, as he pretends and from Aurelius our fellow Bishops: And in the conference 
Collat. Carth. Act. 1.  of Carthage with the Donatists; There was amongst the Catholic Bishops Aurelius Bishop of Carthage, and Aurelius Bishop of Macomades. And if this same Aurelius, had been Bishop of Carthage, it need not follow therefore, that Genetlius had been his coadjutor. Contrariwise it would follow from thence, that it should be Genetlius that had been Bishop of Carthage in Chief, and Aurelius his coadjutor; For the Council entitled the second of Carthage; had been called by Genetlius, as he testifies in these 
Conc. Carthag 2. c. 1.  words: You have travailed to Carthage according to the request of my letters. Now the letters to call 〈◊〉 council had not been dispatched in Genetlius his name, and principally 〈◊〉 being present and resident at Carthage, if Aurelius had been chief Archbishop, and that Genetlius had been but his coadjutor. For the privilege to call General Counsels of Africa, belonged of right to the Archbishops of Carthage; and to 〈◊〉 it appertained to sign the letters which they called in greek Synodical, and in latin tractatorie; and not tractorie, as Erasmus supposed, and some new censors after him, not considering the difference that was between the tractory letters that the Emperors dispatched to send for their officers, and to cause them to be defrayed by the way; and the tractatory letters, that the Primates write either to their Suffragans, to call them to the Counsels of their Provinces; or to straying Bishops, to advertise them 
Ambr ep. 32 & 82.  of what they had done in the Counsels of their Provinces; for the one 
Conc. Carthag. 3. c. 48. & Conc.  was called tractory, of the word, traho; and the other was called tractatory, of the word, tractatus, which signifies Synod, or Council: From whence it is that saint AMBROSE, and the Counsels of Carthage, call the Council 
Afric. c. 14  of Nicaea, Trastatus Nicenus; and that the Council of Zelles in Africa calls the Epistle that Pope Siricius writ to the Africans, not to the end to 
Conc. zellen. Vulg. vocat. Telens' in prooem. Conc.  call them, but to the end to advertise them of what had been ordained in the Council of Rome, tractatory. And that saint AUGUSTIN intitleth the Synodical Epistles of the Council of the Maximianists holden at Carthage, TRACTATORIE. And therefore in all the places of the 
Afric. c. 43. etc. 57  African Counsels, where this word is used, not only the latin edi 
Edit. Graec  say tractatory, but even the greek translation made before the 
Conc. Carth c. 90.  time of justinian Rhinotmete, that is near a thousand years, agone, hath it Synodical.  
To the fourth objection, which is that in the Council entitled the second of Carthage, there is mention made of Alipius Bishop of Sagast, and of Valentine Primate of Numidia, to which there hath as yet been nothing answered, and which is in truth such, as if the edition of this place were correct, the Illustrious Cardinal Baronius his reason had been invincible; I answer these two words; Alypius Bishop of Sagast and Valentine Primate of Numidia are not of the original text of the second Council of Carthage, but they are two quotations which have been added to the repetition of one of the canons of this Council, which was made in the collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage. I will take the business at the spring, to make the readers understand it the better: Amongst the monuments of antiquity which are come to us, there it found as is already above said, a Collection of thirty three Canons, taken out of diverse precedent Counsels; And amongst the rest, from the first Council of Carthage holden under Gratus Archbishop of Carthage, from the second Council of Carthage, holden under Genetlius Archbishop of Carthage; and from the third and fifth Counsels of Carthage, holden under Aurelius Archbishop of Carthage Successor to each of them, but which have been since compiled and assembled into a collection, be it as we pretend by a particular rhapsody; be it as some others pretend by the sixth Council of Carthage. Now it is happened, that the copyers of this collection, entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, believing that the canons that are inserted there, had been made in the sixth Council of Carthage, and not borrowed and repeated out of the preceding Counsels, have accommodated in their copies, the most part of the quotations of the articles, to the time and to the persons of the sixth Council of Carthage. For example; in the fifth Canon of the collection, entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, which is a canon taken from two places, out of the first Council of Carthage, celebrated 
Concil. Carthag 1. c. 10. & 13. Ful. Ferr. in Breu. Cor. art. 24 & 123.  under the Archbishop Gratus, as it appears, 〈◊〉 by the text of the first Council of Carthage of whose truth both sides are agreed; and by Fulgentius Ferrandus, who alleges the second part of this canon, with the title of the Canons of the Council holden under saint GRATUS; and by the Council of Ayx in Germany, called in the time of Lewis the Debonnaire, 
Concil. Aquisgran. c. 61.  who citeth the last part with this inscription; Gratus hath said, the copiers to fit it to the time of the sixth Council of Carthage, have 
Concil. dict. Carthag. 6 c. 5.  changed the ticket of the article; and in steed of these words, The Bishop Gratus hath said, have put it. Aurelius hath said. In the third canon 
Council- 〈◊〉 Honour 12. & Theodos' 8. Coss in Concil.  of the same collection, entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, which is taken, out of the second canon of the Council holden under Genetlius Archbishop of Carthage, after these words: As in the council last passed, the rule of continence and chastity was treated of, which could not have been pronounced 
Afric. c. 76 & deinceps usque ad cap. 94.  in the sixth council of Carthage, for as much as in the council holden under the twelfth consulship of Honorius, which did immediately precede the sixth Conncell of Carthage, there was nothing ordained concerning the continence of the Clergy: the copyers of the collection notwithstanding to fit them to the time of the sixth Coucell of Carthage, where Faustinus the Pope's Legate assisted, have changed the following clause, and in steed of these words, all the Bishops say; have put; Faustinus, Bishop of Potentia saith. In the ninth canon of the same collection, which is a canon taken out of the second Council of Carthage, where after the proposition of Felix and Epigonius, Genetlius spoke again; 
Conc. Carth 2 c. 7.  the exemplifiers of the collection to apply this Canon to the time of the sixth Council of Carthage, have suppressed the word Genetlius, and instead of these words Genetlius Bishop, have put, Augustine Legate of 
〈◊〉 dict. Carth. 6. c. 9  the province of Numidia hath said. And finally in the thirteenth Canon of the same collection, which is a centon taken from the three last canons of the Council holden under Genetlius, which we call the second of Carthage; the exemplifiers to make the words of the canon agree 
Conc. Carth 2. c. 11. 12. & 13.  with the time of the sixth of Carthage, have changed the word Genetlius, which was in all the three places of that Council which we call the second of Carthage, and have put Aurelius in steed of it. And they cannot say, that the canons of the Council holden under Genetlius are not repéated in the collection entitled, the sixth Council of Carthage; but that the canons of the collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, are repeated in the Council holden under Genetlius. For besides that the Canons of the Counsels of Carthage holden under Genetlius, & repeated in the collection entitled, the sixth Council of Carthage, are cited by Fulgentius Ferandus, as canons of the counsels holden under Genetlius, and placed before the canons of the Council of Carthage holden under Aurelius; the words of the same canons are couched in the council holden under Genetlius in their order, and at their length; and with 
Fulg. Ferr. in Breviar. Can artic. 4. 96. 194 & alibi.  their reasons and relations to the antecedent and subsequent clauses; whereas in the collection entitled, the sixth Council of Carthage, they are compiled in form of centons of diverse canons of the council holden under Genetlius, and couched as shall hereafter appear impertinently, and without order of relation or dependency one upon an other. Now the abuse of Scriveners hath not yet stayed there, for this first error hath by reflection produced a second; to wit, that the Exemplifiers of the Council holden under Genetlius, which we call the second of Carthage, finding in the collection, entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, the canons of the second repeated, and noted with these new quotations, have transferred them, & made some of them retrograde into the copies of the second; sometimes in form of diverse readings, as those of the canon of the celibat, where the writers in steed of these words, all the Bishops said, have put in the margin, Other copies say; Faustinus Bishop of Potentia did 
Conc. Carth 4. ad marg. c. 2.  〈◊〉: sometimes in the form of a continued text, and without the note of diverse reading; as in the second, third, fourth, and sixth canon of the second council of Carthage; in the first whereof the ancient manuscripts of the second Council of Carthage; cited by Monsieur le feure, have Epigonius; 
Praefat. in frag. Hilar.  and in the three others, Genetlius; the exemplifiers have taken away Epigonius and Genetlius, and put in Aurelius. Now of this kind do we maintain the two quotations to be, that are here in question; that is to say, that the two names Alypius Bishop of Tagast, and Valentine 〈◊〉 of Numidia, are not of the original text of the Council holden under Genetlius, which we call the second of Carthage, but have been transferred thither, from the repetition of the Canons of the same Council, which had been made in the collection entitled, the sixth council of Carthage. And thus much for answer to the last of the Illustrious Cardinal Baronius. We are now to pass forward to ours.  
The reasons then, by virtue whereof we separate ourselves from the chronology of the Illustrious Cardinal Baronius, who placeth the Council of Genetlius under the emperor Valentinian the third, and adhere to the ordinary computation, which placeth it under the emperor Valentinian the second, consists in ten principal proofs: The first proof is that, we have now some what touched; to wit, that many of the canons of the Council holden under Genetlius, are repeated in the Collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage; from whence it appears, that the Council holden under Genetlius preceded the sixth Council of Carthage. Now the Council holden under Genetlius, could not precede the sixth Council of Carthage, unless Genetlius had been chief Bishop of Carthage, before Aurelius: for in the time of the sixth Council of Carthage, Aurelius had no coadjutor, and Genetlius could not have been Predecessor to Aurelius, but he must have lived, not under the Empire of Valentinian the third who began not his Reign, till six year after the sixth Council of Carthage, but under the Empire of Valentinian the second.  
The second proof is, that the Council entitled, the second of 
Conc. Carth 1. c. 2.  Carthage, was called by Genetlius, as it hath been above said, and as he declared it himself in these words: You have travailed to Carthage upon the instance of my letters: by means whereof he must necessarily be Archbishop of Carthage in chief, and not coadjutor to Aurelius, and consequently, that the Council entitled the second of Carthage, was holden under Valentinian the second, and not under Valentinian the third. The third proof is, that saint AUGUS. having repent that he was made coadjutor with identity of title to Ualerius Bishop of Hippo, because he believed that it was forbidden by the Council of Nicaea, and 
Act. design. Erad apud August. ep. 110.  having upon this occasion procured in the sixth council of Carthage, that those that ordained Bishops, should be obliged to read the decrees of 
Possid. in vit. August.  the Counsels to them, before they ordanied them; there is no appearance, that after the third Council of Carthage, Aurelius should have made 
Conc. Carth 3. c. 3.  Genetlius his coadjutor, with identity of title. The fowerth proof is, that after Aurelius there was no Bishop of Carthage which bore the name of Genetlius, nor any room vacant where to place him: For to Aurelius succeeded 
Ep. Capreol.  Capreolus, to Capreolus, Quodvult Deus; to Quod vult-Deus, Deo gratias: Whereas between the promotion of Gratus, who assisted at the 
Episc. Carth. ad Council Ephes.  Council of Sardica, which was holden the three hundred and forty seaventh year, and the death of Aurelius, who still lived according to 
Victor.  the computation of the Illustrious Cardinal Baronius, the year four 
Vtic. persec. Vandal l 1.  hundred twenty five, there was so long a space, as there must necessarily be one or more Bishops between both. The fifth proof is, that 
Id. Ibidem.  Fulgentius Ferrandus an African author of more than a thousand one hundred years' antiquity, not only placeth Genetlius between Gratus and Aurelius, but also placeth the Council of Carthage holden under Genetlius, 
Eulg. Ferrand. in Breviar.  before the third Council of Carthage, and other Counsels of Carthage, assembled under Aurelius. For in the fourth article of his Epitome, 
Can. art. 4.  speaking of the ordination of Bishops, which ought to be done by three Bishops, with the Metropolitans consent, he allegeth for the credit of this decree, the Council of Carthage holden vuder the Prelate Genetlius, the tenth title, and the general Council of Carthage, title forty seaventh; and the Council of zelles: which general Council of Carthage was the third Council of Carthage, as it appears both by the words of the decree alleged, which are there; and because it is placed before the Council of Zelles, which was holden under the twelfth consulship of Honorius; that is to say, the year before the sixth Council of 
〈◊〉. Ferrand. in Breviar.  Carthage. And in the twenty fourth article speaking of the decree which forbids Bishops to usurp one an others people, he allegeth for warrant 
Can. artic. 24.  to that law, the Council of Carthage under S. GRATUS, title the ninth and the Council of Carthage under the Prelate Genetlius, title the ninth: And the Council of Carthage title the fifth putting the Council of Carthage, celebrated under S. GRATUS; which was the first Council of Carthage, in the first place; & the Council of Carthage celebrated under Genetlius in the second place; and the other Council of Carthage in the third place. The sixth proof is, that in the third Council of Carthage, holden under the consulship of Cesarius and Atticus; whereof the preface is reported in the Rhapsody of the Council of Africa; Victor Bishop of 
Conc. Afric. in Conc. hab. 6. Cal. September sub. Coss. Caesar. & Attic.  Pupputa, is nominated amongst the Bishops of the Council, with the Epithere of old man, whereas in the Council of Carthage holden under Genetlius he is named without any mention of age; a thing which shows that the Council holden under Genetlius, had preceded the third Council of Carthage. For there is no appearance that in the third Council of Carthage, Victor of Pupputa should have been called old man, and that in the Council holden under Genetlius; if this Council had been celebrated, as the Illustrious Cardinal Baronius would have it, twenty seven years after the third Council of Carthage, the mention of his age should have been omitted. The seaventh proof is, that in the third Council of Carthage Epigonius calls the same Victor of Pupputa, the father of the African Bishops, and the most ancient in promotion; 
Conc. Carth 3. c. 44.  And nevertheless in the Council of Carthage, holden under 〈◊〉, 
Conc. Carth sub. Cypr. art. 16.  he is mentioned after Victor Bishop of Abdera, a city of Africa so called, otherwise called Gemanicia, that S. CYPRIAN calls, Abbir of 〈◊〉; and Victor of Utica, Abdir, and Ptolemy, Abdeira. A thing that evidently 
Vict. Vtic. de persecut. Vand. l. 2.  shows, that the Council of Carthage holden under Genetlius preceded the third Council of Carthage. For the Africans were so curious 
Ptolem.  to observe the orders of promotion in the Catalogues of their Counsels, 
Greg. l. 4. Aug. de Vict. ep. 217.  that they never inverted it, as appears by the complaint that S. AUGUS. made to Victorinus, that in his tractatorie, or according to Erasmus Edition, tractorie, he had named him before some Bishops, in promotion more 
Conc. Carth 7. in cata. log. & in subscrip. Et Conc. Afric. ante c. 95 & post. c. 100  ancient than himself. The vl proof is, that Victor Bishop of Abdera, who assisted at the Council held under Genetlius, that we call the second Council of Carthage was dead before the time of the Emperor Valentinian the third, & consequently that the Emperor mentioned in the Date of the same council, could be no other than Valentinian the second; for from the time of the seaventh Council of Carthage which was holden six 
Conc. Carth 2. in process. verbal. & Conc.  years before the Empire of Valentinian the third, it was no more Victor, but Candidus that was Bishop of Abdera. The ninth proof is, that Victor Bishop of Pupputa, & Epigonius Bishop of Bulla regalis, who were present 
Afric. in procèss. ver. bal. Concil. sub Cesar. & Artic. Concil.  in the second and third council of Carthage, were deceased long before the Empire of Valentinian the third, which began the year four hundred twenty five. For in the conference of Carthage, which was held the year four hundred and eleven is was no more Victor, but Pamnonius that was 
Carth. 2. c. 7 & Conc. Carth. 3. c. 42. 44 & 50.  Bishop of Pupputa; nor Epigonius but Dominick, that was Bishop of Bulla regalis. The tenth proof is, that in the second Council of Carthage, there is mention made of the Council celebrated the years before in the pretory, which could not agree with the time of Aurelius, under whose Pontificate 
Coll. Carth Act. 1.  all the Counsels of Africa were celebrated, within the divisions of 
Conc. Carth 2. c. 1.  the Basilickes. The 11th. proof is, that in the same 2d. council of Carthage it is said, that the decree of clergy continence had been made; that is to 
Conc Carth 2. c. 2. 〈◊〉  say, reduced into a written law in the former council: which could not agree with the time of the Emperor Valentinian the third, since more than twelve year before he came to the Empire, the fifth Council of Carthage, 
Conc. Carth 5. c. 3.  had cited the decrees of the clergies continence, as made in former counsels, but in the time of the Emperor Valentinian the second under whom the letter of Siricius to the African Bishops concerning the clergies continence, was carried into Africa. For whereas the council of Zelles holden only seven years before the Empire of Valentinian the third caused to be read and inserted into the acts thereof, two letters of Pope 
Conc. Zellens' male inscript.  Siricius, that was not particularly for the Statute of clergy continence, which had been published long before in Africa; but for the other articles 
Telens'. in prooem.  which were therein contained. And the twelfth proof finally is, that 
Pulg. Ferrand. in Breu. Can. art. 4. 6. & alibi.  the twelfth council of Toledo a general council for all Spain, a province near to Africa, holden under the King Flavius Eruigius, and in the age of the Emperor Constantine Pogonat, and of the third general council of Constantinople; that is to say, near a thousand years agone, citeth the council of Carthage holden under Genetlius, which we call the second council of Carthage, with thetitle of the second council of Africa, in these words, In the second council of Africa the fifth canon, Felix the Bishop of Selempsela said; I insinuate also, if you please to your holiness, that the dioceses that never had Bishops, may have none. And a little after; Genetlius Bishop saith; If the motion made by our brother and fellow Bishop Felix, please you, let it be confirmed by us all; and cities the council celebrated under the cnsulship of Cesarius and Atticus, that we call the third council of Carthage, with the title of 
Conc. Tolet. 12. c. 4.  the third Council of Africa in these words; In the third council of Africa, the two and fortieth Canon, Epigonius Bishop pronounced this amongst other things; I conceive that a people that hath always been under the subjection of a Bishop, 
Ibidem.  and never had a proper Bishop, ought not to be admitted to have a Bishop. All which is said nevertheless with so much respect, as the world shall know, that we admire the great cardinal Baronius, even when we reprove him; and we do acknowledge that his dreams are more learned, than the clearest sight of others.  
The second question concerning the counsels of Africa in chief, is about the number of the Canons of the third Council of Carthage and consists in this; whether the third Council of Carthage hath published all the fifttie Canons that are in the ordinary editions; and amongst the rest, the canon of the Canonical book, which is the forty seaventh; or whether it hath published but twenty one. The new promulgators of the canons of the African church will have it, that it published but 21. amongst which that of the canonical books, which they pretend to have been framed by the sixth council of Carthage, is not comprehended. And we contrariwise maintain that the third council of Carthage hath published all the fifty canons contained in the ordinary edition; & amongst the rest, that of the canonical Books. Their pretences are grounded upon two reasons; the one, that there are but twenty one Canons, or few more of the third council of Carthage inserted into the African Rhapsody, amongst the which, the canon of the canonical books is none; and the other that in the continuance of this canon, it is said that they must communicate with Pope Boniface and with other Bishops beyond Sea; which Boniface was of the time not of the third Council of Carthage, but of the sixth. To the first then of their reasons we answer that whereas they say there are but twenty three canons of the third council of Carthage in the rhapsody of the counsels of Africa, it is because the rapsodist, as it hath above appeared, hath inserted there but the Canons of the third Council of Carthage, which had added some amplification or modification to the canons of the council of Hippo, and hath not set in those that had first been instituted in the Council of Hippo, and had been but repeated in the third of Carthage, amongst which was that of the canonical books, as it appears by the thirtieth canon of the council of Hippo, whose quotation remains to us in 
Conc. Hippon. c. 30.  these words; What are the canonical Scriptures which ought to be read in Churches, and besides which, no others ought to be read. To the second reason which is taken out of the Illustrious Cardinal Baronius, who saith, that the fifty canons contained in the copies of the council of Carthage, cannot be all of this council, and particulaaly the canon of the number of the canonical Books; for as much as in the end of the same canon, there is mention made of Pope Boniface, who was long time after; we answer two things; the one that it is not in the original canon of the copies of the third council of Carthage, wherein this mention is found of Pope Boniface; but in the repetition that is made of the same canon, in the collection of the thirty three Canons, attributed to the sixth Council of Carthage, holden under Pope Boniface; from whence certain ignorant exemplifiers have taken it away, & made it retrograde in form of a diverse reading in the margin of some of the copies of the third Council of Carthage; & the other, that if this continuance were of the original text of the canon, it must have been read Syricius & not Bonifacius; as it appears both by the canon following, where the Father's speaking of an other matter, say, It 
Conc. 〈◊〉 3. c. 48.  〈◊〉 been concluded that we should consult with our brethren and colleagues Cyricius and Simplicianus: And because that Pope Innocent the first, a little after Cyricius, who died six months after the third council of Carthage, had already made a catalogue of the canonical books, comformable to that of the third Council of Carthage, more than fifteen year before Boniface, and the sixth Council of Carthage; which the fathers of the 
Innoc 1. ep ad Exup.  sixth Council of Carthage, whereat the Pope's legates assisted, could not be ignorant of. By means whereof, there was no more need to demand the Pope's confirmation in this regard; in the time of the sixth Council of Carthage: But it is not sufficient to solve the reasons of the contrary opinion, but we must propound our own. The 〈◊〉 then, that we make to convince that the third Council of Carthage hath published the fifty Canons that are in the ordinary editions; and amongst others, that of the catalogue of the canonical books is grounded upon four reasons; the firstreason is, that the twelfth Council of Toledo, which was held near a thousand year ago citeth the 42th. 
Conc. Tolet 12. c. 4.  canon of the third Council of Carthage in these words; In the 42th. canon of the third council of Africa, it is said; that a people that hath been always subject to a diocese, shall receive no other Bishop for Bishop. Which are the proper words of the two & fortieth Canon of the third Council of Carthage, which we 〈◊〉 in our haudes. The second that in the repetition of twenty three of the canons of the Council of Carthage, holden under Cesarius & Atticus the sixth of the calends of September; that is to say, of the third Council of Carthage, which is made in the African Rhapsody, there is a canon repeated which saith, That it shallbe also lawful to read the passions of the Martyrs; which canon being bound by the adverb (alsoe) to 
Conc. Afric. c. 13.  some Canon from whence it hath been separated, can have no relation, but to the Canon, that forbids any other scriptures, but the Canonical Scripture to be read in Churches; and consequently supposeth, that the Canon of the canonical Scriptures, had been published in the Council holden under the consulship of Atticus and Cesarius, which is the third Council of Carthage; but that it hath been omitted in the Rhapsody, because it reports none but those Canons that have added some amplification or diminution to the Canons of the Council of Hippo, which the Illustrious Cardinal Baronius could not see, for the impediment that was given him by the vicious collocation that the Exemplifiers of the latin Rhapsody have made of the preface of the Council holden after the Consulship of Stelicon, which they have interposed between the exordium of the Council, holden under Atticus and Cesarius, and the first Canon of the same Council: a thing which gave him occasion to think, that all the thirty two canons following were of the Council celebrated after Stilicons consulship; whereas the 
Annal tom 5. add ann. 401.  twenty three first, were of the Council celebrated under Cesarius and Atticus, as we will prove hereafter, by the order of the dates, and by 
Beneath in the Chapt. of the African Council.  conferring of the Greek edition, and as it is confirmed also, by the fowrteenth of the same Canons, which makes mention of Syricius and of Simplicianus, which were not Bishops together but under the consulship of Cesarius and Atticus. The third reason is; that Fulgentius Ferandus citeth these two Canons; to wit that of the reading of the canonical books; and that of the reading of the passion of Martyrs, as two consequent canons; and the one under the title of the forty fifth, and the other of the forty sixth Canon of the Council of Carthage in these words; That 
Fulg. Ferrand in 〈◊〉. Can. art. 228. & 229.  there should be nothing read in the Church but the canonical scriptures; the Council of Laodicea Canon fifty sixth and the Council of Carthage Canon forty fifth. That it shall be also lawful to read the Martyr's Passions on the days of their Martyrdom; the Council of Carthage Canon forty sixth. Which cannot be meant, but of the third Council of Carthage, as well because the collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, containeth but thirty three Canons; as because the last of these two Canons is not found in the collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage; and that there is but only in the third council of Carthage where they are couched one next after the other. And the fourth finally, because saint AUSTIN teacheth us. that the first amongst the counsels of Carthage, wherein the roll of the canonical books was published, was the third Council of Carthage, and not the sixth, for he writes in the Epistle to Quintianus; That in the same Council, where the roll of the canonical books was entered, it was also ordained that a Bishop should not usurp the clerk of an other Bishop; I am amazed (said he) that thou dost admonish me to command 
Aug. ep. 235.  that those that come from your quarters into our Monasteries, should not be received; that, that which hath been decreed in the council by us, may be observed; and that thou remember'st not, that in the same council it was determined, what the canonical Scriptures are, which ought to be read to the people. Then review this council, and bring to thy memory all things that thou shalt read there, and thou shalt perceive it was so decided only of the clergy, and not of the laity, that coming from other dioceses they should not be received into our Monasteries, not that there is a word of a Monastery, but because it hath been decreed, that none should receive the clerk of an other. Now the canon that prohibits Bishops to receive 
Conci. Carthag. c. 21.  the clerks of other Bishops, is in the third Council of Carthage, but not in the sixth. Moreover he adds, that in a later Council it had been ordained, that those that departed from a monastery should not be admitted to be clerks or superintendents of an other monastery. In the Council, (said he) where it was determined, what were the canonical scriptures 
Aug. ibidem.  there was no mention made of a Monastery; only it was ordained, that none should receive the Clerk of an other; but in a later Council it hath been decreed, that those that have retired themselves, or have been expelled out of any monastery, should not be made clerks in any other place or superintend any minasteries: which shows again that the Council of Carthage where the catalogue of the canonical Books was published where of saint: AUSTIN speaks, was the third Council, and not the sixth: for the canon that forbids to receive a Religious man that retires from a monastery, and to make him clerk or superintendent of an other monastery, was instituted in the fifth Council of Carthage, which preceded the sixth near eighteen years.  
The third controversy is concerning the fourth Council of Carthage, 
Conc. Carth 5. c. 13.  holden under the consulship of Honorius, and of Eutychianus; that is to say, the next year after the consulship of Cesarius and Atticus; the which not the Illustrious cardinal Baronius, but the new publishers of the greek edition of the Counsels of Africa race from the number of the ancient Counsels; moved thereto, because it is not inserted into that rhapsody of the Counsels of Africa, that we call the African Council. Now this conjecture is so weak, that it is not worth the confutation. For besides that the collection that we call the African Council, is far from comprehending either in general, all the Counsels of Africa witness the Council of Suffetula, the Council of Septimunica, the Council of Marazan, the Council of Tusdra, the Council of Macri, the Council 
Fulg. Ferr, in Breu.  of Zelles the council of Tunis, the council of juca or rather Tuca cited by 
Can art. 2.  Fulgentius Ferandus, which are not spoken of in the body of the African 
Id. art. 11.  rhapsody; or in particular all the counsels of Carthage, and principally, if 
Id art. 44.  
Id. art. 23.  we believe the edition of the same Ferandus who allegeth the fifth canon 
Id art. 76.  of the fifty fifth Council of Carthage. There are two evident reasons 
Id. art. 65.  
Id. art. 61.  wherefore the fourth council of Carthage ought not to be inserted into 
Id. art. 26.  the collection of the counsels of Africa, that we call the African counsels; 
Fulg Feraud. in Breu. Can. artic. 13.  the one, that he, that collected them, had restrained himself of deliberate purpose as it appears by the division of the ninety ninth canon of his rhapsody which is the last of the seaventh Council of Carthage; which to find the reckoning just he divides in two, to make but one century of African canons, within which the fourth Council of Carthage which only contained a hundred and four canons, could not enter; and the other, that the fourth council of Carthage, having prescribed the laws, under which all the ecclesiastical people of Africa ought to be promoted to the order of Priesthood; there was no need to inserte it into the body of this rhapsody, to keep them from wand'ring from the matter; for as much as all ecclesiastical persons, and particularly Bishops were obliged to keep it in their hands. To those two reasons I will yet annex two others, which convince that it is truly ancient, and due to the age whereto we attribute it; the one is that the things there decided, agree wholly to the Estate of Africa in S. AUG. times, as the profession which this council obligeth Bishops to make, coming to the Bishop's Sea, That oneself same 
Conc. Carth 4. c. 1.  God, is the author of the old and new testament, and that the devil is become ill by the liberty of his will to exclude the Manichees, as the belief that is exacted from them, that out of the Catholic Church one is saved to exclude the 
Ibidem. c. 84.  Donatists; as the prohibition that he made, to drive the gentils, or the Jews, or the heretics out of the Church before the mass (that is to say, the dimission) of the catechumen; which shows that this council was holden while paganism lasted. Yet amongst the provinces 
Ibid. cap. 44.  of the Christians, or as the canons that he instituted, that the Clerks should not nourish, either their hair of their head, or their beard 
Ibid. cap. 52.  and might get their meat drink and cloth, by a trade, or by husbandry, without derogating from their office, which were composed, to impugn certain Religious persons slothful and long heard, that saint AUSTIN combats in the work of the travail of Religious persons, who held it 
Aug de oper Monath.  for an oprobry, that Religious men should labour with their hands or shave their heads. The other reason is, that the decrees of this council are acknowledged, and cited not only by all the canonists that have written since six hundred years, as Burchard, juon, and Gratian, but also by Isidorus Bishop of Hispalis, now called seville, a city neighbouring upon Africa,, who lived a thousand years agone; who reported the canon of the ordination of Exorcists, in these words. When the Exorcists 
Isidor. de office Ecci. l. 2. cap de Exorcist.  are ordained, they take (as saith the canon) from the Bishop's hand, the little Book where the exorcisms are written, receiving the power to impose hands upon the Energumenes, whether they be baptised or Catechumen. Which are the very words of the seaventh Canon of the fourth Council of Carthage: And by Hincmarus, ancient Archbishop of Rheims, who cities the Canon where it is forbidden to the Bishop to judge the cause 
Hincmar. opusc. 55.  of any without his clergy, in these terms: Let the Bishop hear no man's cause, without the presence of his Clergy; which are the very words of the twenty third canon of the fourth Council of Carthage.  
The fourth difference is, upon the order of the fifth Council of Carthage, that the Illustrious cardinal Baronius, pretends to have been transferred from the degree; and that it ought to be placed again in the third place; that is to say between the Council of Carthage, holden under the consulship of Cesarius and Atticus, that he places in the second rank, and the fourth. The reasons of the Illustrious Cardinal Baronius are, the one that the date of this Council which is not filled up in the printed editions, but only bears, The sixth of the calends of June after the Consulship, without specifying the consuls' names, is found in some manuscripts filled up with these words Cesarius and Atticus: by which means this council must have been holden the next year after the celebration of the Council, that we call the third of Carthage, and he, the second which was holden under the consulship of Cesarius and Atticus; and the other, that there is a 
Conc. Carth 5. c. 15.  canon in the fifth Council of Carthage, which ordains that the Emperor may be besought to root out the relics of Idolatry. From whence it follows, that this Council hath preceded the commandment that the Emperors gave to abolish the remainder of Idolatry. Now this Commandment was given under the consulship of Theodosius, the year of our Lord, according to our computation three hundred ninety nine by two edicts, the one addressed to Apollodorus vicar of 
Cod. Theod. l. 16. Titul. De pag. l. 16.  Africa, where the Emperor's command that the pagans Idols, should be taken out of their temples and their sacrifices abolished. And the other addressed to Eutychianus, provost of the Eastern Pretory; where they commanded, that the temples of the pagans that were in the fields, 
Ibid. l. 18.  should be demolished without trouble or tumult; And consequently saith he, the Council had been holden the year before, which was the year after the Consulship of Cesarius & Atticus. To the first then of these reasons, we answer that the manuscript which saith, after the Consulship of Cesarius and Atticus, is not confirmed by the universal consent of the other manuscriptes; for there are collections in manuscripts of Mercator, as the new publishers of the Counsels of Africa have noted; which say, after the Consulship of Flavius Stelicon. And to the second we say, that the Canon that ordains the request for the abolishment of the remainders of Idolatry hath nothing in it common with the Edicts of the Emperors of the year three hundred ninety nine. Forasmuch as the Emperors had only ordained by one of the Edicts; that the Sacrifices should be taken out of the Temples; and the Idols deposited into the hands of the Ministers of the Empire, but that the buildings should still be kept entire; and by the other, that the Temples of the pagans which were in the fields, 
Conc. Carth 5. c. 15.  should be demolished. And the fifth Council of Carthage demaun des, that the remainder of Idolatry, should be abolished, not only in the Idols, but also in the woods and in the trees. For the pagans adored not only the similitudes of the false Gods, but also adored certain 〈◊〉 thicketts, and certain ancient Trees, that they believed to be the dwellings and mansions of the presence of their Gods From whence it is, that Quintilian speaking of Ennius, said, We adore Ennius, as we do 
Instit. Orat l. 10.  thicketts that are become sacred through age. These trees then, and these groves polluted by the worship that the Pagans yielded to them, the canon demanded to be rooted out, as well as the Idols and similitudes. From whence may be drawn, that it is so far from following thence, that this canon was before the Emperor's Edicts; as contrariwise it appears hereby, that it was after them. For as for the decree, where was required 
Concil. Afric. c. 25.  the destruction of the temples built in fields, which gave no ornament to cities; which seems to have preceded the Edict of the Emperors, addressed to the provost of the East, it is not in the fifth Council of Carthage in chief, but in the only Rhapsody of the council of Africa, which hath transferred this canon and many others, from the Council holden after the consulship of Honorius and Eutychianus, 
Concil. Afric. in Praefat.  where the first legation to the Emperors was decreed, to the Council holden after the consulship of Stelicon, where the second was decreed. By 
Concil. Celebr. post.  means whereof the observation of the Illustrious Cardinal Baronius is 
Consul. Honour & Eutych.  good to overthrow the order of the African Rhapsody, and to show that it was made by some gross and ignorant Rapsodist; and not to remove the chronology of the fifth Council of Carthage. But we have said 
Concil. Afric. c. 35  enough of these reasons; it is time to propound ours. The motive then that incites us to believe, that the Council that we call the fifth of Carthage, hath been holden in the time wherein we place it; that is to say, between the fourth Council of Carthage and the sixth consists besides the common consent of copies, and the universal voice of Canonists in two reasons; the one is, that S. AUGUSTIN in his Epistle to Quintianus, after he hath spoken of the Council, where there were jointly published the Canon of the canonical Books; and that of the prohibition to Bishops, to usurp one an others Clerks, which was the third Council of 
August. ad Quintian. Ep. 235  Carthage, saith, And after in a fresh Council it hath been ordained, that those who retire from a monastery, or are driven from it, shall not be received elsewhere to be clerks, or to be superintendents in an other Monastery; which are the words of the thirteenth Canon, of the fifth Council of Carthage: from whence it is gathered, that the fifth Council of Carthage that saint AUGUSTIN calls fresh, in regard of the third Council of Carthage, was not holdenn the next year after the third council of Carthage, but a long while after: and by consequent, aught to keep the rank of the fifth and not of the fourth Council of Carthage. The other reason is, that in the Epistle two hundred thirty six written to Xantippus Primate of Numidia, the same saint AUGUSTIN cities the canon, by which those that had neglected to follow their cause a whole year together, were excluded from going forward with it, which is the twelfth canon of the fifth Council of Carthage, as a canon newly instituted. From whence it appears, that the fifth Council of Carthage was holden after that, that we call the fourth. For saint AUGUSTINE testifies, that the year in which he writ this Epistle, the Pasch should be the vl of the Ides of April. I have (said he,) heard the cause of Abundantius, there being yet a hundred days to Pasch Sunday, which 
August. ad Xanthip. ep. 236.  shall be this year the vl of the Ides of April. This I have had care to insinuate to your Reverence, because of the Council, and I have not concealed it from himself, but have faithfully advertised him, of what was there instituted, that if within a year, in case he thinks he should be provided of a judgement, he neglect to pursue 
Pro. & legendum ut.  his cause, none may after give him audience. Now Pasch never fallen out upon the vl of the Ides of April while Xanthippus was Primate of Numidia, but the year of our salvation four hundred and two, which was the year of the fifth consulship of Archadius and Honorius, and consequently the fifth Council of Carthage, that had been holden the year before, fell out in the year four hundred and one, that is to say in the year after the consulship of Stelicon; which was two year after the years of the consulship of Honorius and Eutychianus, in which the fourth council of Carthage had been celebrated.  
The fifth question is concerning the second Milevitan Council, holden under the Consulship of Honorius and Constantius, that the new publishers of the Council of Africa pretend to have made no canons, moved by three conjectures; the first, because in the Rhapsody of the African canons, there is no mention made of this Council. The second because the canons that are thereto attributed, are in part taken from the first Milevitan Council; and in part from the Council holden under the twelfth consulship of Honorius. And the third, that amongst the Canons that are thereto assigned, there are some, that cannot agree, either with the place or time wherein it was celebrated. To these three conjectures, we have also three answers. The first answer is, that the Council celebrated under the twelfth Consulship of Theodosius against Pelagius & Celestius, was rather a repetition and confirmation of the Milevitan council, which had been holden the year before against the same heretics, than a new Council. By means whereof, it must not be held strange, if the African Rhapsody whereinto the Council celebrated underthe twelfth consulship of Hovorius is inserted, hath not reported the Canons of the second Milevitan Council; and principally the second Milevitan Council, having been but a provincial Council of the Bishops of Numidia, which had not the force of a national Council of Africa, but by the concurrency of the Council of the Proconsulary Province, celebrated the same year at Carthage; and by the emologation that was made thereof the year following in the general Council of all Africa assembled at Carthage For the Bishop Aurelius, who is mentioned in the inscription of the Milevitan Council, reported by saint AUGUSTIN, is not Aurelius 
Concil. Afric. in Praef. Council hab. 5. Calend. sept. sub. 〈◊〉. Cesar. & Attic.  Bishop of Carthage, but Aurelius one of the Bishops of Numidia, whereof mention is made in the Council holden under Cesarius and Atticus, otherwise he could not have been put in the third place, and named after Silvanus and Valentinus. For Aurelius' Bishop of Carthage presided in all the Episcopal assemblies of Africa as well at Carthage, as out of Carthage, as it appears both by the commandment read in the conference of 
Collat. Car thag. Act. 1.  Carthage, which saith, Aurelius Bishop of Carthage presiding, and Silvanus' Primate of Numidia; and by the first Milevitan Council, where Aurelius Bishop of Carthage presided, and preceded Xanthippus Primate of Numidia, 
Conc. Afric. in Praef. c. 53.  Predecessor to Silvanus, and Nicetius Primate of Mauritania Sitifensis, and Valentine, and all the other Bishops. The second answer is, that the writers finding in the African Rhapsody the Canons and the preface of the fist Milevitan Council, and believing there was no other Milevitan Council, but that, that was holden against Pelagius and not being enough conversant in history to discern them by the distance of dates, have mingled a part of the preface, and of the decrees of the one, with the text of the other. And the third, that the same Bookebinders', finding the greater part of the canons of the Milevitan Council in the Council holden under the twelfth consulship of Honorius; and upon this occasion conceiving that the Council holden under the twelfth Consulship of Honorius was but a repetition of the Milevitan, have added to the Milevitan what they have found more in the Council holden under the twelfth con sulship of Honorius, and have yet added thereto, some other canons taken out of other Counsels. But that for this cause it follows, that the second Milevitan Council hath made no canons, we deny, and deny it with the authority of the second Council of Tours, celebrated a thousand and fifteen years agone, which cities the canons of the second Milevitan Counsels, in these words; It hath been ordained in the ancient 
Conc. Turon. 2. cap. 21.  Milevitan Canons, that every Bishop that in case of necessity etc. veils a virgin before the age of twenty five year, shall not be holden culpable of breaking the Council, were this number is prescribed. Which are the very words of the twenty sixth canon of the Milevitan Council, that we have in our hands at this day.  
The sixth controversy is, concerning the durance of the sixth Council, of Carthage, which not only the Protestants, but the Illustrious Cardinal Baronius himself, and the doctors of Collen which have followed him in 
Edit. Concil. Colon. 1606. pag. 619. & 621.  the last impression of the Council, will have, to have continued five. years; to wit, to the time of the Epistle of the Bishops of Africa to Pope Celestine, which was written under the consulship of Victor and of Castinus. And we contrariwise maintanie, that it ended the same year wherein it began; to wit, the year after the twelfth Consulship of Honorius; that is to say, the year of the Consulship of Monaxius and Plinta; and thatall the assemblies which were made after upon the subject of appeals, were as many distinct & separated Counsels; and for proof of our intention, we will employ two reasons: the one, that the Bishops of the sixth council of Carthage protested that they would answer nothing concerning the appeals till the copies of the exemplifications of the council of Nicaea, kept at Constantinople, and in Alexandria, had 
Conc Carthag 6. c. 10.  been brought out of the East; and that when they should come, they whould assemble a council to advise upon it. From whence, it appears that the sixth council of Carthage was finished the same year wherein it began, and lasted but till the copies came out of the East, which arrived in the month of November of the consulship of Monaxius and Plinta; and the other, that when there was question of the last process of Apiarius, and of the second voyage of Faustinus into Africa; the Bishops of Africa writ to Pope Celestine, that they had assembled a council, expressly upon the occurrence of this Business; from it may be gathered, that the sixth council of Carthage had not continued till then: Our holy brother 
Epist. Concil. Afric. ad Caelest.  & fellow Bishop Faustinus, said they, coming to us, we have assembled a council. Whereto there may yet be added, that between the first appeal of Apiarius, when he was pursued by the inhabitants of Sicca, which was determined in the sixth council of Carthage in the presence of Flavianus; and the second appeal of the same Apiarius, when he was pusued by the inhabitants of Thabraca, which was determined in the Council holden after the return of Faustinus into Africa; there did again intervene an other Council, by which he had been deprived a second time, of the 〈◊〉 of all the Bishops of Africa. And it is not to be replied, 
Praef. Council Carth. 7  that the sixth Council of Carthage chose twenty two deputiesto finish what had not been determined in the general assembly of the Council, for it was an ordinary thing for the general Counsels of Africa, when they had been some days together, to avoid the wearysomnes, and the expenses of so great a multitude of Bishops, to choose three or four 〈◊〉 from every province, who should prepare and put into form the acts of the Council: as in the Council holden the year before under the twelfth Consulship of Honorius after the constitution of the 〈◊〉, there was chosen three deputies of every province, to determine 
Coccil. Afric. c. 94.  the other business of the Council, and to reduce into form, the acts of what had been there resolved. And nevertheless, so far is it from appearing from thence, that this Council lasted to the year following, as contrariwise the year following, which was the year after the twelfth consulship of Honorius, there was assembled a new Council, the 
Conc. 〈◊〉 6 in 〈◊〉 & cap. 1.  vl of the calends of June, which was that that we call the sixth of Carthage.  
The seaventh skirmish is about the collection entitled, the sixth Council of Carthage which is a gathering of thirty three of the principal canons of the former Counsels of Carthage, which many think to have been made in the sixth Council of Carthage and we conntrarywise pretend it to be compiled by some impertinent Rapsodist, whether an African during the last and most barbarous time of the dominion of the Uandalls in Africa; or an Europian, while the heresy and tyranny of the Vandals, hindered the catholics on this side the Sea, from being able to have exact communication and knowledge of the ecclesiastical things of Africa And we are grounded in this belief by infinite reasons: The first reason is that Fulgentius Ferandus an African deacon, and very conversant in the African antiquity, who writ a little before the expulsion of the Uandalls out of Africa, not only makes no mention of this collecton that they entitle the sixth council of Carthage but also citing some of the canons that are there, allegeth them under the title of canons of the former Counsels of Carthage. As when he citeth the canon 
Fulg. Ferand in 〈◊〉 Can art. 4.  of the canonical Books, he cities it from the Council of Carthage where there was added the permission to read the Passions of the martyrs, which is the third Council of Carthage; and doth not note that this canon hath been published in any other Council of Carthage: when he registers the prohibition of ordaining Bishops without the 
Ibid. art. 16  consent of their Primate; he allegeth it with these quotations, 〈◊〉 Council of Carthage, under the Prelate Genetlius, title tenth, the General Council of Carthage, title forty fowerth: And the Council of Zelles in the recital of the Pope's Epistle: and maketh no mention amongst the places where this canon of the Council is, that we call the sixth Council of Carthage, which was holden the year after that of Zelles. When he enrolls the canon of the celibate of Bishops, Priests and deacons, he inserts it with this quotation, The Council of Carthage title the first, and Council of Zelles; And of the Council of Carthage, holden after that of Zelles; which is that which we call the sixth, he speaks not one word. And it is not to be objected, that these fragments are found in the collection of Dionysius Exiguus. For besides that the collection of Dionysius Exiguus, was compiled not by a natural African, as was Fulgentius Ferandus, but by a Scythian, it was made after the Register of Ferandus, as it appears both by the canons of the Apostles which are there inserted, which in Pope Gelasius his time, and in Fulgentius Ferandus his time who were both Africans, were neither recevied in the church of Rome nor in the African church; and for this cause are not mentioned in the Register of Ferandus: and by the division of the last canon of the seaventh council of carthage, which the collection 
Collect. Dionys. in Conc. dict.  of Dionysius, and the Greek edition that follows it, do divide 
Afric c. 99 c. 100  inpertinently into two canons: whereas Fulgentius Ferandus, and the 
Edit. Graec. Conc. Carth. c. 133.  original text of the seaventh Council of Carthage, do place them under one only title. And to this there is no opposition, in this, that Victor Bishop of Tununes, or according to others Tons, extends the 
Fulg Ferand. in 〈◊〉. Can art. 73.  〈◊〉 of Fulgentius Ferandus, if the quotations be not transposed, to the one & twentith year of the Empire of Justinian. For it is certain that Fulgentius Ferandus writ from the time of the Emperor Anastasius, and of 
Concil. Carth. 7. c. 5.  Fulgentius Bishop of Ruspa, to whom he dedicated the Epistle of the five questions. 
Isidor. de Scriptor.   
The second reason is that these fragments; entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, are not in the collection of Jsidorus Mercator, and in the 
Eccl. c. 14. Annal. tom 5. ann. 419. num. 59  ordinary volumes of the Counsels, where the Counsels of Africa in chief, are reported, and all the other ancient Counsels of the latin church, whereof we make use. Contrariwise, that the sixth Council of Carthage 
Impress. now Concil. Colon. tom. 1. pag. 620.  which is there inserted contains no canons, and comprehends but the verbal process of what passed between the Pope's legates, and the Bishops of Africa, about the matter of appeals; which verbal process is reduced only to ten Chapters; after which immediately follows in the 
Concil. Carth. celebrat. v. Calend.  ordinary copies, the seaventh Council of Carthage. The third reason is, that the sixth Council of Carthage and the seaventh, were not two different Counsels, but two actions of one and the same Council, the one 
Sept. Cesar & Attic.  celebrated the vl of the calends of June under the twelfth consulship 
Coss. relat. in Conc.  of Honorius; and the other celebrated three days after; to wit, the fifth of the calends of June, under the same twelfth consulship of Honorius; but 
Afric. Conc. Carth.  that they are reckoned as two different Counsels, for as much as the 
Theodos. &. Rumorid. Coss. relat. in Conc.  first was holden by all the two hundred & seaventeen Bishops that were come to the Council: and the second was holden by the twenty two deputies, that stayed to finish the affairs of the Council, after the two hundred & seaventeen bishops had been licenced to depart. For that the 
Africa post. cap. 57 Concil. Carth. Honour. 7. & Theodos.  Illustrious Cardinal Baronius, and the Doctors of Coloigne write, that the two hundred and seaventeen Bishops assisted not at the first action of the Council, but by their deputations and signatures; and that there was none present at the first act but the twenty two deputies that were at 
Coss. relat. in Afric. post. c. 63.  the second, moved with this, that the verbal process of the first saith, Aurelius and the sever all legates of the African province then sitting, is contradicted both by the ancient custom of the Counsels of Africa, which 
Conc. Carth Honor. 12. & Theod. 8. Coss. relat in Afric c. 94. &  teacheth us, that there was great difference between the deputies that the provinces elected to assist at the Counsels, and the deputies that the counsels elected to finish the rest of their affairs: And by the overture of the first act, where Aurelius gave thanks to God for the arrival of so 
Conc. 7. Carth. relat. in Afric post. c. 94.  great a company; and by the overture of the second where it was said, that the twenty two deputies had been chosen, because the other Bishops had complained that they could not stay the end of the affairs 
Conc. Carth 6 c. 1.  of the Council; by means whereof, if these thirty three canons had 
Edit. Graec Conc Afric. Paris. apud Abraham.  been made in the sixth Council of Carthage as the quotations of the times and persons seem to show; that they have not only been compiled there, but made there, and as the new publishers of the African counsels 
Pacard. ann 1615. in Praef. p. 35. & 38.  maintain, they must have been made either at the first act, or between these two acts, and before the separation of the entire company of the Council. For Faustinus the Pope's legate who is represented pronouncing 
Concil. dict. Carth gg. 6. c. 4.  one of the thirty three Canons, departed the morrow after the second act, which contains but the five Canons, that bore the title 
Con. Afric c. 100  of the seaventh Council of Carthage; & consequently, it is necessary that the edition of the thirty three canons should have been made in the whole assembly of the general Council of Africa, that is to say, in the presence of all the two hundred seaventeen Bishops; and before the Rhapsody of the hundred canons that we call the African Council, into which the five ćanons of the second act are inserted; and which also the collection of Dionysius and the Greek translation place after the collection of the thirty three canons entitled the sixth Council of Carthage. Now this is against the express distinction that Cresconius, one of the principal maintainers of the collection of Dionysius, sets between the collection of the thirty three canons attributed to the sixth Council of Carthage, and the Rhapsody of the hundred canons, that they call the African Council. For citing the order of the voyages of the Bishops beyond Seas, which in the collection of the thirty three canons attributed to the sixth Council of Carthage is the twenty third, and in the collection of the hundred canons that we call the African Council, is the seventy third, he cities the twenty third, & all the rest of the same 
Crescon. in Breu. Canon art. 154 & alibi.  collection under the simple title of the Council of Carthage; and the seventy third with the title of the general Council of Carthage. The fourth reason is, that if even the thirty three canons attributed to the 
Id. ibid.  sixth Council of Carthage, should not be pretended to have been made, 
Nova Editio Graeca Codicis Canon  but only collected in the sixth Council of Carthage, there is no appearance that those two collections to wit, that of the thirty three canons, that is entitled the sixth Council of Carthage; and that of the 
Asric. impress. Paris apud  hundred canons, that they call the African Council, having been both compiled in one Council as the new publishers of the Council of Africa 
Abraham Pacard.  maintain, & as Dionysius Exiguus and those that have follwed him suppose, that they would have registered the same canons in them both. Contrariwise 
Anno 1615. in Praef. Pag. 35. & 38.  the division of the inscriptions would, that into the first should be inserted, the only canons of the Counsels celebrated before the promotion of Aurelius; and into the second the canons of, the Counsels 
Collect. Dionys. in Concil.  holden after the promotion of Aurelius. For 〈◊〉 collection of Dionysius, and the greek translation that follows it, puts this inscription in the 
Carthag. in inscrip. cap 1.  front of the first collection, After this, the things published in diverse African Counsels, are acknowledged to have been inserted into the present acts: a clause 
Edit Craec Concil.  that shows plainly, that it is a Rapsodyst, and not the clerk of a council that speaks: And in the front of the second this; There were recited also 
Carth. ibid. Collect.  in this Synod, diverse Counsels of the whole Province of Africa, celebrated in the 
Dionys. in inscript.  times preceding Aurelius. And neverthelesses, not only the first collection doth indifferently embrace the Canons of the Council holden both before 
Concil. Afric.  and after the promotion of Aurelius; but also the most part of the 
Edit. Graec Concil.  Canons that are inserted into the first collection, are so also into the second; as the Canon of the celibat of Bishops, Priests and deacons, which 
Carth. post can. 33.  had been made in the fifth Council of Carthage, is reported in the collections 
Conc dict. Carthag. 6 c. 25.  of the thirty three Canons, under the title of the twenty 〈◊〉 Canon, and in the collection of the hundred Canons, under the title 
Conc. dict. Afric. c. 73 Conc. dict.  of the thirty seaventh Canon; of the prohibition of Priests, deacons, and other inferior clerks to appeal beyond Sea, which had been made in the second Milevitan Council, and confirmed in the Council holunder 
Carthag. 6 c 28.  the twelfth consulship of Honorius, is reported in the collection of 
Conc. dict. Afric. c. 92  the thirty three canons, under the twenty vl Canon; and in the collection of the hundred Canons under the title of the ninetith two canon; and so of many others.  
The fifth reason is, that the preface of the collection of the thirty three Canons is all taken from the discourse, that Genetlius made in 
Conc. Carth 1. c. 1.  the beginning of the second Council of Carthage, which after some words, contains these, because you are here present under the auspexes of 〈◊〉 favour, the ecclesiastical faith that we consign aught to be before all things uniformly confessed in this glorious assembly. And then afterward, the order of every point of ecclesiastical discipline, aught to be established and 〈◊〉 by the consent of all, to the end that the Spirits of our brethren and 〈◊〉 Bishop newly promoted, should be confirmed in the resolution of the things propounded, and that as we have received from our Fathers by an assured trust, the Trinity which we retain 〈◊〉 in our breasts; that is to say, 
Legendum 〈◊〉 & non dispositione.  the unity of the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost, which is acknowledged to have no novelty; in the same sort as we have learned it, so we teach 
Legendum sinibus, & non sinibus Legendum novitatem, & non, notitiam.  〈◊〉 to the people of God. After which words, these immediately follow, 〈◊〉 was said by all the Bishops; so certainly have we received it, so we hold it, following the faith Apostolic. From this former discourse then, the compilers of the collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, have stolen their prologue, except that in steed of these words; 〈◊〉 the Bishop said; they have set down to fit their theft to the sixth Council of Carthage; All the Council saith. And in steed of this answer. It was said by all the Bishops; they have set; it was said by all 〈◊〉 Bishops newly promoted. Behold their language; All the Council saith; 
Conc. dict. Carth. c. 2.  under the auspexes of God's favour, the ecclesiastical Faith that we consign 〈◊〉 to be before all things uniformly confessed in this glorious assembly, and then the order of every point of Ecclesiastical Discipline ought to be established by the consent of all, and to confirm the spirits of our brethren and fellow Bishops, 〈◊〉 promoted; those things must be propounded which we have received from our Fathers by an assured deposition, to the end that the unity of the trinity that we retain consecrated in our senses (so have they corrected the word finibus which was in the second Council of Carthage, not discerning that in the steed of finibus, must be read, sinibus, that is, breasts) to 〈◊〉 of the Father, son, and holy Ghost; which is acknowledged to have 〈◊〉 difference (so have they corrected the word notitiam, not seeing that in steed of notitiam, must be read, novitatem, which is an allusion of 〈◊〉 that Genetlius would make to the word, unitatem) In the same 〈◊〉 as we have learned it, so we teach it to God's people. And immediately after, Item it was said, by all the Bishops newly promoted; So certainly have we received it, so we hold it, so we teach it, following the evangelical faith, with your doctrine. Now this fragment cannot subsist neither in the place nor form where it is couched, For besides that the Fathers of the sixth Council of Carthage had already, yea from the 〈◊〉 of the Council, and before all other things, caused the creed 
Concil. Carthag. 6. c. 1. 9 & 10.  of the Council of Nicaea to be read, by means whereof this instance of propounding the faith of the Trinity was to no purpose; how could it be all the Council that said, to confirm the spirit of our 〈◊〉 and fellow Bishops newly promoted; those things must be propounded which we have learned from our Fathers? And how could the Bishops newly promoted answer; so have we received it, so we hold it, so we 〈◊〉 it following the evangelical faith with your doctrine? For the Bishops newly promoted which made this Answer; where they not parts of the Body of the Council? and than what likelihood is there, that all the Bishops in a Council should pronounce word for word, 〈◊〉 selfsame speech? There is often times noted in the front of the Canons; a all the Council saith; for as much as such Canons having 〈◊〉 propounded and read by some of the Fathers of the Council, all the rest have given their consent unto it. And there are also sometimes Clauses of two or three words, pronounced together by all the Bishops of a Council; And principally in the acclamations to Princes; where one of the Bishops having begun a period, all the 
Concil. Const. sub. 〈◊〉. & alibi.  rest repeat with him in the form of an Echo the same words. There are also sometimes orations composed and pronounced by the deputies of Counsels, which are attributed to the whole body 
Concil. Const. 6. Act. 18.  of the Counsels, but that a whole Council hath made and pronounced, immediately one same oration, and principally an oration that had been spoken word by word by one Bishop in an other Council near thirty year before, there is no spark of likelihood in it.  
The sixth reason is that the most part of the Canons of this pretended Council, are taken from diverse Clauses of former Counsels; sticthed together, and threded as it were in the form of Centons, one at the end of an other, and joined with so little relation, and so unaptly and impertinently as the Collection can but be attributed to the ignorance of a particular Rapsodist, and not to the sufficiency and napacitie of the Fathers of the Council. I will content myself with producing two examples, to the end that from thence, the readers may conjecture the rest. The first example shall be drawn from the 
Conc. Carth dict. 6. c. 4.  fifth Canon, whereof this is the tenor: Aurelius Bishop saith, there is none doubts, but that the greediness of Covetousness, is the mother of all evils; and therefore it must be interdicted, that any should usurp the bounds of an other, or for hope of profit to trench beyond the limits established by the Fathers, neither shall it be lawful for any to take usury of any thing whatsoever: although the new propositions which are either obscure or hidden under the generality of words being considered by us, shall receive a rule. But for the rest those whereof the Scripture hath clearly determined must not longer be delayed, but rather to execute judgement. And therefore that which is reproved in laymen, aught by as much stronger reason to be condemned before all others in ecclesiastical persons, all the Council saith; None can labour without danger either against the prophets or the Gospel. Now this Canon is a centon compiled of two clauses, taken the one from the 
Conc. Carth 1. c. 10.  tenth Canon of the first Council of Carthage, which forbids Bishops to trench upon the lymitts of their fellowe-bretherens; and the other 
Concil. Carth. 1. c. 13.  from the thirteenth which forbids Clerks to lend upon usury; between which the Rapsodist hath unaptly interposed this interlocution; although the new propositions which either are obscure or hidden under the generality of words, being considered by us, shall receive a rule, yet those where the ordnance of the scripture is clear, must not be delayed, but rather the judgement must be executed; which is not of the body of the original Canon, but is an answer to the demand that Abundantius Bishop 
Conc. Carth 1. c. 13.  of Adrumeta had made, that they should confirm in the first Council of Carthage, which was a general Council of all Africa, the decree that had been propounded in the Council of Adrumeta, which was a particular Council of one of the provinces of Africa; that it was not lawful for Clerks to lend upon usury. To this demand then Gratus answered that new propositions and the decisions whereof were either obscure or ambigious in the Scripture, it was reasonable to deliberate of before they should be resolved. But that those where the ordnance of the Scripture was clear, as in the case of usury, which was evidently forbidden both by the old and new Testament, there needed no deliberation but execution. And the Rapsodist hath inserted the answer into his centon without making mention of the question. And to tie it to the rest of his faggot, he hath put in there the word, although, which hath no relation either to the words before or after; But this will best appear by confronting the Texts. The first clause then of this centon, is taken from the tenth Canon of the first Council of Carthage, where the text saith. Gratus Bishop said, 
Conc. Carth 1. c. 10.  that none doubts, but that the greediness of avarice, is the root of all evils; and therefore it must be forbidden, that any man should usurp the ends of nother, or trench upon an other Bishop his colleague. And the second is taken from 
Conc. Carth 1. c. 13.  the thirteenth Canon of the same Council, whereof the words are these: Abundantius Bishop of adrumeta said, It hath been ordained in our Council, that it is not lawful for clerks to lend upon usury: and if it seem to your Holiness and to this Council to be to purpose, let it be appointed by this present decree. Gratus the Bishop said, new propositions, which are either obscure or hidden 〈◊〉 the ambiguity of any general words; we deliberate of, before we set down a Rule concerning them; but those wherein the ordinance of the divine Scriptures is clear, it is not needful to delay the judgement, but rather to execute it. And so that which is reproved even in the laity, aught by a much stronger reason to be condemned in ecclesiastical persons, before all others. All the Bishops said, None can do any thing contrary to the prophets, nor contrary to the Gospel without peril. And out of these two Canons of the first Council of Carthage, separated by the interposition of two other Canons, and distant by more than twelve periods one from an other, the gatherer of the collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, hath made this continued text under the title of the fifth Canon of the sixth Council of Carthage. Aurelius the Bishop said, none can doubt, 
Conc. dict. Carth. 6. c. 5.  but that the greediness of Avarice is the mother of all evil, and therefore it must be forbidden, that any man should usurp the ends of an other, or for hope of profit trench beyond the limits prescribed by the Fathers; and that that also it shall not be lawful for any clergy man to lend upon usury; although new propositions, which are either obscure or hidden under the generality of words, should be considered by us, before we set down a rule concerning them: yet those where, the ordinance of the divine Scripture is clear, must not be delayed, but rather proceeded in to judgement: and so that which is reproved even in laymen, aught to be by stronger reason much more condemned in Clergymen. All the Council said, none can act any thing without peril contrary to the law or the prophets. In which place yet to accommodate this confusion to the time of the sixth, Council of Carthage he hath changed, either he or the exemplifiers which came after him, the word Gratus into Aurelius, against the credit of all antiquity, which teacheth us, that the first Council of Carthage was holden under Gratus, and not under Aurelius; and contrary to the copies of the first Council of Carthage, in the truth whereof we all agree on both sides, which saith Gratus and not 
Fulg. Ferrand in Breu. Canart. 24. & 123.  Aurelius; and against the testimony of Fulgentius Ferandus, who cities the two Canons whereof this centon is compounded with the title of canons of the Council holden under saint Gratus. The second example, shall be drawn from the thirteenth Canon of the same collection, 
Conc. dict Carth. 6. c. 13.  which consists in these words: Aurelius the Bishop said; that we ought, 〈◊〉 observe the decrees of the ancient Fathers; as also, that without consulting with 〈◊〉 Primate of every Province, many Bishops assembled presume not so easily 〈◊〉 ordain a Bishop, unless in case of necessity three Bishops, in what place 〈◊〉 they should be, ought by his commandment, to ordain a Bishop; and 〈◊〉 any one do in any thing contradict his profession or signature, he deprives 〈◊〉 of this Society. Now this gallymaufery is a medley stitched and patched together from the three different clauses of the second Council of Carthage, where they are couched with their reasons, relations, and dependencies; whereas in this centon, they are inserted without 
Cresc. Episc. Silemsilensis  any relation or connexion one to an other. The first clause is taken from the tenth Canon of the second council of Carthage, where after Felix Bishop of a city of Africa called Selemsela, or according to the collation 
Collat. Car thag. in recent Epis. Donatist.  of Carthage, Silemsila showed that the ancient Counsels decreed, that a Bishop should be judged by twelve Bishops; a Priest by six; and a deacon by three; there follow these words: Genetlius Bishop said; what saith your 
Act. 1 art. 176.  Holiness to this? All the Bishops said, that the decrees of the ancient Fathers 
Concil. Carthag. 2 c. 10.  ought to be observed. The second clause is taken from the twelfth Canon of the same second Council of Carthage, wherein after the complaint 
Numid. Ma xulit. Collatine Carthag Act. 1. art. 112.  that Numidius Bishop of Massilia, (or according to the collation of Carthage, Maxulia: for Masculia, whereof the Bishop Uictorianus was at one of the acts of the third Council of Carthage, was an other Bishopric) had made to Genetlius that some Bishops despising the Primats of their 
Do natus Masculitan Optat. Milevit. l. 1. Foe lix.  provinces, ordained Bishops without receiving letters from them; & the answer that Genetlius gave him, that this was a thing that concerned their common honour, and they must all give their votes; there follow these words: It was said by all 
Episc Mozulitancnsis & Vital is episcop.  the Bishops, It pleaseth us all, that the Primate of the Province not having been consulted with, none should presume so easily (though with many Bishops) to ordain a Bishop, etc. but in a case of necessity, three Bishops in what place soever 
Mascul. Donatistae in Collat.  they shall be, with the commandment of the Primate, may ordain a Bishop. The third is taken out of the last Canon of the same Council, where after Genetlius had demanded, will it please you then, that all things that have been 
Carth. Act. 1 art. 188. & 202.  decreed in your most glorious assembly, shall be observed by all? and that all the Bishops, had answered; It pleaseth us, it pleaseth us, that they should be 
Concil. Carth. 2. c. 12  observed by all, these words follow, Genetlius Bishop said, and if (against our expectation) it happen that they should be violated in any point, what do 
Conc. Carth 2. c. 13.  you ordain aught to be done? It was said by all the Bishops: Whosoever shall contradict his protestation or his signature, shall make himself incapable of this Society. And of these three diverse clauses repeated in three several canons, and which have no relation one to an other, he that gathered the collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, had made this centon as a 
Conc. Carth dict. 6. c. 13.  contained Canon; Aurelius the Bishop said, what say your Holiness to this? All the Bishops answered; that we ought to observe the Canons of antiquity, as alsoe; that without consulting with the Primate of every Province, many Bishops assembled, ought not to presume, so easily to ordain a Bishop, unless in case of necessity, three Bishops in what place soever they be, with his commandment ought to ordain a Bishop; and if any man happen in any thing to contradict his profession or his signature, he shall thereby make himself incapable of this Society. And to the end to fit it to the time of the sixth Council of Carthage, either he, or the Exemplifiers which have come after him, have changed the name of Genetlius into that of Aurelius, against the credit of the copies of the second Council of Carthage, which say, 
Fulg. Ferand in Breu.  Genetlius; and of Fulgentius Ferrandus, who citeth these Canons with the title of the Council holden under Genetlius. 
Can. art. 55. & 96. & artic. 4.   
The seaventh reason, but one that comprehendes under it a legion of others, is that almost all the canons that are inserted into this collection, are there inserted with precise notes of Canons composed & pronounced in the sixth Council of Carthage; & nevertheless, there is scarce one of them; where there are not some clauses, that cannot agree neither with the time, nor 
Conc. dict. Carth. 6. c. 3.  with the persons, nor yet with the discipline of the Fathers of the sixth coucell of Carthage. As for example; in the third canon, it is said, when in the Council past, the continence of the clergy was treated of, these three degrees were restrained by the consecrations, as to one kind of conscription of Chastity; to wit, Bishops, Priests, and deacons. Now it hath already been showed, that these words cannot be of the sixth Council of Carthage, as well 
Conc. Carth. c. 2.  because they are word by word in the second Council of Carthage, which had been celebrated thirty year before, & with this same remitment to the past Council; as because in the Council of Carthage holden under the twelfth consulship of Honorius, which had immediately preceded the 
Conc. Carth 〈◊〉. Honour. 12.  sixth council of Carthage, there had been nothing ordained concerning the continence of the clergy: And it cannot be said, that by this phrase 
Theod 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Afric.  in the council past, they intended to speak of the Council assembled under the consulship of Vincentius & Flavitas, which had been celebrated 
Concil. Carth 5 c 〈◊〉. & Council dict. Afric. c. 37.  eighteen years before the sixth council of Carthage. For besides that this note of time, in Concilio praeterito, determinately taken, & to say, in the past council, hath reference to the council last passed; and indeterminately taken, & to say, in a council past, it cannot have been used by the sixth council of Carthage, in the time whereof, the decree of clergy continence had been published, not in one, but in many and several Counsels; as the 
Council dict. Carth. 6. c. 25.  twenty fifth canon of the same collection declares; when it saith, That hath pleased us, which hath also been confirmed in several Counsels; that the subdeacons which handle the Sacraments, and the Deacons, Priests, and Bishops, according to the former decrees, shall abstain even from their wives. The word, in Concilio praeterito, cannot be expounded of the Council holden under the Consulship of Uincentius and Flavitas; for as much as the canon of the celibat, published under the consulship of Uincentius and Flavitas, is wholly reported in the same collection, more than twenty chapters 
Con. dict. Carth. 6. c. 5.  after. In the fifth Canon the text saith, Faustinus Bishop of Potentia of the Province of Urbino, Legat of the Roman Church, saith; It pleases that Bishops, Priects, and Deacons, or those that handle the Sacraments; keeping chastity, shall abstain even from their own wives. Now this Canon is not a Canon by itself, but the train of a former Canon; that is to say, of the second canon of the second Council of Carthage, in the which the compiler of 
Conc. Carth 2. c 2.  the collection, or his exemplifiers, in steed of these words; It was said by all the Bishops, it pleaseth all, that the Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, or those that handle the Sacraments, keeping chastity, shall abstain even from their own wives; hath put to fit the decree to the time of the sixth Council of Carthage; Faustinus Bishop of Potentia, of the Province of Urbin, Legat of the Roman Church, saith; It pleases that Bishops, Priests, deacons, or those that shall handle the Sacraments keeping chastity, shall abstain even from their own wives. 
Syric. Ep. ad Afric. citat. in Conc. Zell. & apud  A thing that can no way subsist. For besides, that if it had been the Pope's legate that had spoken this language, he would never have forgotten to mention the decrees of the celibate, sent to the Bishops of Africa by Pope Syricius; It is evident, that this clause is not a Canon a part, but 
Fulg. Ferr. in Breu. Can. art. 130.  it is the approbation and conclusion of the proposition of the Canon; and therefore alsoe in the second Council of Carthage, it is joined in one and the same canon with the preceding article. And nevertheless the author 
Conc. dict. Carthag. 6. in titul. c. 3.  of the collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, not only hath thereof made two canons in chief, but the better to distinguish and 
Ibid in titul. d. 4.  make manifest his impertinency, hath entitled them with two differing titles, 
Edit. Grec Conc. Carth in titul. c 3. & 4.  and hath placed before the one of them this inscription: Of continence, chapter the third. And before the other, Of the diverse orders that ought to abstain from their wives, chapter fourth. And the Greek Interpreter the 
Concil. dict. Carthag. 6. c. 6.  very same. In the ninth canon, the text of the collection is, Augustin Bishop Legate of the province of Numidia said, Vouchsafe to ordain that if any in respect of their crimes be cast out of the Church, and that any Bishop or Priest receive them into communion, he may be held to be involved in the like crime, as those that shun the regular judgement of their Bishop. Now these are the words of the second Council of Carthage, where after Felix Bishop of Selemsela, and Epigonius Bishop of Bulla Regia (for it must be read Bullensium regiorum and not Bullensium regionum as it appears both by the acts 
Collat. Carth. Act 1.  of the conference of Carthage which say, Bullensium regiorum; and by the Geograficall tables of Ptolemy, where there is a city of Africa called Bullaria, 
Ptolom. Geogr. l. 4. legendum.  which is a corrupt abridgement of the word Bulla regia) had made the proposition of the article; Genetlius Bishop of Carthage replied; With 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 id est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  good cause then do our brethren and fellow Bishops propound, that those that in respect of their crimes are cast out of the Church, if avoiding the regular judgement of their Bishop, they be received to the communion by any Bishop or Priest, 
Concil. Carth 2. c. 7.  he shall be held to be involved in the like crime. Only there is this difference, that whereas the second Conncell of Carthage saith: Genetlius Bishop saith; the compiler, or his exemplifers, to accommodate the Canon to the time of the sixth Council of Carthage, have set, Augustin Bishop Legate of the province of Numidia saith; which is a metamophosis, that cannot take place as well because Epigonius was dead as it hath been above showed, a long time before the sixth Council of Carthage; as because saint AUGUSTIN would not have said in the sixth Council of Carthage, Vouchsafe to ordain, of a thing already ordained, and in the same terms thirty year before. In the fourteenth canon the collection saith; Item, it 
Concil. dict. Carth c. 14.  hath pleased, that from the province of Tripoli, in regard of the small number of Bishops, there one only Bishop may come in legation, and that in the same province, a Priest may be heard by five Bishops, and a Deacon by three, the proper Bishop of the Diocese, as hath been abovesaid, sitting with them. Now the first clause of this decree, is a train of the second Canon of the third Council of Carthage, where after the Fathers had ordained that there should be sent to the national anniversary Counsels, three deputies from every province, they added this exceptation; But from Tripoli, because of the small 
Concil. Carth. 3. c. 2.  number of Bishops, there shall come but one only Bishop. From this canon then, the Rapsodists of the sixth Council of Carthage have separated and torn the train from the head, and have set, by an order reversed, the head, which ordains that there should come to the national Counsels but three deputies from every province, in the eighteenth canon of their collection, and the train which excepts the province of Tripoli, and the dispensation of sending but one deputy, in the fourteenth, that is to say, after the thirteenth with which it hath no relation. For that this exception hath been made in the third Council of Carthage and not in the fixth; and that it is a train of the second canon of the third Council of Carthage, it appears both by the text of the third Council of Carthage, where it is in the same words; & by the Council of Carthage, held under the twelfth consulship of Honorius, which preceded the sixth Council of 
Concil. Carth. Honorio nor. 12. & Theod. 8.  Carthage, where it is said, that Plautius was come only Legate from the province of Tripoli according to custom; a thing that evidently shows, that the exception of the province of Tripoli, had preceded the sixth council of Carthage. 
Coss. relat. in Concil. Afric. c. 94  The other clause is, an ignorant addition, that the Rapsodist hath thrust in, by which he will have it, that in the province of Tripoli, five Bishops with the diocesan, that is to say, six Bishops might judge a Priest; not considering that in the province of Tripoli there was in all but five Bishops. For that the Rapsodist meaneth five Bishops besides the Diocesan, it is apparent by these words: the proper Bishop, as hath been ahove said, being present: Which remitts the Readers to the former canons, where the diocesan Bishop is added, besides the 
Concil. dict. Carrh. 6. c. 〈◊〉.  six Bishops that ought to judge the Priests of the other Provinces; and by Zonara and Balsamon, who say interpreting this canon; He means five Bishops, besides the Diocesan Bishop, which ought to preside at this act; and 
Zon. in Conc. Carth c 14. Balsam.  that there was in all but five Bishops in the province of Tripoli, it is manifest by the ninteenth canon of the third Council of Carthage which is the sixteenth of the African Rhapsody, where Aurelius saith: In Tripoli as it 
ibid.  is affirmed, (or according to the Greek, as you know,) there are but five Bishops. 
Conc. Carth 3. c. 19  In the sixteenth Canon, which is a confusion of four articles; all the articles 
Edit. Graec. Concil. Carth. c. 49.  are as so many canons of the third Council of Carthage, bound up and patched together without order one with an other, and that cannot be presumed to have been transferred from the sixth Council of Carthage 
Impress. Còncil. Afric. Paris 16 r 5. apud Abraham Pacard. in Praef. pag. 35. & 38.  into the third as the new publishers of the counsels of Africa pretend; for as much as the most part of the same canons had been instituted in the Council of Hippo, which the first Milevitan Council testifies to have been repeated in the third Council of Carthage. In the seaventeenth canon the collection saith, It hath pleased, that Mauritania Sitifensis, (as it hath requested of the Primate of Numidia from whose Congregation it is now to be subtracted) 
Concil. Mi leuit. 1. relat in Afric post. c 52.  should have a Primate a part, which all Primates of African provinces, yea all the Bishops consenting thereto, because of the length of the way, do permit to be so. Now this canon could not be made in the sixth Council of Carthage, 
Concil. dict. Carth. 6. c. 17.  for more than twenty year before the sixth Council of Carthage, Mauritania Sitifensis had a primate apart, as appears both by the third Council 
Conc. Carth 3. c. 2.  of Carthage which saith, that there were none but the Provinces endued with the first Seas, that should send Legates to the Counsels, and 
Conc Carth 3. c. 48.  nevertelesse names the Legates of Mauritania Sitifensis; and by the first 
Conc. Milevit. 1. relat. in Afric p. c 52.  Milevitan Council, where Nicetius is called, Primate of Mauritania Sitisensis. And therefore also Fulgentius Ferandus attributes this decree to an other Council of Carthage. In the eighteenth canon, it is said; Item, it hath been 
Fulg. Ferand. in Breu. Can. art. 81.  decreed, that those that ordain, shall imprint the canons of the Counsels in the ears of the Bishops or Clerks, that are to be ordained; words which are syllable for syllable, in the third Council of Carthage, & which cannot be said to have 
Conc. Carth dict. 6. c. 18 Conc. Carth 3. c. 3.  been transferred thither from the sixth, as the new publishers of the Counsels of Africa pretend. For Possidius reports, that it was saint AUGUSTIN, who having perceived that he had been created Bishop of Hippo jointly 
Possid. in v. Aug.  with Valerius his Predecessor, contrary to the prohibition of the council 
Conc. dict. Carthag. 6 c. 18.  of Nicaea, after his promotion caused the decree of reading the canons of the counsels, to those that were to be promoted to be made. To the same canon the Rapsodist andds, Item, it hath pleased that the Eucharist shall not be 
Conc. Carth 3 c 6.  given to the bodies of the dead etc. and that the ignorance of Priests do not cause 
Conc. Carth 3. c. 2.  men already dead to be baptised. For which cause it shall be confirmed in this holy Synod, that according to the decrees of the council of Nicaea in ecclesiacticill causes which often decay with age, to the damage of the people, there shall be called every year a council, whereto all the provinces that have Primats, shall send from their counsels, two legates, or as many as they please, that the authority may be entire in the company assembled: Which are two decrees, the one taken from the sixth canon of the third council of carthage, which saith, Item it hath pleased that the Eucharist shall not be given to the bodies of the dead etc. And the other drawn from the second canon of the same third council of carthage, which pronounceth; It hath pleased that for ecclesiastical causes, which often decay with age to the damage of the people, there shall be called every year a council, to which all the provinces that have prime Seas, shall send three Legates from their counsels, to the end that the authority should be entire, and the assembly less subject to envy, and less costly to their hosts. Now besides this that, the last of these canons hath nothing common with the prohibition of giving 
Conc. Carth 3. c 7.  the Eucharist, or baptism to the dead, with which the Rapsodist ties it, but speaks of causes attempted against ecclesiastical persons. And besides that the mention of the Council of Nicaea which is joined thereto, 
Conc Nic. c. 5.  is wholly impertinent, seeing the law of the Council of Nicaea is but of provincial Counsels, and not of national; it could have been neither made, nor confirmed in the sixth Council of Carthage, for the dereee of the Anniversarie holding of the national Counsels of Africa, first entitled in the Council of Hippo, and since renewed by this canon in the third Council of Carthage, had been suppressed and abrogated more than 
Conc. Hipp. c. 7.  eight year before the sixth Council of Carthage, by the Council held 
Conc. Carth 3. c. 2. & 41 & Conc. dict Afric. c. 18.  under the seaventh consulship of Honorius, in these words; Because it had been ordained in that Council of Hippo, the there should be holden every year a General Council of Africa, not only here at Carthage, but in all the other provinces 
ubi vitio. scriptorum non advertentium utrumque Canonem esse eiusdem  every one in his turn, it hath been reserved to be kept, sometimes in the province of Numidia, and sometimes in that of Byzacia: But for as much as this hath seemed laborious to all the brethren, it hath pleased that there should be no more anniversary necessity to travaile-trouble the brethren, but that when the common cause, that is to say of all Africa, shall require it, from whatsoever part the letters 
Concilij, pro 〈◊〉 superius, positum est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  shall be addressed to this Sea; the Synod shall be assembled in the province that shall be thought fittest. In the ninteenth and tweentith it is said, that Bishops and Priests accused, cannot be excommunicated unless after citation and refusal to appear; which are two decrees transferred from the third 
Conc. Hon 7 & Theod. 2.  Council of Carthage into this collection; and not transferred from this collection into the copies of the third Council of Carthage, as the 
11. Coss. rerelat. in Afric. c. 62 Conc. Carth 3. c. 7 & 8.  new publishers of the Council of Africa pretend. For S. AUGUSTIN himself notes, that the decree forbidding to excommunicate accused Priests, but after citation and refusal of appearance, was instituted in the time that Proculian was Bishop for the Donatists at Hippo. Now Proculian 
Aug. ep. 137.  had lived and was dead à long while before the sixth Council of Carthage, 
Aug. ep. 68  as it appears both by the letters of the clergy of Hippo to januarius, 
Collat. Carthag. Act 1. art. 201.  which testify, that Proculian was Bishop of Hippo, before the laws of the Emperors against the Donatists came into Africa; and by the conference of Carthage, which was holden eight years before the sixth Council of 
Conc dict. Carth. 6. c. 24.  Carthage, in which time it was no more Proculian, but Macrobius, that was Bishop of the Donatists at Hippo. In the twenty fourth canon which is of the canonical Books, the collection saith, Be it also made known to our brother and fellow. Bishop Boniface, and to the other Bishops of the same provinces, for the confirmation of this canon, that these are the books that we have received from our fathers, to be read in the church. Now we have already showed by three reasons, and can yet confirm it by a fourth that the canon of canonical books had been published in the third council of Carthage. For the first Milevitan council testifies that the Statutes of the council 
Còc. Milevit. 〈◊〉. in Conc.  of Hippo which contained forty one canons, amongst which was a decree of the canonical books, had been inserted and confirmed in a more 
Afric. post. c 52  full council assembled at Carthage. Which can not be understood, but 
Conc Hipp. c 30.  of the third council of Carthage; that is to say, of the council holden the fifth of the calends of September, under the consulship of Cesarius and 
Conc Carth 5 Calend. Sept. Cesar & Attic.  Atticus, in which was propounded the extract of the canons of the Council of Hippo. Moreover we have proved that Pope Innocent the first, had already framed a roll of the canonical Books agreeable to that of the 
Coss. relat. in Council Afric c 1 Innoc. ad Exup. ep. 3.  third Council of Carthage more than fourteen year before Boniface, and the sixth Council of Carthage. By means whereof, it had been an impertinent thing, for the Bishops of the sixth Council of Carthage, to write to Pope Boniface for the confirmation of this canon; and it cannot be said, that perchance the Africans knew it not; for Faustinus the Pope's legate who was present at this Council, and Phillippus and Asellus priests of the Roman Church, who assisted him, would not have permitted them to be ignorant of it. In the twenty fifth, the collection 
Conc. dict. Carth 6. c. 25.  contains, Aurelius saith: we add my most dear brothers moreover, as relation bade been made of the incontinence of some clerks, although but readers, towards their own wives; It was decreed, which also hath been confirmed in diverse Counsels; that the subdeacons which should handle the sacraments, & the deacons and Priest's and also Bishops, according to the former Statutes, should abstain from their own wives &c: which if they observe not, that they should be deposed from their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 office; but that the other clerks should not be constrained by this law, but in a riper age. Now besides that these are the words of the third canon 
Conc. Carth. 5. c. 3.  of the fifth Council of Carthage, which saith; moreover, as relation had beve made of the incontinence of some clerks, though toward their own wives; It was decreed, that Bishop's priests, and deacons, according to the former Statutes, should abstain even from their own wives; which if they observe not, that they should be deposed from their ecclesiastical office; but that other clerks should not be bound by this law: there are so many impertiencies in the extract of the canon, as it could not be collected by the Fathers of a Council. For first, these words, Aurelius saith; We add my most dear brethren; hath no relation 
Concil. Carth. dict. 6. c. 24.  with the former canon of the same collection, which is of the catalogue of the canonical books. And secondly, this contexture; Aurelius saith We add my most dear brethren: moreover, as relation had been made to the incontinency of some clerks, hath no construction, neither natural nor gramaticall, but is a strained and impertinent conjunction to bring into Aurelius' discourse the words of the third Canon of the fifth Council of Carthage, which beginus with these words: Moreover, as relation had been made of the incontinence of some Clerks. And thirdly this parenthesis (although but readers) is directly against the discipline of the Fathers of Africa; who never meant to deprive the Readers from the use of their own wives; contrariwise, they have bound them, coming to the age of Manhood, either to profess chastity, or to marry. It hath been ordained (saith the third council of Carthage that Readers having once attained to the age of 〈◊〉, 
Conc. Carth 3. c. 19  shall be constrained either to take wives, or to make profession of chastity. And fourth this exception, unless a riper age, utterly destroyeth the intent of the council; which wills that none but Bishops, Priests, deacons and subdeacons should be obliged receiving orders, to quit their wive; & that 
Conc. dict. Carth. 6. c. 23.  the other clerks which handle not the Sacraments, should not be obliged to this Condition. In the twenty eight Canon, which is a repetition of the canon instituted in the second Milevitan Council, and confirmed 
Concil. 〈◊〉. 2. c. 22.  in the Council of Carthage holden under the twelfth Consulship of 〈◊〉, where it had been decided, that the priests Deacons and other inferior 
Conc. Carth Honor. 12. & Theodos. 8. Coss relat in Conc. Afric. c. 92.  Clerks, cannot in their proper causes, appeal beyond Sea: the greek edition and some latin copies add, as it hath-bene often said of Bishops, a thing which can have no ground, first because the original Canons of the second Milevitan Council, and of the Council holden under the twelfth consulship of Honorius, from whence this repartition is taken, reduce the 
Collect. Cronies. in tit. Can 28  〈◊〉 to only priests, Deacons, and other inferior clerks, & make no mention of Bishops: Secondly, because the title of the same twenty eight 
Conc dict. Carthag. 6.  canon which is in the collection of Dionysius Exiguus, and in the greek edition, is restrained precisely to these words, that the priests, deacons and 
Edit. Grec. Conc. Carth 6. in tit. c. 28.  〈◊〉, that in their own cause appeal beyond Sea, should not be received to the 〈◊〉: and thirdly because the Fathers of the sixth Council of Carthage protested in the acts of the same Council, that they would not 
Conc. Carth 6. c. 9 &. 10  meddle with this article, till the Copies of the Council of Nicaea should be brought out of the East, and after they should come, they would assemble a new Synod to advise upon it. Now these copies came but in 
Inscript. ep. Cyrill. ad Episc.  the month of November in the Consulship of Monaxius and Plinta, that is to say six months after the calling of the sixth Council of Carthage; 
Afric. Ann. tom. 5. ad. ann. 419.  in which time neither the sixth Council of Carthage was on foot, neither was Faustinus Legate to Pope Boniface then in Africa, in whose presence this collection is pretended to have been made. For that which 
Impress. Conc. Col. ann. 1606. in not. ad Concil.  the Illustrious Cardinal Baronius, and the doctors of Collen do suppose, (that Innocentius and Marcellus bearers of the copies of the Council of Nicaea, arrived not in Africa till after the death of Pope Boniface, and in 
Carthag. 6 Inscript. ep. Cyril. & Attic.  the time of Pope Celestine; and upon this occasion put back the edition of the collection of the thirty three Canons until the time of, Celestine, under which Fauctinus made a second voyage into Africa,) is contradicted both by the inscription of the same copies, which shows, that they were brought out of Alexandria into Africa by the priest Innocentius, and sent from Africa by the same Innocentius and by Marcellus Subdeacon of the Church of Carthage to Boniface Bishop of the Roman Church, the sixth of the calends of december: and by saint CYRILL that saith to the 
Conc. dict. Afric. c. 102.  Africans in the end of his Epistle; As for the Pasch, we signify to you according to the request that you have often made to us in your letters, that we will celebrate it the seaventeenth (or according to the correction of some the fourteenth) of the calends of may, of the future indiction; for, for what cause should the answer be made to the question that they had made to him of the day of the next Pasch, if his answer were not to be returned before the same Pasch. And by the Epistle of the Africans to Pope Celestine, which testifies that they had sent the copies of the Exemplifications from the 〈◊〉 to 
Conc. dict. Afric. cap. 105.  his predecessor Boniface by Innocent priest, and Marcellus subdeacon. And from this, that which saint JEROME writes to saint AUGUSTIN, derogates 
Hier. ep. 79.  not; The holy priest Innocent bearer of this epistle, took not the year last past any letters from me to your Dignity, as if he should not have returned into Africa. For so far is it from appearing by this that Innocent stayed in the East till the year following as chose it doth the more plainly appear, that he returned the same year into Africa, but that he made a new voyage into the East the year after. And then if this collection 
Conc dict. Carth. 6. c. 4.  have been framed in a Council of Carthage where Faustinus was present, as the fourth canon of the same collection supposeth; It must have been while the first stay that Faustinus made in Africa, under the Popedom of Boniface, and not during the second stay that he made there under the popedom of Celestine: for the twenty fourth canon of the same collection 
Conc dict. Carth. 6. c. 28.  ordains, that the article of the canonical Books, should be communicated to Pope Boniface; whose Popedom met with the fiirst stay of Faustinus in Africa; and not with the second.  
The vl reason is, that except Aurelius Bishop of Carthage, and Valentine Alypius, and saint AUGUSTINE Bishop of Numidia, there is not so much as one neither of all the two hundred seaventeen Bishops who were present at the sixth Council of Carthage, nor of the twenty two deputies that stayed at Carthage after the separation of the rest of the Council, that is brought in to speak in this collection: contrariwise all the other Bishops that are named there, as Fortunatus, Felix of Selemsela; Numidius of Massilia, are the Bishops that assisted thirty year before in the second Council of Carthage; and more than this also the names of the Bishops of the sixth Council of Carthage, which are mentioned in this collection, have been almost all supposed there in the steed of others that have been taken away to set them in their places, as we have showed amongst other examples by that of the fifth canon, which is taken from the first Council of Carthage, where in steed of Gratus Bishop of Carthage, there is set into the collection, Aurelius; and by that of the ninth which is taken from the second Council of Carthage, where in steed of Genetlius Bishop of Carthage, there is 
Conc. Carth 1. Can. 10. & 13.  set into the collection Augustine Bishop Legate of the province of Numidia: and by that of the thirteenth which is taken out of the same second Council of Carthage, where in steed of Genetlius, there is set into 
Conc. Carth 2. c. 〈◊〉.  the collection, Aurelius. A thing which could not have been done by the 
Conc Carth 2 c. 10. 12. & 13.  Fathers of a Council, who would never have changed the names of those, that had first propounded the canons to set them under the names of others; and that could not be attributed to the ignorance of the copies of the last ages, but aught to be imputed either to the original Rapsodist, or to the exemplifiers of the next ages after him. For the same mistakes and changes of names which are in the latin edition of this collection, are in the collection of Dionysius, which was made more than a thousand years ago; and in the greek translation which was made shortly after.  
And finally the ninth and last reason is, that the conclusion which is read in some copies at the end of the collection, entitled the sixth Council of Carthage,; and in others at the end of the Rhapsody of the Council of Africa, which we call the African Council, is taken word by word out of the conclusion of the first Council of Carthage, except that in steed of Gratus, there is 〈◊〉. For behold the latin terms wherein it is reported in the copies of Monsieur the precedent of Champigny, at the end of 
Cod. Manusc D. de Champig.  the collection, intituted the sixth Council of Carthage; and in others, at the end of the collection, entitled the African Council, Aurelius Episcopus 
Conc. dict. Carth. 6. c. 40. qui secundum.  dixit, Juxta statuta totius Concilij congregati & meae mediocritatis sententiam, placet facere rerum omnium conclusionem, universi tituli & designati huius 〈◊〉 tractatum, & ecclesiae gesta suscipiant. And behold how it is couched at 
alios. 33.  the end of the first Council of Carthage, Gratus Episcopus dixit, juxta 
Conc. dict. Afric c. 100 Concil.  statuta concilij, & meae mediocritatis sententiam, placet facere rerum omnium conclusionem; universi tituli disignati & digesti teneant sententias suas. In which 
Carthag. 1. c. 14.  place the Rapsodists of the collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, have impertinently taken the word, tituli, in the genitive singular; and the greek interpreters even the same; and have expressed the period 
Edit. 〈◊〉  in this sense; Be it registered in the acts of the Church, the treaty of all the title designed & digested this day. Not considering that in Gratus his proposition, it is a nominative plural; and not remembering that, tituli, in the Statutes 
Conc. Carth c. 〈◊〉.  of the first Council of Carthage, signified Canons; and besides 〈◊〉 perceiving that the word Universi, in the same first Council of Carthage, hath reference to the Bishops, and not to the decrees. For the order of the Sense showeth, that Gratus his proposition must be read by way of interrogation and expounding it in these words: Doth it please you according to the Statutes of all the Council, & the sentence of my mediocrity, to make the conclusion of all things: And in the second clause after the word, Vniversi; to set in as in all the other canons of the same Council dixerunt, and to interpret it in this sense; all the Bishops did say, that the canons designed and digested, maintain their sentences: and this done to repeat, Gratus Bishop saith. I know well nevertheless, that in the verbal process of the sixth Council of Carthage inserted into the ordinary volumes of the Counsels, there were some articles ordained to be registered, as it appears by the words of the Council to Aurelius, which are these; The copies of the faith and of the Statutens 
Conc. Carth c. 9  of the Council of Nicaea, which were brought to our Council by the Bishop Cecilian, late predecessor to your holiness which had assisted there, and also the things that our Fathers constituted here following the same copies, and those that we by a common Synod constitute now remain registered in the present Ecclesiastical acts: But that these words; the things that we constitute now by a common Council, are meant of the determination to send to seek the Council of Nicaea into the East, and to observe it; (treated in the eight chapters preceding the verbal process; which the 〈◊〉 would should be reduced into writing; and not of any other decrees;) the rest of the speech shows it; which is, To wit, that as it hath been above said, your Blessedness 
the Latin 〈◊〉 ita ut & le Graec.  should vouchsafe to write to the Reverend Bishops of the Churches of Antioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople, to send under the testimony of their letters, the most certain copies of the Council of Nicaea, whereby the truth being cleared, the chapters 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  that our brother and fellow Bishop Faustinus here present, and our fellow Priests Phillipus and Asellus have brought with them in their instruction, either if they be found, they shall be confirmed by us; or if they be not found we will assemble a Synod to advise upon it. And as for these words; and also the things that our Fathers constituted here following the same copies, they are meant by the confirmative decrees of the Council of Nicaea made by the Council of Carthage, holden under Cecelianus and other 〈◊〉 of the Bishops of the sixth Council of Carthage, where the Statutes of the Council of Nicaea had been imposed both in gross and in retail to all the ecclesiastical Orders of Africa, and not of the canons of the collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, whereof the more part, had been made in the Council holden under Aurelius, and are not contained neither in Sense nor in words in the canons of the Counsels of Nicaea. Well do I know again, that the decrees of this collection, are alleged both by the Epitome of the Counsels, sent in Pope Adrian's name to Charlemagne, and by Hinckmarus' Archbishop of Rheims in the work of the fifty five Chapters, and by many others. But the misreckoning being come from a higher root, and having had place from the time of Dionysius and Cresconius, and of the Greek translation, it must not to be thought strange, if from one absurdity many others have ensued. It sufficeth that Fulgentius Ferandus, who was both before them and more versed in the knowledged of the Counsels of Africa than they, represents no tract of the collection of the thirty three Canons, entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, for that Fnlgentius Ferandus hath preceded all the other collectors of this kind in anti quitie; whether it were that Ferandus deacon of Carthage, that writ the works of the five Questions to saint FULGENTIUS 
Isidor. Hispal. De Scriptor. Eccl. c. 14.  Bishop of Ruspia, in the time of the Emperor Anastasius, Or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an other deacon of Carthage, yet more ancient, which hath borne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Fulgentius Ferrandus, it appears as well because he speaks not, neither of the Canons of the Apostles, nor of the Epistles of the Pope's later than Syricius: as because he makes mention of infinite Counsels of Africa: as of the Council of Suffetula: of the Council of Septimunica, of the Council of Marazan: of the Council of Tusdra: of the Council of Macria: of the Council of Tennis: of the Council of juca; & of many Counsels of Carthage whereof there is found no tract, neither in Dionysius nor in Cresconius. And that he hath surpassed them in the knowledge of the Council of Africa, it is manifested aswell by the 
Cresc. ep. ad Liber. in Praef. Collect. Can.  same citations as by the testimony that Cresconius gives of him in the Epistle to Liberinus, which contains these words; I did remonstrate to you, that the Epitome of the Canons had been already made by Ferandus most Reverend 〈◊〉 of Carthage, and that it ought to suffice for our instruction least undertaking to 〈◊〉 an other, it may seem that we would steal from his wisdom. And therefore also those that have collected the body of the Council in form, have passed over the medley of the thirty three canons, entitled by some; the sixth Council of Carthage, in silence.   

Of the African Council. CHAPT. VII.  
NOW as for this medley and rhapsody of the Counsels of Africa that we call the African Council, which is a century of African canons, gathered from diverse counsels, there are therein two difficulties. The first difficulty concerns the author of the rhapsody, & consists in this, to wit; whether this composition hath been made by any particular canonist; or whether it hath been gathered in a Council. The greeks, & the Protestants who follow them, and some Catholics as well ancient as modern, believe it to be made in a council, which some suppose to have been the sixth Council of Carthage, and others the seaventh, & I contrariwise incline to believe, that it hath been made by some African canonist, and whilst the Uandalls possessed Africa, in which time there could no national council be assembled in Africa: And this I incline to believe for ten reasons amongst others: The first reason is, that the Epistle of the Council of Africa to Pope Celestine is there inserted, which was made in a council holden expressly, for the second process of Apiarius, and after the last 
Conc. Afric. cap. 105. in ep. ad Caelest.  voyage of Faustinus into Africa, as appears by these words; Our holy Brother and fellow Bishop Faustinus, coming to us, we have assembled a Council, and have believed that the aim of his coming hath been, that as by his procurement Apiarius had been once before restored to the priesthood, so now by his labour, he might be purged from the accusations of the Tabracenians. Now this Council that we call the ninth was holden long after the fixth & seaventh which had been celebrated under Boniface. And to sale that it was in this ninth that the rhapsody of the Counsels of Africa were made, it is a thing that cannot subsist, for the Fathers would not have been contented, to insert heereinto their Epistle only, but would have added to it somewhat of the history, and of the date of their Council. The second reason is, that after the quotation of the Council of Hippo, which is the first whose date is registered in this Rhapsody follow these words: The acts of this Council 
Conc. Afric. in not. ante. c. 1.  are not here described because the things that have been therein ordained, are above inserted, which words cannot have relation either to the rhapsody of the counsels of Africa, or to the sixth Council of Carthage; for the acts of the Council of Hippo, which contain more than forty canons, are inserted neither into the rhapsody, which begins with the Council of Hippo, and comprehends nothing that precedes it, nor in the thirty three canons attribured to the sixth Council of Carthage, but are the words of the Exemplifier or Rapsodist, which remitts the readers to find the Canons of the Council of Hippo, to the former collections of the Counsels. The third reason is, that in the quotation of the Council, 〈◊〉 the fixth of the calends of Julie, under the Consulship of Cesarius, and Atticus, there are these words, Whosoever will search the acts of this council, shall 
Conc. Afric. in notis. ante. cap. 1.  find them in the authentic all copies: A thing which shows it is a particular collection, and not a Council that speaks. The fourth reason is, that at the head of the sixtith one chapter, after these words, Under the consulships 
Concil. Afrie. in not. ante. c. 61.  of the noble consuls, Stelicon for the second time, & Arthemius the tenth of the calends of September at Carthage, in the Basilicke of the second region: these follow, I have not transcribed from the one end to the other, the acts of this council, for as much as they more regard 〈◊〉 of time, than any general ordinances, but for the instruction 〈◊〉 the studious; I have digested from them a brief Summary. from whence it appears, that this collection was made by a particular compiler. For that the greeks have translated it in the third person, & in steed of these words, 
〈◊〉. Graec.  for the instruction of the studious; have turned it, of things studiously ordained; 
Council Carth. ant. cap 94. vel 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉 69.  that is to say, in steed of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, have supposed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, is a corruption too apparent. The fifth reason is, that in the thirteenth chapter of the latin Rhapsody, which is the forty seaventh of the Greek Rhapsody, the Canon saith in either edition, Likewise also, that it may be lawful to read the 
Conc. 〈◊〉. c. 13. & Edit. Graec. c. 47.  the passions of the Martyrs; which hath no relation to the words of the former Canon, which are; that reconciliation shall not be refused to comedians: but it is a train that hath been torn from his head, that the latin Rhapsody 
Concil. Afric. c. 12. & Edit. Graec. c. 46  hath omitted, and that the Greek hath transferred from his place, to wit, from the Canon, that forbids other Scriptures than those that are canonical to be read in Churches, as appears both by the Council of Carthage entire, where these two Canons are couched the one after the other, and by Ferandus his Breviarie, where they are quoted as two canons, 
Conc. Carth 3. cap. 46. & 47.  following one an other in these words; That there shall be nothing read in the Churches, but the Canonical Scriptures: the Council of Laodicea, title fifty sixth and the Council of Carthage, title forty fifth. That it shall be lawful also to read the 
Fulg. Ferr. in 〈◊〉, art. 228. & 2. 9  Martyr's passions in the anniversary day of their Martyrdoms. Council of Carthage, title forty sixth. A thing that shows that this collection hath been made by a particular Rapsodist, who inserting the third Council of Carthage into his Rhapsody, hath omitted the canon of the canonical Books; forasmuch as this canon was made in the Council of Hippo, & was but repeated in the third Council of Carthage, & had contented himself with inserting that, that the Council of Carthage had added to it; to wit, the permission of reading also in the Church, the passions of the Martyrs. The sixth reason is, that of the fifth canon of the seaventh council of Carthage (which ordains, 
Conc. Carth 7. c. 5.  That if a Bishop saith, that if any one have confessed (that is to say, with civil confession) a crime to him alone, and that he after deny it, the Bishop shall not hold it for an injury, if credit be not given to his only testimony, and that if the Bishop, moved with the scruple of his own conscience, saith that he will not communicate with him that so denies; as long as the Bishop shall not communicate with him, other Bishops shall not communicate with the Bishop.) The Rapsodist hath made two different canons, to wit, the ninety ninth & hùdredth of his Rhapsody; And to perfect the construction of the ninety ninth, which otherwise was without sense, hath added these words, that he shall notwithstanding, secretly interdict him the communion, till he conform himself: which are directly against the intention of the Council. See here the words of the ninety ninth. If a Bishop saith, that any one hath confessed a crime to him alone and 
Conc. Afric. in Edit.  that he deny it, and will not do penance for it, the Bishop shall not hold it for a particular 
joan. Schoffer. c. 99  injury, that credit is not given to him alone: and if moved with the scruple of his own conscience, he saith that he will not communicate with him that so denies, let him 〈◊〉 interdict him the communion 〈◊〉, till he conform himself. And behold here the words of the hundredth: Whiles a Bishop communicates not with 
Ibid. c. 100  his excommunicated Diocesan, 〈◊〉 not the other Bishops communicate with such a Bishop. An error that the Fathers of the sixth or seaventh Council of Carthage would never have committed, if themselves had compiled this Rhapsody, seeing it was themselves that had composed the whole Canon. And it is not to be said, that the later Exemplifiers perceiving this fault, have reunited the two Canons in one, and have reported the canon complete, as it is couched in the seaventh council of Carthage. For the ancient latin Rhapsodies, made two canons of it as it appears both by the copies of Dionysius Exiguus that the edition of Schoffer the Almaigne Printer hath followed, & by the Epitome of Cresconius who cities them under two titles; the one of the ninety ninth canon, & the other of the hundredth; And by the words of the Greek translation, which distinguisheth and divideth them into two Canons. The seaventh reason is, that at the end 
Crescon. in Breu. can. art 288.  of the same canon, follow these words; Be it registered in the acts of the Church the treaty of all the title designed and digested this day; and as for the things which 
Edit. Graec.  have not yet been expressed we will write them the day following by our brethren Fauctinus 
Concil. Carth. cap. 132. 133.  Bishop, and Philip and Asellus priests, to our 〈◊〉 brother and fellow Bishop Boniface. Which words besides that they are couched after the canon 
Concil. Afric. ad calcem. cap 100  of the rash excommunications, which is the hundredth of the rhapsody, that is to say, the fiftieth & last of the seaventh Council of Carthage, could not, if they be authentical, be pronouncedanie other where then in the seaventh Council of Carthage, for they testify that the Pope's Legates, which were yet present in the seaventh Council of Carthage, departed the next day after they had been pronounced. And nevertheless, not only they are not in the seaventh council of Carthage, but also in some copies they are set after the forty, or according to others the thirty three canons, attributed severally to the sixth Council of Carthage, & after the prohibition to alienate ecclesiastical Goods. The vl reason is, that at the end of the signatures of the last council of the Rhapsody, which is the se aventh council of Carthage, it is said, And the other two hundred seaventeen Bishops subscribed: Which is a manifest ignorance in the compiler, who remembered not, that in the seaventh Council of Carthage, there were but twenty two Bishops; 
Concil. Afric. in subscript. c. 100  For to ease the two hundred seaventeen Bishops which were at the sixth Council of Carthage, they were sent back a while after into their Provinces; & only twenty two chosen in their places, to finish the rest of the affairs of the Council. This appears both by the signatures of the 〈◊〉 Council of Carthage where there did but twenty two Bishops sign, & by the inscription of the same seaventh Council of Carthage inserted into the Greek & latin Rhapsody in these words: Many of the Bishops complaining that they could not attend at the length of the other expeditions, & were pressed to return into their provinces, it pleased all the Council, that by the whole assembly, there might 
Concil. Carth. 7. in Praef. cap. 1  be deputies chosen from every of the provinces which should remain to finish the rest. from whence it happened, that those assisted there whose signatures testify 
Et Conc. Afric. in Praefat. c. 95.  them to have been there present. A thing which manifestly shows, that this clause; And the two hundred seaventeen other Bishops signed likewise; is of the compilers' stile, & not of the acts of any Council. The ninth reason is, that if this Rhapsody had been compiled by the Fathers of the seaventh Council of Carthage, or any other later; as the use that is there made of the Canons at the seaventh of Carthage, & other subsequent pieces do suppose, they would never have forgotten tosett down the extract of the sixth council of Carthage, & the thirty three Canons which are attributed to it, if at least they be justly attributed to it. For with what colour should the extract of the Canons of the seaventh Council of Carthage, which were made by the deputies that remained of the sixth Council of Carthage after the rest were dismissed, have been inserted into the Rhapsody, & the Canons of the sixth council of Carthage, which had been made by the whole council, not have been inserted? And it will not serve to say that the sixth Council of Carthage is in an act a part: for so is the seaventh also which nevertheless is registered in the rhapsody. Less will it avail to say that the Canons of the sixth Council of Carthage, are enrolled in the Greek Rhapsody. For besides that the ancient & original Rhapsody is the latin and not the Greek, as it appears amongst other means by the quotations of Cresconius, which answer to the numbers of the latin, and not or the Greek; they are not inserted into the Body of the Greek 
Crescon. in Breviar. Can.  rhapsody; that is to say, into the order and chronological clew of the Rhapsody, which begins at the Council of Hippo, and ends at the Epistles of the Bishops of Africa to Pope Celestine: but in the extract and particular collection of the Canons of the sixth Council of Carthage, that the greeks have tacked & annexed to the head of their Rhapsody, which had not happened, if it had been compiled in an actual Council, for as much as the Fathers of the Council whould have set the extract & the Canons of the sixth Council of Carthage in their true place, which is between the Council holden under the twelfth consulship of Theodosius, & the seaventh Council of Carthage, and not in a place anticipated. The tenth reason is, that if this Rhapsody were a reading of diverse former Counsels of Africa, which had been made in a later Council, there would have been in the same Council some ordinance to read them: as in the third Council of Carthage reported by the rhapsody, it was ordained that the Canons 
Conc. Afric. in Praefat. c. 1.  of the Council of Hippo should be read there; & in the first Milevitan Council incorporated into the same Rhapsody, it was ordained that the Canons composed in the Council of Hippo, & after confirmed in the Council of 
Conc. Afric. in 〈◊〉. cap. 53.  Carthage should be read there; A thing nevertheless, whereof there is no track to be found. And this may be said of the reasons which invite me to believe that the African Rhapsody hath been compiled by some particular canonist; it remains to examine the proofs of the contrary opinion.  
The foundation them of those that think that the African rhapsody hath been collected in an actual Council, is that at the head of the century, it is said, In this Council were also recited diverse Counsels of the provinces of Africa, 
In Clausulant Council Afric.  holden in the times passed of Aurelius. Which clause some pretend to be relative to the sixth and others to the seaventh Council of Carthage: but this foundation itself, hath need of a foundation; for first it is not certain, whether this clause be of the original text of the rhapsody, or whether it be a note of some exemplifier, who thought that the African century, that is to say, the Rhapsody of the hundred African Canons, that we call the African Council, had been made in the sixth Council of Carthage contrary wise that at the head of the collection entitled by some, the sixth Council of Garthage, precedes such a like clause, in these words, Then were read the Canons of the Council of Nicaea, as they have above been inserted; After 
In Concil. dicto. sexto 〈◊〉. ex Edit.  also were registered in the present Acts, the things that had been published in the African Counsels; intimates that these two clauses are of the Exemplifiers stile; 
〈◊〉 Schoffer. inter finem Conc. Ni cen. & 1 caput Conc Carthag. 6.  for besides that this remitment, as they have been above registered which is in the latin addition of the first clause, showeth that it is neither the sixth Council of Carthage, nor the clerk of the sixth Council of Carthage; that speaks; but the exemplifiers of the volumes of the Counsels, who to save the pains of writing out the Canons of the Counsels of Nicaea, which were produced in the sixth council of Carthage, sends the Reader to the place, where they had been first transcribed in their form & in their order; to what purpose was it, after it was said at the head of the collection, entitled the sixth council of Carthage; there were also recited sundry canons of Africa, that is to say, at the head of the Rhapsody of the hundred canons. In this council were likewise recited, diverse counsels of Africa, holden in the times passed of Aurelius? Secondly if this second clause, were of the original text of the rhapsody, that is nothing to oblige the reader to refer it to the sixth council of Carthage; contrariwise that the clause saith; In this Council were likewise recited diverse Counsels of Africa, 〈◊〉 in the times past, or according to the Greek, in the times before Aurelius: 
In Edit. 〈◊〉. Concil. Carth.  Gives to understand, that the two correlative terms of the clause, are not the one, the sixth Council of Carthage, and the other the Body of the Coucells inserted into the rhapsody; but the one, the third council of Carthage, & the other, the counsels holden under Aurelius before the third council of Carthage. For in the whole body of the rhapsody, there are many things which have been made, not in the times of Aurelius which had preceded the sixth council of Carthage, but in the last times of Aurelius, and after the sixth council of Carthage. And therefore also Zonara the Greek canonist, not only omitts this second clause, but also deprives the reader of means to refer it, either to the sixth or seaventh council of Carthage. 
Zonar. in Comm.  For he will have it (although ignorantly & against the custom log observed amongst the Africans, to celebrate every year a national council 
Can. Conc. 〈◊〉. in Praefat Act 2. pag. 422  in Africa;) that the six counsels of Africa, whereof according to him, the African Rhapsody is compounded, & which contains the interim of more than eight year, have been as many Sessions of one and the same council of Africa, separated & reassembled in seaverall times, and that in these six Sessions, the Rhapsody of the African Canons hath been compiled. A thing which cannot agree, neither with the sixth or seaventh council of Carthage; which were both celebrated as shall hereafter appear, in one same year, & in one same month But it may be said, wherefore should the clause of the century have reference to the third Council of Carthage? For two causes; the one, because the third council of Carthage is the first whose canons are inserted into the century of the African Canons: for although there be diverse Counsels quoted in the African Rhapsody, nevertheless there are but five Counsels that are inserted there with their canons, whereof the first is the third Conncell of Carthage. And the other, because the Rapsodist hath not incorporated in his rhapsody all the Canons that were published in the third Council of Carthage, but of fifty chapters that were couched there hath only registered twenty three in his century, and that in part to make up the number of the century; & in part, because all the canons that were employed in the third Council of Carthage were not all first instituted there, but that many of them had been framed in the Council of Hippo, & had been but renewed or accompanied with some moderations in the third Council of Carthage. For this cause then the compiler taking from the third Council of Carthage and from what was thereto annexed, which was the answer to the instances of Musonius, but the Canons that had added either some decision, or some kinds of moderation to the Canons of the Council of Hippo; and willing nevertheless to hinder the readers from believing, that these were all the canons that had been published in the third council of Carthage, hath set before his rhapsody, whereof the third 〈◊〉 of Carthage makes the first part, In this Council were also read diverse Counsels of Africa holden in the time befores Aurelius: and of those hath quoted particulaly three to wit that of Hippo, holden under the consulship of Theodosius and Abundantius, the year 391: that of Carthage holden under the consulship of Arcadius and Honorius, the year 394. And that of Carthage holden under the consulship of Celarius and Atticus the year three hundred ninety seven the sixth of the calends of Julie; for that the council of Carthage holden under the consulship of Atticus and Cesarius the sixth of the calends of julie, is quoted in the latin rhapsody after the third Council of Carthage, which was celebrated the same year, the fifth of the calends of September; it is a manifest error in those that copied it, as it appears first by the order of the dates; the one of the fifth of the calends of September; and the other of the sixth of the calends of July. And secondly: 
Concil. Afric. in not. ante Can. 1.  by the note that in that of the sixth of the calends of July, the Canon was decreed, That Bishops should not sail beyond Sea; without letters form from their Primates; which Canon is repeated in the third Council 
Conc. Carthag. 3 c. 28  of Carthage complete. And thirdly because between the preface of the Council holden under Atticus and Cesarius the fifth of the calends of September, in which Aurelius propounds, to cause the abridgement of the Council of Hippó to be read, and the first Canon of the 〈◊〉 where Epigonius saith in that abridgement that is drawn from the Council of Hippo; it Seems there ought nothing to be changed but that the signification of the day of Pasch should be made in the time of the Council, there could be nothing interposed. A like error have they committed, when at the train of the same Council, holden undet Atticus and Cesarius the sixth of the calends of julie, they have also interposed between the preface of the third Council of Carthage and the first canon of the third Council of Carthage, the quotation of the Council celebrated after the Consulship of Honorius and Eutychianus, and that of the Council celebrated after the consulship of Stelicon with the preface; A thing that not only reverseth the order of the dates; for these two last Counsels were held, the one, two year, and the other four year after the third Council of Carthage, but also maims the sense of the thirty fourth Canon of the centuarie, which can have no perfect construction, if the date and the preface of the Council after the consulship of Stelicon, to which this canon is a relative, be not placed after the report of the signatures of the third Council of Carthage; that is to say, between the three & thirtieth canon of the latin Rhapsody, & the thirty fourth. And therefore the greeks have taken away these three quotations from the place where they are set in 
Edit. Graec. Council Carth. post c.  the latin Rhapsody, and have set them in the Greek Rhapsody after the canons and signatures of the third Council of Carthage, as pertinently for the two last quotations, as impertinently for the first, which should precede the Register of the third Council of Carthage. But this is enough for the question of the compiling, which nevertheless I remit to the judgement of the readers. For I know well that Cresconius an African canonist of 〈◊〉 a thousand years' antiquity, hath cited the canons of a Council, that he entitles the general Council of Carthage, with numbers 
Crescon. in Breviar. Canon. artic  answering to the numbers of this collection, which we call the African Council. It is true that he might either be abused about the clause whereof we have spoken above; or else that he might call this collection the general Council of Carthage, for as much as it is a collection of many several Counsels of Carthage; as Gratian and the other canonists 
Dist. 24 c. si quis Presb. & alibi.  allege the collection of the Greek Synods, made by Martin the ancient Bishop of Brague or Bracara in Spain, under the singular title of a Council, and entitles it 〈◊〉 Council of Pope Martin. Well know I also, that the Africans in their Epistle to Pope Boniface, sent him the copy of some Canons either made or confirmed by their Council, but there is no impediment, why this sending may not be intended of the canons of the seaventh Council of Carthage, which had been holden in the presence of the legates of the said Pope Boniface, the day before the date of this Epistle. And therefore without perverting the judgement of the Readers, I have contented myself with touching the causes of the first difference. Let us go on to the second.  
The second difficulty hath regard to the number of the canons of this rhapsody, & consists in this, that the latin edition contains but an hundred canons, which with the Epistles and the act sent from the East, make anhundred five chapters; & that of the greeks contains an hundred thirty three besides the Epistles. And the reason of this difference proceeds from this, that the original Rhapsody not comprehending all the canons of the Council of Carthage, but being restrained to the number of an hundred, and the greeks not having the copies of those other Counsels of Carthage in chief, that we have, it seemed necessary to them to add to this century an other collection of thirty three Canons which goes under the title of the Canons of the sixth Council of Carthage, but which is taken from diverse former Counsels, and to set it at the head 
Crescon. in Breu. Can.  of their rhapsody. For that the original rhapsody contains but an hundred Canons, and was conformable to the number and to the cyphers of the latin, and not of the Greek, it appears by the citations that Cresconius an ancient African Canonist makes of this medley, that we call the 〈◊〉 Council, wherein the numbers and titles of the Canons, answer the order of the latin Rhapsody.   

Whether the latin edition of the African Canons, be more faithful, than the Greek Rhapsody. CHAP. VIII.  
The Adversaries of the Church will have it, that the relation of the Greek rhapsody is more faithful, then that of the latin Rhapsody. And we contrary wise maintain, that the Relation of the latin rhapsody is much more sure, saving some faults in the Exemplifiers, them that of the Greek. & that for three causes; the first because the Counsels of Africa, have been made in latin and not in Greek, by means whereof, reason wills, that the latin Rhapsody which hath been taken out of the original itself, except the Epistles whereof it seems as it shall appear hereafter, that the latin hath been translated from the Greek translation, and that the 〈◊〉 latin original hath been lost, must be more certain than the Greek Rhapsody, which had been made but upon the extracts of the translation. The second because the greeks have been much more ignorant in the matter of Counsels of Africa, than the latins; as it appears by the erroneous Council holden under saint CYPRIAN, that the greeks have set into the rank of the orthodox Counsels of Africa. And the third because that in the places, where the readings of the Greek and Latin 
Edit. Graec  Rhapsody differ, the readings of the latin Rhapsody 〈◊〉 with the Counsels 
Conc. Carth c. 71 vel secundum alios 73.  of Africa in chief, which we have in our hands, and with the custom of the ancient African Church, reported by saint AUGUSTINE, by Fulgentius Ferrandus, and other African Doctors; And the readings of 
Phot Nomocan. 'tis 9 c 29.  the Greek Rhapsody are repugnant thereunto. I will content myself to allege two examples besides that, which we have already tendered 
Cedr. in hist. Concill Nicen.  of the addition of the Bishops to the canon of the appeals.  
The first example shall be taken from the seaventith one Canon of the Greek Rhapsody, where the African Fathers having said: It hath pleased that the Bishops, priests, and Deacons, according to the former determinations, shall abstain from their own wives. The greeks that do indeed forbid Priests to marry after their promotion, yea call such marriages impious and detestable; but if before their promotion they have been married, provided it were but once, and besides that they be simple Priests and not Bishops; do permit them the continuance of the wives that they have married before their priesthood; have advised themselves to abuse 
Balsam. in Conc Carth c. 73.  the ambiguity of their tongue, which maketh use of one same word, to express (determination) and to express (term) and have converted these words, according to the former determinations, or, according to their own determinations, into these words, according to their proper terms. And to the end to delude the sense of the canon have made weekly priests, who serve by turns and alternative weeks, and observe the Celibat, during the weeks of their Services, and intermit it during the rest. Now how false this interpretation is, and how contrary to the intention of the African fathers who never knew these weekly priests, nor these alternative Celibats, it appears first by all the Conncell of the ancient Latin Church, holden in the Regions near Africa, which oblige Bishops, Priests and deacons, without distinction of turns and vicissitudes, to a perpetual Celibat. It hath pleased (saith the Elibertine Council celebrated 
Concil. Elibert. c. 33.  in the province of Grenado in Spain near an hundred years before the sixth Council of Carthage) to ordain Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and Subdeacons, established in the Ministry, to abstain wholly from their wives, and to 〈◊〉 no children. And the first Council of Toledo, celebrated in Spain, in the time of the fifth Council of Carthage, from whence this canon is 
Conc. To. let 1 can. 1  taken, If any Deacons have lived incontinently with their wives, let them not be honoured with the degree of Priesthood. And the second Council of Arks, celebrated 
Concil. Arelat. 2. c.  a little after the sixth of Carthage: None constituted in the bond of Marriage, can be admitted to Priesthood, without promise of Conversion. Secondly it 
Conc Carth 2 c. 2.  appears by all the Counsels of the African, Church which concern the same matter: It hath pleased (saith the second Council of Carthage) that 
Edit. Graec.  Bishops, Priests, Deacons, etc. practice entire continence etc. to the end that what 
Council Carth. c. 3.  the Apostles have taught (or according to the Greek edition, given by tradition) 
Ibid.  and antiquity itself observed, we also should observe. And again: It 
Conc. Carth 5. c. 3.  hath pleased that Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, or others that handle the Sacraments, should live chastely and abstain evenfrom their own wives. And the fifth Council of Carthage: It hath pleased that Priests and Deacons, according to their own Statutes (or as the best copies have it, according to the former Statutes) should abstain from their own wives. It appears thirdly by the testimony of all the doctors of the Latin church, and especially the African, 
Ambres. de office l. 1. cap. ult.  who have lived in the time of those Counsels; That the Ministry (saith Saint AMBROSE) must be preserved inviolate and immaculate, without defiling it with any conjugal embraces, you know it you that with integrity of body, 
Hier. ad Pam. pro libr. adu jovin l. 1.  and incorruption of modesty, abst ayning yourselves even from the use of Marriage, have received the grace of the sacred Deaconship, And saint Hierom; Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, are chosen either virgins, or in widowhood, or at least are after 
Aug. de adulter. Coniug. l. 2 c. ult.  their Priesthood, eternally chaste. And saint AUGUSTINE; The soul and pen of the Counsels of Africa: We have, (said he) accustomed to propound to lay men, that have put away their wives, the continence of Clergy men, who are often taken by force, and against their wills, to undergo that charge; and having accepted it, be are it with gods help lawfully, even to the end. We say to them, what would become of you, if you were constrained and forced by the violence of the people, to undergo this charge? would you not chastely preserve the office wherewith you were charged, instantly converting yourselves to beseech of God such strength, as 
Euseb. de demost.  before your never thought of? Whereto I might yet add the ancient Greek doctors, 
Euang. l. 1. cap 9  as Eusebius, who writes; Now the 〈◊〉 of the divine word, do necessarily 
Epiphan. contr. nova haeres. 59  embrace abstinence from Marriages, to attend to a better imploymeut practising a generation of spiritual and incorporal children. Or as saint EPIPHANIUS, that cries out; The holy Church of God receives not him, that hath been but once married, and converseth still with his wife, and begets children for Deacon, Priest, and Bishop. But because here the question is of the custom of the latin Church; and particularly of the African, & notof the greek Church; 
Fulg. Ferr. in Breu.  I set the greek testimonies aside. It appears fourthly by Fulgentius Ferandus an African Canonist, of above 1100. years' antiquity, who in his 
Can. art. 16 Crescon in Breu. Canon art. 109.  epitome of the Canons, registers the Canon of the Council of Carthage, in these words; That Bishop's Priests, and Deacons should abstain from their Wives. And by Cresconius an African Canonist likewise, & of near a thousand 
Edit. Grec.  years' antiquity, who registers it in these words, That the priestly 
Concil. Carth. cap. 7.  and levitical order ought to have no cohabitation with women. It appears fistly by the proper text of the Canon, which plainly comprehends Bishops, 
Concil. in Trull. c. 12  which nevertheless the greeks exclude from all conjugal acts, and to whom this condition of serving by turns and alternative weeks cannot 
Cedre. in hist. Concil. Nicen.  agree. It appears besides this, by the sixth Canon of the same Council of Carthage, which saith; That readers when they are come to the years of manhood, 
Concil. dict. Carth. 6. c. 16.  shall be constrained either to marry, or profess chastity. A thing which necessarily shows, that the use of Marriage, was wholly prohibited to Bishops. Priests, and deacons. And finally, it appears by Andrew Gesnerus minister of Zurich, and the Germane Centuriators being ashamed of this falsehood; for Gesnerus interpreting the Greek translation of the Council of Carthage, hath turned it into these words; It hath pleased, that 
Conc. Carth ex edit.  Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, according to their statutes, should abstain even 
Graecolatin Andr.  from their wives: And the Centuriators of Germany epitomizing the same Council of Carthage, report it in these words; That the Sacerdot all and 
Gesn. c. 71. Ceatur.  and Diaconall order, should abstain from their wives. But forasmuch as this 
Mag. cent. 5. col. 829  matter was treated of more largely in the appendix of the conference of Fontainebleau where we confuted the fable of Paphnucius reported by Socrates and Sozomene Novatian Authors, from whom the later greeks have borrowed the occasion of their fall, and expounded the Canon of the Counsels of Gangres which seems to favour them: It shall suffice me for an end of this advertisement, to remit the readers thereunto.  
The second Example of infidelity, shallbe taken out of the twenty fourth Canon of the Greek Rhapsody, which is the twenty fourth of those thirty three latin Canons, whereof the collection is entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, where the Greek interpreter hath eclipsed from the Catalogue of the Canonical Books received in Africa, the two Books of the Macchabees. Now that this subctraction is a notable falsehood, appears by six unreprochable ' means. It appears first by all the latin copies, as well printed as manuscripts of the collection entitled 
〈◊〉. D. Praesid. de Champign. & alij innumeri.  the sixth Council of Carthage, in which the two Books of the Macchabees are expressed by name. It appears secondly by the forty seaventh Canon of the third Council of Carthage, from whence the canon of the collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage hath been extracted, which mentions particularly the two Books of the Macchabees. It appears thirdly by the Canon of the Canonical Books, inserted into saint AUGUSTINS' second Book of Christian Doctrine, where the two Books of the Macchabees are expressly contained; and to which saint AUGUSTINE, for an impediment that the number should not be varied 
Aug. de Doctri. Christ. l. 2. c. 8.  by any addition, or Subtraction, sets to this seal, In these forty four Books the authority of the old Testament is determined: And again repeats the same seal in the Register of his retractions in these words: In the place 〈◊〉 (said he) of the second book of Christian Doctrine, where I have written, in 
Aug. tract. l. 2. c. 4.  these forty four books, the authority of the old Testament is determined; I made use of the word old Testament, according to the form of speech, which the Church practiseth at this day; but the Apostle seems to call none the old Testament but that which was given in the Mount Sinai. It appears fourthly by the other writings, where saint AUGUSTINE speaks of the Maccabees, as when 
De Civit. l. 18. c. 36.  he saith in the eighteenth Book of the city of God; Amongst the volumes severed from this rank, are the books of the Maccabees, which not the Jews but the Church, hold for Canonical. And in the second book against the Epistle of Gaudentius the Donatist, The scripture entitled from the Macchabees, the Jews 
Cont. Secundum Gaudent. Epist. l. 2. c. 23.  do not hold, as the law, the Prophetts, and the Psalms, which our Lord allegeth for his testimony, etc. But it hath been received by the Church, not unprofitable, if it be read or heard soberly. In which passage that saint AUGUSTINE saith, that the jews hold not the Scripture of the Maccabees in the same rank, as the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets, is not to weaken the authority of the Scripture of the Maccabees; for the Jews do no more hold 
Aug de praed. Sanct. l. 1. c. 14.  the book of Wisdom in the same degree of the Law, the Psalms, and the Prophets; and our Lord hath no more alleged it amongst the Testimonies, then that of the Maccabees. And nevertheless S. AUGUSTINE saith; The book of WISDOM hath merited after so long a continuance of years, to be read in the Church of Christ, by the Readers of the Church of Christ, and to be heard by all Christians, even from the Bishops to the lowest laymen, faithful penitents, and catechumen, with the reverence of divine authority. And 
Ibid.  again; All the Doctors near the time of the Apostles, making use of the testimony of the Books of WISDOM, have believed that they made use of none, but a divine Testimony; but the reason why saint AUGUSTINE said, that the Jews held not the Scripure of the Machaebees, in the rank of the law the Prophetts and the Psalms, was to show the Donatists who were separated from the Church, and yet made use of her own weapons to oppose her, that this Scripture having been received into the Canon, not by the 
Cont. 2. Gaudent. Epist. l. 2. c. 23.  Jews but by the Church they could not employ it against the sense and Doctrine of the Church. And that he adds, that it was received by the Church, not unprofitably. provided it be read soberly; it is not to the end to diminish the credit which ought to be given to it, but to repress the furious consequences that the Donatists inferred upon it, and signifies no other thing, but, provided it be read with settled senses, and not with madness and frenzy, as the Donatists read it, who took occasion from the example of Samson in the history of the Judges, and from the example of Razias in the history of the Maccabees, whose zeal and not his act is commended, to kill and precipitate themselves, which he confirms a while 
Ibid.  after in these words; We ought not then to approve by our consent, all things which we read in the Scriptures to have been done by men even adorned with praises by Gods own testimony, but to mingle our consideration with discretion, bringing with us judgement not of our authority, but of the authority, of the holy and divine Scriptures, which permit not us to praise or imitate all the actions even of those, of whom the Scripture gives good and glorious testimony, if they have done any thing that hath not been well done or that agreeth not with the custom of the present time. It appears sifthly by the Catalogue of the Canonical books, that Pope 
Innoc. 1. ad Exup. ep. 3, Gelas. in Decret. lib. veter. testam.  Innocent the first, time fellow with S. AUSTIN, sent to Exuperius Bishop of Tholosa, where the two Books of the Maccabees are expressly contained. For whereas Pope Gelasius in renewing the decree of the Canonical books makes use of the history of the Maccabees, but for one only book, it is because he speaks according to the Style of S, AMBROSE, 
Ambros. de office l. 3. c. 14.  who reckons the first and second of the Maccabees, for one and the same Book. And whereas saint GREGORY the great, in his commentary 
Greg. in job. c. 17.  upon job, compounded near two hundred years after the Canon of the African Fathers, citing the Books of the Maccabees, adds although not canonical, yet written for the edification of the Church; that is because the first draught of this commentary was made in the East. For saint 〈◊〉 was not yet Pope, when he first composed the comentary up on Job, but a simple deacon, exercising the 〈◊〉 of Nuntio at Constantinople amongst the greeks. For this occasion then speaking in the East, of the Books of the Maccabees; he added in the form of a case put, and not granted; If not canonical, yet written for the edification of the Church; that is to 〈◊〉, the which if they were not canonical, nevertheless had been written for the edification of the Church. It appears finally, by the very continuance of the African canon, inserted into the Greek Rhapsody, which is, We have learned from our Fathers, that those are the books that ought to be read 
Edit. Graee Conc. 〈◊〉 c. 24.  〈◊〉 the Church. For not only all the ancient African Church, but also all the ancient Western Church, had holden from age to age, the Books of the Maccabees to be canonical, as it appears, in regard of the ancient 〈◊〉 
Cypr. ep. 〈◊〉  church, by the testimony of saint Cyprian, who calls the Maccabees, 〈◊〉 scriptures; and in regard of the other parts of the western 
Ambros. de office l. 13. c. 14.  church, by the testimony of saint AMBROSE, who cries out; Moses saith as it is written in the books of the Maccabees; And by that of the great defender 
Lucif. lib. de non parcend. in Deum. delinq.  of the Catholic Faith Lucifer Bishop of 〈◊〉, who writ to the emperor 〈◊〉; The holy scripture speaks in the first book of the 〈◊〉: And by an infinite number of others, whose names I will not 〈◊〉 particularly to report. Only I will say in general that there was 〈◊〉 any latin Author which took liberty to remove the authority of the Book of the Maccabees before saint HIEROME, and Ruffinus 〈◊〉 him, while he was his disciple. Whereupon, there are three 〈◊〉 to be made. The first observation is, that as saint HIEROME, before the perfect maturity of is studies, for afterward he changed his opinion, eclipsed from the canon of the old testament, the history of the Maccabees, so did he also shake in the canon of the new testament, 
Hier. in Esai c. 8.  the epistle to the 〈◊〉. The latin custom, saith he receives not the Epistle 〈◊〉 Hebrews, amongst the canonical scriptures. And again; If any one will 
In Ezech c 28 in ep. ad Eph. c. 3. & alibi.  〈◊〉 the Epistle, which under Paul's name hath been written to the Hebrews. And 〈◊〉 where; Paul in his Epistle which is written, to the Hebrews, though 〈◊〉 of the latins doubt of it. By which means if the authority of saint 
Hierom in Math. in c. 26.  HIEROME not yet fully instructed in the sense of the Church, be 〈◊〉 for the exclusion of one of these pieces; it is also available for the 〈◊〉 of the other. The second observation is, that saint HIEROME 〈◊〉 induced to remove this stone, by the commerce that he had with 〈◊〉 Jews of Palestina, amongst whom he inhabited, and from whom he 〈◊〉 the Hebrew letters. For Istdore Bishop of Sevilla, who writ a 〈◊〉 years ago, reports; that the jews in hate of our Lord, rejected 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Book of Wisdom: The Hebrews (said Isidore, as some of 
Isidor. de Eccles. of. sic. l. 1. c. 13.  〈◊〉 sages have noted it) received the Book of Wisdom amongst the canonical 〈◊〉; but after they had taken Christ, and put him to deach remembering that 〈◊〉 were in the same Book so many evident testimonies of Christ, etc. they made 〈◊〉 together, and lest ours should convince them of so manifest a 〈◊〉, they cut it of from the prophetical volumes, and prohibited theirs from reading Now the Jews could have no fair colour to cut of the Book of 〈◊〉, from the roll of the Canonical Books, but because it was not in 〈◊〉 Canon of Esdras, a thing which likewise obliged them, to cut of all 〈◊〉 other Posthume books from the old restament; so call I all the 〈◊〉 of the old Testament, which had been written or published since 〈◊〉 of Esdras; and after the death of Esdras, as Ecclesiasticus, the 〈◊〉 of Tobias, the Book of judith, and the two Books of Maccabees. 〈◊〉 these causes then, saint HIEROME tying himself to the catalogue of the jews, upon whose text, and with whose help, and particularly of a certain Rabbin called Barabanus or Barhanina whom Ruffinus by 
Hier. ad Pam. & Ocean. ep. 65.  way of reproach calls Barrabas; he had made the translation of his Bible, not only excludes in his prologue upon the book of Kings, that he entitles the armed prologue, and in his prologue upon the Proverbs; all the 
Hier. in Prol. Galeat ep. 105 Hier. Praef. in Proverb ep. 115.  whole books which were not in the canon of Esdras; as were Wisdom, Ecclesiacticus, Tobias, judith, and the Maccabees: but also in his prologue upon Daniel rejects all the parts of the canonical Books, not comprehended in the text of the Hebrowes, as were the Canticle of the three Children, and the history of Susanna, and that of Bel. The Book of Daniel, 
Hier. Praef. in Daniel. ep. 120.  saith he, amongst the Hebrews, contains neiter the history of Susanna, nor the Hymn of the three Children nor the fables of the Dragon of 〈◊〉 which nevertheless, because they are spread over all the world, we have annexed thereto; but after having marked them with an obeliske, which precedes them, and cuts their throat. From whence it is that Ruffinus being grown his enemy reproacheth him thus; All those then that supposed 
Ruff. in Hier. Inuect. 2.  Susanna had furnished all married and unmarried women with an example of Chastity, have erred, it is not true; all those that conceived that Daniel yet a child had been fulfilled with the Spirit of God, and had 〈◊〉 the adulterous Elders, have erred, it is not true. And the whole Church throughout the extent of the world, as well as those that are still upon the Earth, as of those that are before our Lord, be they holy coufessors, be they holy Martyrs, who have sung in the Church of our Lord the Hymn of the three Children, have all erred and sung false things. Now then after four hundred years, doth the truth of the Law bought with Silver (So 
Hier. ad Pam. & Ocean. ep. 65. & Praef. in job. ep. 113.  he saith, because saint HIEROM had given money to the jews, to be helped by them in the edition of this Bible) come to us from the Synagogue? And the third observation finally is, that saint HIEROME being afterward more exactly instructed in the truth of the sense of the Church, changed his opinion, and retracted both in general and particular, all that he had written in these three prologues. For in his Apology against Ruffinus, answering to his reproach about the history of Susanna, and of the Dragon of Bel, and of the canticle of the three Children, he saith; Whereas I have reported what the Hebrews used to object against the history of 
Hier. adverse. Ruff. apol. 2.  Susanna, and the Hymn of the three Children, and the fables of the Dragon of Bell, which are not in the Hebrew volume, etc. I have not explicated what I thought, but what the jews were accustomed to say against us. And in his preface upon the book of Tobias; The Hebrews (saith he) cut of the book of 
Hier. Praef. in Tob. ep. 100  Toby from the Catalogue of the divine Scriptures. And again; The ie alousie of the Hebrews doth accuse us, and imputes it to us, that against their Canon we transferr 
Ibidem.  the book of Toby into the latin ears: but I judge that it is better to displease the judgement of the pharisees, and to obey the commandments of the Bishops. And in the exposition upon the forty fourth Psalm: Ruth, Hester, and judith, 
Hier. in exposit. Psal. ad Princip. ep. 140.  have been so glorious, as they have given their names into the sacred volumes. And in his preface upon the history of Indith: The book of judith (said he) is read by the Hebrews amongst the Hagiographs, whose authority is esteemed 
Hier. praefat. in judith. ep. 〈◊〉  less sufficient to decide contentious things, etc. but for as much, as the Council of Nicaea is read to have reckoned it amongst the holy Scriptures, I have obeyed your demand. Words which plainly retract what he had said in his Prologue upon the Proverbs: As then the Church reads judith and Toby and the 
Hier. Praefat. in Prou. ep. 115.  Maccabees, but receives them not amongst the canonical Books. so may she read Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus for the edification of the people, but not for the confirmation of Ecclesiastical Doctrines: And which cannot be avoided, by answering that the word (holy Scriptures) doth not there signify Canonical: for the opposition that he makes of the Council of Nicaea to the jews, which esteemed the Book of judith amongst the Hagiograph books; 
Hier. de 〈◊〉. Eccl c. ult. Hier. in Esai. c. 23.  whose authority is reputed less sufficient to divide contentious things, stopps the mouth of that delusion. And finally in his commentary upon the Prophet Esay compounded long after the prologue armed, he sets the history 
Alcim. Auit. l. 6. c. 17.  of the Maccabees amongst the canonical Books, The Scripture (saith he) reports, that Alexander king of the Macedonians came out from the land of Cethim. Which some Latins that followed being ignorant of, it befell that they 
Bellator. apud. Cassiod. Divin lect c. 6.  were separated from the common voice of the western Church. For although the greater part of the later Latin Doctors, as Alcimus, Bellator, 〈◊〉, Isidorus; have followed the catalogue of S. AVS. & of the third 
Casiodor.  
ibid.  Council of Carthage, and set the history of the Maccabees amongst the 
Isidor. Orig. l. 6. c. 1. & de Divin. office l. 〈◊〉.  canonical Books; yea that some of them, as Bellator, who lived in the time of the Emperor justinian the first, have illustrated it with commentaries; nevertheless, some others not knowing that S. HIEROME had changed his opinion, have tied themselves to that of S. HIEROME: But in 
Cassiodor. de Divin. lect. c. 6.  sum, whatsoever the later Latin doctors have done, it is certain, that in the Latin Church, never any before S. HIEROME, had removed the authority of the six posthume books of the old Testament. For whereas S. HILARY in his commentary upon the Psalms composed, or rather as S. HIEROME saith, translated by him out of origen, whilst he was in the 
Hier. Apol adu. Ruffian l. 1. Ad. Aug ep 89. & in exposit. Ps. 126. ad  East, writes that the number of the canonical books of the old Testament, is reduced according to the tradition of the Elders, either to the number of the twétie two letters of the Hebrew alphabet, or by the addition of the Books of judith & of Tobias, to the number of twenty four letters of the 
Marcell. ep 141.  Greek Alphabet; besides that these marks are not the notes of S. HILARY, 
Hilar. 〈◊〉. in Psalm.  but the notes of origen in his commentary upon the first psalm, that S. HILARY hath transcribed in part into his prologue upon the psalms. He means by the tradition of the Elders, not the tradition of the Church, but the traditions of the jews; whereof some, to wit, these that made use of the Hebrew tongue in their Synagogues, set twenty two Books into their canon, according to the number of the letters of the Hebrew Alphabet: And the others, to wit, the Hellenist Jews; that is to say, those that used the Greek tongue in their Synagogues, set in twenty four according to the number of the Greek Alphabet, which contains twenty four letters.  
But at the least will some man say, there are amongst the monuments of the Greek Church, catalogues wherein the six postume Books of the old Testament are omitted. Now this is a case apart: for the dispute which now is treated of is not of the custom of the Greek Church, but of the the oustome of the Latin Church, and particularly of the African in the times of the Counsels of Carthage. Nevertheless, for as much as this chance may be met in our way, we will furnish it with four advertisments. The first advertisement shallbe that of the Greek canons, where these books are omitted, there are many which have been supposed by the later greeks, as amongst others the Synopsis which bears the title of S. ATHANASIUS; the which also Beda and the copies of Basile 
Beda Praefat. in Apocalyps'. & edit. Basil oper. Athanas.  cast into the Tome of the Books falsely imputed, to S. ATHANASIUS. For the Synopsis entitled from saint ATHANASIUS, defalketh Wisdom from the number of the Canonical Books; and sets it into the 〈◊〉 of the Books that were read by the Catechumen only; directly against saint AUGUSTINE, who saith, That the books of Wisdom 
Aug. de praedest. Sanct. l. 1. c. 14.  had merited by so long a continuance of years, to be read in the Church of Christ by the Readers of the Church of Christ, and to be heard by all the Christians, from the Bishops to the lowest laymen, faithful penitents, and 〈◊〉 with reverence of divine authority; And against saint ATHANASIUS 
Athan. Apol. 2.  himself, who cries out; They fear not what is written in the holy letters, the false witness shall not be unpunished, and the lying mouth slays the soul.  
The second advertissement shall be, that although the neighbourhood and the confusion of dwelling with the jews, hath sometimes hindered the Greeks, & principally the Asians from setting the posthume books 
〈◊〉. hist. 〈◊〉. l. 5. c. 〈◊〉.  of the old Testament into their Canons, nevertheless there are none of those books, but have been employed by diverse Greek Authors, in the quality of a sacred and canonical book: as the book of wisdom 
Athan. apol 〈◊〉.  by Melito Bishop of Sardes; & by S. ATHANASIUS, and all the Synod of Alexandria, which saith, speaking of the Arrians, They fear not that which is written in the holy scriptures, the false witness shall not remain unpunished, 
Ibid.  and the lying mouth slays the soul. The book of Tobias by the same Saint, 
Hier. praef. in judith.  ATHANASIUS, and the same Synod, which saith; It is written, that the mystery of the King must be concealed. The book of judith by the Council of Nicaea, which is read (saith S. HIEROME) to have reckoned the volume of judith amongst the holy Scriptures. The books of Wisdom, 
Epiphan. Aet. haer. 76.  and of Ecclesiasticus, by S. EPIPHANIUS, who writes against Aetius; Thou must turn over the two Wisdoms, that of Solomon, and that of the son of Syrach, and in sum all the divine Scriptures. And finally, the book of the Maccabees, by the three first and greatest Antiquaries of the Greek Christendom; 
Clem. Alex storm. l. 1.  Clemens Alexandr. Origen, and Eusebius. For Clemens Alexandr, reporting the history of the Scriptures, saith; In the captivity were 〈◊〉 
Origen. de Princip. l. 2. c. 2.  and Mardocheus, whose history is currant, as that of the Maccabees. And Origen in the second book of the work of Principles; disputing against the here tickes of the sect of Martion, who placed matter as coeternal to God; & willing to prove to them, that God had created the world of nothing, cries out; And that we may prove it to be so by authority of Scriptures; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the book of Maccabees to the mother of the seven martyrs. And in his commentary 
Id. in ep. ad Rom. l. 4.  upon the Epistle to the Romans, expounding this verse of S. PAUL, None dies for the just: and disputing against the same Marcionites, who interpreted it of the God of the old law, he asks; But what will they do? For we find in the 〈◊〉 many martyrs, let them read the books of the Machambees, And Eusebius in the work of evangelical preparation, comparing the points of the doctrine of Plato, with the divine Oracles of the Hebrews, sets down among the examples of comformity, the place where Plato writes; that the souls of the just after their death help the living: with the place 
Euseb de praep Euang. l. 12 c. 1.  where the book of the Maccabees quots, that Jeremy was seen after his death praying for the people. The twelfth book of the evangelical preparation (saith Euselius) shall contain the rest of the conformity of the doctrine of Plato, with the 
Euseb. ibid.  oracles of the Hebrews. And a little after, reporting the articles of this conformity; Plato (saith he) writes, that the souls of the deceased, are endued with a certain virtue, and have a care of the affairs of men, etc. And in the book of the Maccabees it is written, that the Prophet jeremy after his departure out of this 
Origen. de Princip. l. 4 c 2.  life, was seen praying for the people. And from this it doth not derogate, that Origen alleged also in the second book of his work of principles, the volume of Pastor, which many of the ancient held for canonical: for 
Orig. cont. Cels. l. 8.  he adds in the fourth book of the same work, that some despised it, which he no were notes of the book of Maccabees. chose in his apology against Celsus, he cries out; that the history sf the Maccabees is testified by the witness of two whole nations; that is to say, of the jews and the Christians. from whence it is also, that the Greek doctors hold it for so au 
〈◊〉 psalm. 43.  thenticall & 〈◊〉, as they affirm that the things therein described, the holy Ghost had long before foretold, by the mouth of David, & the other Prophets. The Prophet (saith S. CHRISOS) hath indicted the 43th. psal not in his person, but in the person of the Maccabees, describing and prophesying the things that 〈◊〉 hap in their times. And S. ISIDORE of Egypt time fellow with the same S. CHRYSOS. saith, The Angel that discoursed with 〈◊〉, 
1 sid. Pelus. ep. l 3. ep. 4  spoke of Antiochus Epiphanes, that he should be manifestly conquered and dispossessed by the Macchabees. And Theodoret contiguous in time to both of them: 
Thodor. in in ep. ad Rom. c. 8.  The holy Ghost (saith he) hath writtenn by the divine David the forty third psalm of the 〈◊〉.  
The third advetisment shallbe, that not only diverse Greek authors, 〈◊〉 often the same Greek authors, in speaking of the Books of the old testament, follow according to the occasion of their speech, sometimes the primitive computation of the jews, & the rabbinical tradition of the canon of Esdras, & of the books enclosed in the Ark, & answerable to the number of the letters of the Hebrew alphabet, in which the posthumall books of the old testament were not comprehended; & sometimes the accessary computation of the Christians, wherein they were contained, from whence it appears that from the lesser of these computations nothing can be inferred against the larger. To prove it so, when Origen in his commentary upon the psalms speaks of the Scriptures of the old Testament, he follows the canon of Esdras, and the number of the twenty two Hebrew letters, wherein neither Tobias nor judith, nor that of Wisdom had 
Orig apud Euseb hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 19  any place. Yond must not be ignorant (said he) that the books of the Testament according to the tradition of the Hebrews, are 22. according to the number of their letters. And when he speaks in his commentary upon the book of Numbers of the volumes of the Scripture, he follows the accessary computation of the christians, & the appendix of the posthumall books, & sets, down the 〈◊〉 of judith, Toby & that of Wisdom amongst the canonical Books: When 
Orig. in Numb. hom 27.  there is presented (saith he to those that are newly Scholars in divine Studies) any reading of the divine volumes in which there is nothing that seems obscure, as the book of Hester, or of judith, or of Toby, or the precepts of wisdom they receive it willingly; but if the book of Leviticus be read to them, their spirit is presently dulled. And in the same place of the commentary upon the psalms, where he reckons the Canonical Books of the old Testament, according to the computation of the Hebrews, and the number of the Hebrew letters, he adds; 
Orig. apud Euseb. hist. Eccl l. 6. c. 19  out of this rank are the books of the Maccabees, which the Hebrews call Sarbit Sarbaneell; that is to say, the Sceptre of the Prince of the children of God, By which words he intends not to say, that they are not of the rank of the canonical Books of the old Testament, for then wherefore (having purposed to speak of the Canonical Books) should he mention the Maccabees? but that they were not in the rank of the canonical books, inserted in the canon of Esdras. Likewise when S. EPIPHANIUS in the Book of the Hebrew weights & measure, & in the confutation of the Sect of Epicurus, speaks of the canonicalll Books of the old Testament, he follows the catalogue of Esdras, & the cabbale or tradition of the twenty two Hebrew 
Epiph. de ponder & mens. Hebraic.  letters, and saith, that the Books of Wisdom & Ecclesiasticus, were not of this number: The Wisdom of Solomon and that of jesusthe son of Syrach, are useful and profitable, but are not set down amongst the books enroled; (that is to say enroled by Esdras) And for that cause they are not placed in the Aron, that is to say, in the Ark of the testimony; for so it must be read, & not; neither in the Aron, nor in the Ark; as it is read at this day by the ignorance of the book writers & interpreters, who of the word Aron, which in hebrew signifies Ark, have made Aaron brother of Moses And when he disputeth against Aetius head of the heresy of the Anomeans, he follow the accessary computation of the Church, & sets both those amongst the 
〈◊〉. contr. Act. 〈◊〉. 76.  divine and Canonical Scriptures. You must (saith he) turn over the twenty seven books of the old Testament, that the hebrews reckon twenty two and the four gospels, and the fourteen epistles of the Apostles S. PAUL and the Acts of 〈◊〉 Apostles made before, and during the same time, and the Catholic Epistles of james, Peter, john, and jude, and the 〈◊〉 of John, and the two Wisdoms, that is to say, that of Solomon, and that of the Son of Syrach, and in sum, all the divine Scriptures.  
And finally, the fourth and last advertisement shall be, that there is not one of all the Greek canons, wherein the Maccabees are passed over in silence, (except those that follow the double computation, whereof we now speak) which is not according to the very judgement of Geneva imperfect, 
Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 5. c. 26.  & omitts those Bookès, the Caluinists' théselues confess to be canonical. And to prove it so, in the canon of Melito, the book of Hester is omitted; in the canon of S. CYRILL of Jerusalem, & in the canon of the 
Cyrill. Hic rosolym. Cateches. 4.  council of Laodicea, the Apocalypse is forgotten: in the Synopsis falsely imputed to S. ATHANAS. the book of Hester is cut of: in the canon laid to S. GREGORY of Naziazenes charge, (I say, laid to his charge, because 
Conc. Laodicen c. 60 Grag. Naz. de Theolog. ora 2. & orat. de fid.  this canon leaves out Wisdom, which S. GREG. of Nazianzen in his true writings cities as canonical,) the Book of Hester; and that of the Apocalypses are excluded. In the catalogue, attributed to Amphilochius, the book of Hester and the Apocalypses, are called in question. In the catalogue of josephus (an author that was an Hebrew by nation, but whose Books are 
joseph. contr. Appion. l 1.  written in Greek) the book of Job is omitted & principally according to their computation that will have Job to have been before Moses; as 
Orig. cont. Cels. l. 6. Merc.  Origen amongst the old Christians, & Mercerus the Caluinist amongst the modern, & Raby Moses Kimhi amongst the jews, And in all the judaical antiquities 
Comm. in job.  of the same Josephus, there is no mention made of jobs history. By means whereof, nothing can be concluded from the silence of those imperfect 
Rab Mos. 〈◊〉 in libr. usar. ling Sanct.  rolls against the volumes by them omitted. And indeed, notwithstanding this catalogue, Josephus leaves not of, (if we give credit to the Greek text of the work against Appion) to allege the book of Ecclesiasticus 
joseph. contr. Appion. l. 2.  for one of the pieces of the Jewish law, when he writes; The law saith, that the woman is in all things worse than man, and that a man's iniquity is better than the good work of a woman; Nor to insert a great part of the history of the Macchabees into his treaty of the dominion of reason over the senses, yea with the title of a sacred Book, if we believe the final clause of the work, which is defective in the Greek text, but is in the ancient latin translation, acknowledged, & published by Erasmus. For whereas the same 
Vetus. verse latin. joseph. recognit. per 〈◊〉. & impress.  josephus distinguisheth between the books written before Artaxerxes, when the Prophets flourished in the Jewish Church; & the Books writté since; so far of is he from excluding hereby the books of the Macchabees from the number of the books written by the Prophets: that contrary wise, in 
Basil. 1535. Contr Appion. l. 1  noting that the books written since Artaxerxes, are not reputed so worthy of credit as the former, because, the succession of the Prophets hath not been exact, he shows that they were believed to have been written by the Prophets, but with a belief less assured, & mingled with some uncertainty. Since Artaxerxes, (saith he) even to our time, other things have been written, 
joseph. contr. Appion. l. 1.  but they are not esteemed worthy of the same credit as the former, becanse the Succession of the Prophets hath not been exact. Now this uncertainty S. JOHN & S. PAUL seem to take away; S. JOHN, when he reports, that our Lord assisted at the feast of the dedication of winter, whose institution is described in the only collection of the Maccabees, for the history of the dedication of winter was a thing necessary to Salvation, since without this dedication, the ordinary Sacrifices of the Law, could not be lawful, & by consequence according to our adversaries, had need of the testimony of a canonical Scripture; and S. PAUL when he cities in the Epistle to the Hebrews, the history of the tympanized Martyrs; and that not in matters of things known by natural light, as when he allegeth Aratus; or in manners 
Hebr. 〈◊〉. v. 35.  as when he allegeth Menander or Epimenides, but in matter of faith; and to verify these two theological propositions, that faith is the proof 
Hebr. 11. v. 1.  of things not apparent, and; by faith the Saints have Conquered Kingdoms, 
Hebr. 11. v. 33.  and wrought justice. For the history and the word itself of tympanized Martyrs, S. PAUL takes it from the second Book of the. Maccabees, as 
Edit. Graec  Theodoret hath noted, and after him the Ministers of Geneva, who in their 
2. Mach. c. 6 v. 19 18.  annotations upon the Epistle to the Hebrews, have quoted in the Margin 
Theod in ep ad Hebr c. 11.  of this verse, the sixth Chapter of the second of the Maccabees.  
I know well that the Caluinists do shake the Authority of the two 
Bib. de Geneu. ann. 1588.  Books, & principally of the second they object five things; first that the author excuseth the lowness of his stile: the second, that it is not an original history, but the extract & epitome of a more large history the third, that the primitive author was called jason which is a pagan and profane name: the forth that he was a Cyrenian and not a jew: the fifth that this history contains many contrarieties, both to itself, and to profane histories. But there is none of these objections, but brings his solution with him; for to the first opposition, which is in behalf of the excuse of the stile, we answer; that S. PAUL doth yet excuse himself in more express terms, for the stile of his Epistles, when he saith, Though I be ignorant as concerning 
〈◊〉 Corinth. c. 11.  words yet I am not so in knowledge. To the second opposition, which is in behalf of the quality of the history, which is the abridgement of a larger history; we answer, that the history of Kings, and that of Chronicles 
Reg. 15. ver 36. & alibi.  are also of other larger histories of the Kings of Israel and juda; and that to make a history Canonical, it is not necessary that the holy Ghost 
2. Cronic. 27. vers. 7. & alibi.  should immediately indite all the matter of the Narration, but it sufficeth that he so assist it, that in the composition of the ingredients of the history, there be no falsehood mingled with it. To the third opposition, which is concerning the name of jason, one of the authors of the original history, 
Machab. 2.  which they will have to be a profane name; we answer that the name Jesus in hebrewe, and the name jason in greek, the one derived from the hebrewe word jesa, which signifies salvation; and the other from the the Greek word jasis, which signifies, healing; is one selfe-same: From whence it came, that the priest jesus brother of Onias, was called Jesus 
joseph. antiq. l 2. c. 6.  amongst the Hebrews; and jason amongst the greeks as Onias his brother was called Onias, or Onian amongst the hebrews, which signifies the strength 
Theodor. in Daniel. c. ●1. & alij.  of the people, and Menelaus amongst the greeks; & that since, jason son of Eleazar, and many other jews, bore the same name. To the fourth 
Machab. 8.  opposition, which concerns the country of this jason, who is surnamed, jason, 
Machab 2.  the Cyrenean; we answer, that Cyrene was a province and peopled with jews, from whence it is that the Gospel calls him that did help to carry the cross of our Lord, Simon the Cyrenean; and that S. LUKE calls one of 
Marc. 10.  the Synagogues of jerusalem, the Synagogue of the Cyreneans. And finally 
Act. 6.  to the fifth and last opposition, which is concerning the pretended repugancie of this history either against itself, or against profane histories; 
2. Chronic c. 21.  we answer that if this gate should be once opened, there were no Canonical book whose authority might not be called in question, 
2. Reg. c. 2. & 3.  For who knows not, that it is a thousand times more difficult to reconcile, 
Matth 1.  either the history of the Chronicles, which saith, that Elias writ 
2. Reg. c. 8. 9 11. 14. 15  to joram, king of juda; with the history of the Kings, which saith, that Elias had been taken up out of the world, eight year before the reign 
2. Chronic c. 22. 23. 24. 26.  of the same joram King of juda: (or saint MATTHEW who writes, that joram King of juda begat Ozias; and reckons from David to Ozias, fourteen 
Act 5.  Generations; with the history of the Kings, & the Chronicles, which tetestifie, 
joseph. antiquit. l. 20 c. 2.  that joram was the Grandfather of the Grandfather to Ozias; and let's down from David to Ozias, seaventeen Generations; or the history of the Acts, which computes the death of Theodas, to be under the Empire of Tiberius; with josephus, an author, of that country, and tymel who reckons it under the Empire of Claudius) then to reconcile all the seeming repugnancies, which are in the history of the Maccabees, either against itself, or against profane histories. And if it should be less, who sees not, that it belongs not, as hath been already said to the matter now in agitation? For the question that is in dispute in the matter of the collection entitled the sixth Council of Carthage, is not, whether the books of the Maccabees are in their ground Canonical or not; not whether the other parts of the Church have reputed them canonical; or not Canonical; but whether the African Church hath holden them for such; and whether the Greek interpreters, in eclipsing them from the canon of the African Church, have done falsely or not? Now we prove that they have done so, both by the Catalogue of the third Council of Carthage, and by that of saint AUGUSTINE, and by a thousand other authentical testimonies, and consequently that the latin edition of the African canons, is of better credit than the Greek Rhapsody, which is that we have obliged ourselves to prove.   

Of the difficulty touching the epistles that are at the end of the African Council. CHAPT. IX.  
THERE remains one last difficulty, which is represented 
Conc. Carth 3 c 47.  
Aug. de doctr. Christ. 〈◊〉. c. 8.  upon the matter of the Counsels of Africa, touching the Epistles annexed to the end of the century of the African Canons; to wit, whether the latin text of these Epistles which we have at this day in our Libraries, have been translated from the Greek translation, and added to the collection of Dionysius, the ancient latin original being lost: or whether the ancient latin text, being come to our hands, it have been corrupted by the schismatics of West the whether it were in the time that the Church of Aquilea, and that of Grada were in Schism, and that the Popes held for the Church of Grada, and the Lumbards' for the Church of Aquilea or whether it were afterwards. For that it hath been familiar with the schismatics of the West, to abuse these Epistles to the fomenting their rebellions, it appears by the mocke-Councell 
Contur. 10 cap. de. Synon  of Rheims, holden for the cause of Arnulphus Bishop of Orleans, where the principal piece that the schismatics made use of, was the Epistle of the Africans to Pope Celestine, I have said, the mocke-Councell of Rheims, for as much as the very Centuriators that caused it to be printed, confess it to have been a tyrannical Council, holden at the instance of Hugh Capet, to oppress Arnulphus, bastard Brother to the king Lotharius, Legitimate and innocent Bishop of Orleans; And besides that it was disannulled three years after by the authority of the Sea Apostolic, 
Aim. seu 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gest. France l. 5 c. 46.  and of Seguin Archbishop of Sens, and with the consent of Hugh Capet himself. Then whether the Latin text of these Epistles be a translation of the Greek edition; or whether the ancient latin original being come to our hands, hath been corrupted, be it by the ignorance of the Bookbinders, or by the malice of the 〈◊〉, is the thing in question. And the causes of this doubt are, that whereas in the copy of the African Canons, the latin edition is much more correct then the Greek, in the copy of the Epistles; contrariwise, the Greek edition is very correct, and the latin most depraved and corrupt; and the corruptions are such: as seem to proceed from the ambiguity, and misunderstanding of the Greek words: I will allege five patterns.  
The first pattern shall be taken from the Epistle to Pope Boniface, where the Greek text, speaking of the canons that Pope Zozimus had sent into Africa, under the title of the Canons of the Council of Nicaea, saith; These things have been rigistred in the Acts, till the more certain Copies of the Council of Nicaea shall come, in which if they be couched in the same form, as they are contained in the instruction, that our brethren have showed us sent by the Sea Apostolic, and that they be observed in the same fashion by you in Italy, we will make no more mention thereof, nor further contest of the not suffering them: which is the true sense of the African Bishops, who had newly before be sought the Pope, that he would cause them to observe in the like case, what should be found in the copies of the Council of Nicaea, which should 
Edit. Graec. Conc. Carth cap. 138.  be brought out of the Eact; And which is the sense also, that hath been followed by the Protestants of Germany in the last impression, that they have made of the Counsels of Africa. And the latin text contrariwise saith; These things have been inserted into the Acts, until the coming of the more certain copies of the Council of Nicaea, which if they be there contained, so as they are 〈◊〉 in the instruction, as our brethren sent by the Sea Apostolic have alleged, and were kept in the same form amongst you in Italy, we shall be no way constrained to tolerate things, such as we will not now call to memory or to suffer them intolerable. Words that besides the impertinency of the construction; in the alternative whereof, there is no antithesis, are directly repugnant to the sense and intention of the Epistle; which is, contrariwise to say, that if the clauses intended by the Pope's instruction, were to be found in the 
Conc. dict. Afric. c. 101  copies of the Council of Nicaea, which should come out of the East, they would not so much as open their mouths to speak of it, and would not contest of the not suffering them: and whereof the corruption seems to proceed from the ambiguity of the two Greek verbs whereof the one signifies, to make mention or to commemorate; and the other, to be constrained and to contest.  
The second pattern shall be taken from the exordium of the Epistle to Pope Celestine, where the Greek text speaking of Apiarius saith; For first he hath mainly resisted all the Council, charging it with diverse contumelies, under pretence of pursuing the privileges of the Roman Church, and willing to cause himself to be received into our communion, because your Holiness believing that he had appealed to you, which he could not prove, had restored him to the communion. Yet this did not succeed with him, as you shall more at large understand, by reading the Acts; Which is the true sense of the words of the Epistle; and which also the Protestants of Germany have followed in the last impression that they have made of the Council of Africa. And the latin text contrariwise imports, referring these words to Faustinus the Pope's Legate. For 〈◊〉 how much he hath resisted all the Assembly, Charging it with many 〈◊〉 under colour of pursuing the privileges of the Roman Church, and willing to 〈◊〉 him to be received into our communion, because your Holiness believing he had appealed to you, which could not be proved, had restored him to the commnnion, which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was not lawful, as you shall better discern by reading the Acts; which are three depravations, one in the neck of an other: the first in this that the latin text refers to Faustinus that which the Council saith of 〈◊〉, as it appears by these words: For first, which show that it speaks of him, of whom it had begun and continued to speak of in the following periods; and by this subsequent clause, when we examine the crimes that have been objected to him, which could not be understood but of Apiarius. And this seems to proceed from the ambiguity of the Greek pronoun, which being taken in a reciprocal signification signifies, himself, and obligeth the Readers to translate, willing to make himself be received, which is the sense that the new editions of the Prote. stants of Germany have embraced; and being taken in a direct signification, 
〈◊〉 Can Concil. Viteberg. 1614  signifies, him, and obligeth the Readers to translate; willing to cause him to be received. The second in this, that instead of these words of the Greek text; Notwithstanding this hath not succeeded to him, which are spoken of the Action of Apiarius the latin text sets down, which yet was not lawful, and refers it to the action of the Pope against the credit of this remitment, as you shall better discern by the reading of the Acts: which shows that the Council speaks of the issue of Apiarius his cause, and not of the Pope's action; and this seems to have proceeded from the Ambiguity of the Greek verb, which signifies to succeed, and to be lawful, And the third in this, that instead of the adverb, greatly, which is in the greek text, the latin edition reads, how much, a thing which deprives the construction both of sense and verb, and makes the speech suspense and defective.  
The third pattern shall be taken from the beginning of the request of 
Conc. dict. Afric. c. 105.  the same Epistle, where after these words, Premising then the office of a due salutation, we beseech you affectionately that henceforward you will no more, so easily admit to your ears, those that come from these parts, nor restore to the communion, those that have been excommunicated by us; for as much as your Reverence will easily discern, that this hath been defined by the Council of Nicaea; the 〈◊〉 text adds, for although it seem, that there should only mention be made of Clerks and laymen, by how much stronger reason, should this be observed of Bishops, that those which have been deprived of the communion in their province, might not appear to be restored rashly and duly to the communion by your Holiness? And the Greek text contrariwise makes two diverse clauses of this train, whereof he refers the first to the Pope, and not to the Council of Nicaea, and distinguisheth them by the word, then, which is an adverb of illation, in these terms; For if it appear that he hath had care to extend his caution, even to clerks and laymen, by how much stronger reason would he have is to be observed in regard of Bishops? Let not those then that have been suspended from the communion in their own province, appear to be hastily, and otherwise then is fit, 
Edit. 〈◊〉  restored to the communion by your Holiness. Now that the reading of the Greek 
〈◊〉. Cartb cap. 138.  edition be the true one, it appears by the branch following, which is; Likewise also the impudent flight's of priests and inferior clerks, let your Holiness as a thing worthy of you, reject them; Which supposeth, a precedent prayer to 
Edit. joan. 〈◊〉. 1525. & 〈◊〉. impress. Paris apud Abrah. Pacard. 1615.  the Pope particularly made for the Bishops.  
The fourth pattern shall be taken from the middle of the same petition, where the Greek text containing, the grace of the holy Ghost shall not want to every provision; the latin exemplifiers of the Greek word, which signifies there, provision; some of them have made, providence; and other some, province. For that there it must be read provision, and not province, 
Edit. or. din. Concilior. ex Isidor Mercat  it appears by the clause that follows, which saith; And principally since it is permitted to every one if he find himself aggrieved at the sentence of the judges to appeal to the Synod of his province. The fifth pattern shallbe taken from the end of the same Epistle, where the Greek text saith; For as for the wretched 
Edit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Carth cap 138.  Apiarius, having already been for his infamous crimes cast out of the Church of Christ, by our brother Faustinus, we are no more in care; for as much as by the means of the approbation and direction of your Holiness, for the preservation of brotherly Charity, Africa will suffer him no longer: which is the true sense of the Bpistle, where the Fathers intent to express, that the Pope will no longer permit, that Apiarius (to whom by the first judgement of Faustinus his 〈◊〉, & of the African Bishops reviewing the cause with him, it had been granted to remain in Africa, and so exercise there in any place he could or would, the office of priesthood, provided it were not at Sicca; having been by the second judgement, condemned and excommunicated, yea by the very month of Faustinus his Holiness legate;) should remain in 
Conc. dict Afric. cap. 101. & 105.  Africa, and exercise any priesthood there; which sense also the protestants have followed, as well in the Greek, as in the latin, of the last impression of the Counsels of Africa, which they have made in Germany. 
Edit. Conc. witeberg. Ann. 1614  And the latin edition contrariwise saith, transferring the speech to 〈◊〉; For as for our Brother Faustinus, Apiarius having been already cast out of the Church for his enormous crimes; we are assured saving the probity and 〈◊〉 of your Holiness, that brotherly Charity will not permit, that he be 〈◊〉 longer borne with, in Africa. Now this translation is both against the Greek text, which refers the speech to Apiarius, and not to Faustinus; and against the express intention of the Council, which might well & conveniently desire the Pope, not to permit any longer, that Apiarius should remain in Africa, but not desire him no more to keep a Legate in Africa, & principally according to the opinion of those that will have it, that the Council of Carthage where Genetlins presided, was celebrated under the Empire of Valentinian the third who begun to be Emperor, but the year after the Consulship of Victor and Castinus, under the which, according to them, this letter was written, and that Faustinus the 
Leo ad Episc.  Pope's Legate assisted at it; And against the testimony of Leo the first, who was created Pope eight years after the death of Celestine, who 
Afric. ep. 85.  makes mention of a Bishop called Potentius, who was his Legate in Africa. For as for the clause, we are no more in care of it which wants in the Greek printed copies, it is in the ancient greek copies commented by Zonara and by Balsamon; And as for the word probity which is read in the latin text, it may be it is a depravation of the Greek word, which signifies, 〈◊〉, which also the Germans have retained in the new edition as well Greek as latin of their Conncells. But it is already a long while since this digression began, to exceed the proportion of the other parts of my work; And therefore the fear to abuse the Readers patience, obligeth me to conclude and to pray them to excuse me, if I have suffered myself to be carried beyond what was my purpose at the beginning of the chapter. The importance of the matter shall recompense the defect of the proportion, which perchance in these kinds of searches, will not be displeasing to spirits curious of antiquities.   

Of the Question of Appeals, treated of in the sixth Council of Carthage. CHAPT. X.  
THE fifth instance of Calvin against the Pope's authority, is taken from the dispute that happened about the matter of Appeals in sixth Council of Carthage; and consists in this, that Apiarius priest of the city of Sicca in Africa, having appealed to the Pope from a sentence that the Bishops of Africa had given against him; And the Bishops of Africa having complained of this Appeal, the Pope sent them the canons of the appeals made in the Council of Sardica, and directed them to them under the title of the canons of the Council of Nicaea, for as 
Conc. Carth Dict. 9 c. 3.  much as the Council of Sardica, was an appendix of the Council of Nicaea. By means whereof the Africans not finding these Canons in the Copies of the council of Nicaea that they had with them, deputed some into the East, to see if they could find them in the copies of the Eastern Churches, and not having found them there, and besides finding themselves much aggrieved as the frequent appeals, which those that had bad causes cast in from their judgements, besought the Pope, that he would not more so easily receive Appeals from the churchmen of their provinces. Now this instance hath been after many ages, the principal engine of the adversaries against the Pope's authority, as it appears both by the use that the schismatics of the mockcouncell of 〈◊〉 
Centur. 10. c. 9 col. 494.  made of it to the end to oppress the innocence of Arnulphus Bishop of Orleans, which the Pope maintained; And by the calumnies where with Zonar as and Balsamon Greek schismatics, unjustly charge the memory 
Zonar. Comment. in Conc. Carth c. 〈◊〉.  of Pope Zosimus, for having alleged the canons of the Council of Sardica, under the title of the canons of the Council of Nicaea: And finally by the proceedings of the protestants, who in this slander have followed 
Balsam.  and surpassed them. For not only the first Protestants have caused to be 
〈◊〉.  published, and republished many times, this sixth Council of Carthage; as a Storehouse reputed by them very powerful to resist the authority of the Sea Apostolic, but also have vomited & disgorged with so much impudence, the venom of their invectives against the Popes, under the which, this matter hath been treated of, as the heavens abhor it; calling 
Aug. contr. duas. Epist. Pelag. l 1.  Pope Boniface) whom S, AUGUS, calls, Reverend Pope Boniface, & to whom he dedicated one of his principal Books, and whom Prosper qualifies, Pope of holy memory) instead of Boniface Maleface; And Pope Celestine, 
Prosp. x Collat.  whom the General Council of Ephesus, calls new S. Peter; in the 
Conc. Eph. part. 2. Act 3.  steed of Celestine Infernal. And yet since these two last years, their Successors dissembling the learned answers of the Illustrious Cardinals Bellarmine and Barronius, have caused the same Council to be twice new printed, once in France, & an other time in Germany, as an insoluble piece against the Pope's authotity. And therefore since the affairedeserues to be treated with much diligence, and read with much attention, it belongs to me to contribute the one, and to the readers to the lend the other.  
To this instance then, before I undertake to search this history to the bottomb, I will bring eight observations in form of preservatives and antidotes: The first observation shall be, that whatsoever the aim and success of this Council were, nothing could be inferred from it, to trouble & shake the Pope's authority in regard of Appeals. For in the Council of Chalcedon which was holden by six hundred thirty six Bishops, thirty years after the sixth Council of Carthage, & which was more famous & authentical, than the sixth Council of Carthage, as being a general Council, & one of the first four General Counsels; whereas the sixth Council of Carthage, what but a national Council, the Appeals of causes which concerned either faith or the persons of Bishops, continued to go to the Pope according to the form that had been ordained by the rule of the Council of Sardica The Epistle of the Emperor Valentinian the third annexed to the head of all the copies of the Council of Chalcedon, as well Greek as latin, is a testimony of this, which saith; We ought to preserve 〈◊〉 in our days, the dignity of particular reverence to the blessed Apoctle Péter, 〈◊〉 that the holy Bishop of Rome, to whom antiquity hath granted the priesthood 〈◊〉 all, may have place to judge of faith, and of Bishops, etc. For, for this cause 〈◊〉 to the custom of the Counsels, Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople hath 
In Epist. praeambul. Conc. Chalc.  〈◊〉 to him, in the controversy which is moved concerning faith. The law of the Emperor Marcian annexed to the end of the Acts of the same Council is a testimony of this, which cries out: The Synod of Chalcedon, by the authority 
Lex Marcian. in Conc. Chalc. part. 3. c. 11  of the blessed Bishop of the city eternal in glory Rome, examining matters of faith exactly, and establishing the foundations of Religion, gives to Flavianus the reward of his past life, and the palm of a glorious death. A testimony of this, is the petition of appeal, sent to the Pope by Theodoret Bishop of 
〈◊〉. ep. ap Leon.  〈◊〉, a city confining upon Persia, and subject to the Patriarch of Antioch, which saith; I attend sentence of your Apostolic Throne, and beseech your Holiness to succour me, appealing to your right and just judgement. A testimony 
Conc. Chalc Act. 1.  of this is the ordinance of the directors of the policy of the Council, which was; Let the most reverend Bishop Theodoret come in, that he may partake of the Council, because the most holy Archbishop Leo hath restored his Bishopric to him, and that the most sacred and religious Emperor hath ordained, that he be present at the Council. And finally the relation of the same Council is a testimony of this, which writes to the Pope, approving the judgement of appeal, that he had given in the cause of Eutyches Abbot of Constantinople, and condemning Dioscorus and the false Council of Ephesus, for presuming to meddle with it, He hath restored to Eutyches, the dignity whereof he was deprived by your Holiness, &c, And after all this; He hath 
Conc. Chalc relat. ad Leon.  〈◊〉 his felony even against him, to whom the keeping of the vine had been committed by our Saviour, that is to say, against your Apostolic Holiness. 
Conc. Chalc ep ad Leon part. 3. c. 2.   
The second observation shall be, that the controversy of appeals, which was handled in the sixth Council of Carthage, was not of appeals in mayor and Ecclesiastical causes, that is to say, in causes of Faith, or of the Sacraments, or of discipline, or of the customs and ceremonies of the Church: but of appeals in minor and personal causes, that is to say, in the secular and temporal causes of persons constituted in orders; as causes of adultery, drunkenness, battery, theft, debt, and others causes, as well moral as pecuniary, and as well civil as criminal of Ecclesiastical persons, which the decrees of Counsels, and the laws of Emperors, submitted to the Tribunal of the Church. This appeareth both by the quality of Apiarius his cause, for which this 
Conc. dict. Afric. can. 138.  question was moved, which was a moral cause, and wherein there were 〈◊〉 and infamous crimes handled, and not an Ecclesiastical cause; And by the remonstrance which the Africans made to Pope 〈◊〉, 
Ep. Conc. African. ad Celest. Pap. in Concil.  That the beyond-sea judgements could not be assured for the difficulty of causing witnesses to pass out of Africa into Europe, which often because of the weakness either of age or sex could not endure sea voyages. And by the Epistle of Pope 
Afric. c. 105 Aug. ep. 106 Inter 〈◊〉 Aug. ep. 93.  Innocent the first, which S. AUGUSTINE calls, worthy of the Sea 〈◊〉; wherein these words were contained; And principally whensoever 〈◊〉 of faith are handled, I conceive that all our brethren and colleagues ought not 〈◊〉 them but to Peter, that is to say, to the author of their name and dignity. And finally by the very proceedings of the Milevitan Council, and of the Council of Carthge, holden under the twelfth consulship of Honorius. For not only the Fathers of the Milevitan Council, where the prohibition was made to inferior Clerks not to appeal beyond sea, 〈◊〉 
Conc. Milevit. c. 22.  the final judgement of Celestius already heard and judged for a cause of Faith in Africa to Pope Innocent the first, with this acknowledgement, 
Aug. epist. 106.  that the Pope's authority was of divine right; or to use their own own 
Aug. ep. 92  terms, drawn from the authority of the holy Scriptures: but even Pope Innocent the first being dead before he could hear Celestius in person, and having only condemned him in general, upon the report of the Counsels of Africa, the African Bishops reassembled in the Council of Carthage holden under the twelfth consulship of Honorius, wherein the question of Apiarius, and the controversy of Episcopal appeals began; caused their acts concerning Celestius, to be carried to Rome, and procured them to be confirmed by Pope Zosimus, successor to Innocent. The reverend Bope Zosimus (saith S. AUGUSTINE) pressed Celestius to condemn those things that the Deacon Paulinus (so was he called that had accused Celestius 
August. de 〈◊〉. origin 〈◊〉. 7.  in Africa) had objected against him, and to give cousent to the letters of the Sea Apostolic, 〈◊〉 by his predecessor of holy memory. But he would not condemn the articles that Paulinus had objected against him, true it is that he durst not resist Pope Innocents letters: Contrariwise, be promised to condemn all that, which that Sea should condemn. And therefore after having been gently fomented, as a frantic person to make him rest; it was nevertheless, not thought fit, to unbind him from the Bonds of excommunication, but for the space of two months, attending till they writ out of Africa, time for repentance was given him, under a certain medicinal sweetness of judgement. And again; By the watchfulness of 
Id ep. 157.  the Episcopal Counsels, the Reverend Prelates of the Sea Apostolic, even to the number of two, Pope Innocent, and Pope Zosimus, have condemned Pelagius and Celestius through the whole Christian world, if they do not correct themselves, and 
Prosper. in Chronic.  besides that do penance. And Prosper, timefellow & scholar to S. AUGUST. under the twelfth consulship of Honorius, and the vl of Theodosius, The decrees of the Council of Carthage of two hundred and fourteen Bishops, were carried to Pope Zostmus, which having been approved, the Pelagian heresy was condemned 
Id. contr. Collat.  over all the world. And again; Pope Zosimus of blessed memory, added the forces of his sentence to the decrees of the Counsels of Africa, and to cut off impious persons, armed the right hand of all the Bishops with the sword of Saint Pcter. And the Deacon Paulinus himself, in his epistle to Pope Zosimus; published by the illustrious Cardinal Baronius; I had promised (saith he) not 
Baron. Ann l. to m. 5. 〈◊〉 Ann. 〈◊〉. 413  to fail to appear at Rome, if the judgement had been given against me, and not for me, but then I could pursue nothing, since he that had appealed to the Sea Apostolic (he means Celestius, who, as saith S, AUGUSTINE, upon the end 
Aug. de 〈◊〉. origin c. 7. & 8.  of the trial at Rome, took his flight) absented himself, he that ought to have maintained the validity of his appeal.  
The third caution shallbe, that the Africans did not in this question contest the evocations, that came from the mere motion of the Pope, but the appeals that came from the simple motion of the particular men. For that the custom of evocations proceeding from the Pope hath been known in antiquity, and hath had place both before and after the sixth Council of Carthage, it appears both by the request that Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia, and his partakers made to the Pope, to call the cause of Athanasius, which had been judged in the Council of Antioch, and in many others Counsels of the East, and to draw it to Rome; He writ 
Socrat. hist 〈◊〉. l 2. c. 11.  (saith Socrates) to julius' Bishop of Rome, and besought him to call the cause to himself. And Theodoret: Julius following the Ecclesiastical law, commanded them 
Theodor. hist. Eccl. l 2 c 4.  to present themselves at Rome, and summoned the divine Athanasius in judgement; and by the constitution of the Emperors Theodosius and Valentinian published a while after the sixth Council of Carthage, which ordains, That every Bishop that, 
〈◊〉.  
Theodos. tit. 24.  having been called by the Pope, shall refuse to appear, shall be constrained thereunto by the Governor of the Province. And by the evocation that the Pope S. 
Greg.  GREGORY the Great made of all the causes that Adrian Bishop of 
Mag. l2. indict. 11. ep 7.  Thebes in Macedonia had, or might afterward have, before John Bishop of Larissa his Metropolitan, which he ordained to be judged either at Constantinople, by the Pope's Nuncio, if the causes were Minor or at Rome by the Pope himself if they were mayor causes. And that the Africans contested none but the Appeals that proceeded from the simple motion of particular persons, and not the evocations that came of the Pope's mere motion; it appears by this that the Pope having put four Articles into the instruction that he had given to his Legates, to treat with the Bishops of Africa, amongst which there was one that 
Edit Graec. can. 134  imported thus much, To call Urbanus Bishop of Sicca to Rome, or even 
Conc. Carth 6. epist. univers.  to excommunicate him, if he corrected not such things, as aught to be corrected. The Africans stuck only upon the Articles of Appeal, and 
Afric. Synod ad Bonifac. c. 101  as for the Article of evocation, they brought neither scruple nor resistance against it. Contrariwise, they answered, that Vrbanus had corrected those things, that aught to be corrected, without any difficulty. 
Ibid.  And indeed, how could the Africans have contested the evocation, proceeding from the Pope's proper motion, they that but even before, had solicited Pope Innocent the first, to call Pelagius out of Palestina, where he had been absolved by Eulogius Archbishop of 〈◊〉, and by John Bishop of Jerusalem, and by all the Council of the province, to be heard and adjudged by him at Rome: It is necessary then 
Aug. ep. 95.  (said they) either that Pelagius should be called to Rome by they Reverence; 
Aug. ep. 90  etc. or that he may have Interrogatories by letter. And elsewhere: We are assured, that when your Reverence shall have seen the Episcopal Acts, which are said to have been made upon this occasion in the East, thou wilt judge of it in such sort, as we shall all rejoice in the mercy of God. For that Pope Innocent answers, that Pelagius might be more commodiously heard by the Bishops here Palestina, he intends with commission from the Sea Apostolic, as he shows by these words: He ought not to attend to be called by 
Interiepist. Aug. ep. 96  us, but aught to come to us, that he may be absolved. And again; But care 
Ibidem.  shall not be wanting, if he will give way to remedies, for he may condemn those things that he hath holden, and ask pardon for his errors by letter, as is convenient for one that returns to us. Now this exception was more than sufficient, to preserve the mark of Superiority, though the minor Appeals should have no place. For even in secular jurisdictions, there is great difference between making difficulty, that a particular man of his own Motion, should appeal from any Tribunal to the Prince, or that the Prince of his own motion should call the cause of a particular man to him. And our ancient French have often debated Appeals from France to Rome in minor and personal causes, without pretending for all that to debate, either evocations or Superiority. And to prove this, when Rothaldus Bishop of Soissons appealed to Rome under the second race of our Kings, Hincmarus' Archbishop of Rheims and tyme-fellow with Charles the Bald writ to the Pope: God forbid that we should so despise that 〈◊〉 
〈◊〉. Epist. ad Nicol. Pap. 1 apud. Flo doard. hist Eccl.  of the Prime and Sovereign Sea of the Pope of the holy Roman Church, as to weary your Sovereign authority with all the Processes, and all the differences of the Clergy, aswell of the inferior as superior order; which the Canons of the Council of Nicaea and of the other Sacred Counsels, and the 
Rom. 1. 3.  〈◊〉 of Innocent, and of the other Bishops of the holy Sea of Rome, 〈◊〉 to be determined in their provinces. And nevertheless to manifest that he pretended not to touch, upon neither-the superiority, nor 
Id. ibid.  the evocations, he added; We know all, aswell young as old, that our Churches 
Id ibid.  are subject to the Roman Church. And a little after, It is fit and just, that every Bishop, that the Roman Bishop shall send for, to come to him to Rome, if sickness or any other more grievous necessity, or impossibility hinder him not as the sacred Canons prescribe, shall do his devoir to travel thither, And elsewhere; 〈◊〉 
Idem. in 〈◊〉 55.  yield obedience to the Sea Apostolic, from whence is derived the stream of 
〈◊〉. l. 35.  Religion, Ecclesiastical ordination, and Canonical judicature. And even to this day, in the Appeals of minor and personal causes; neither the causes nor persons of the French Clergy, go to Rome to be judged there; neither doth the Pope send legates from Rome in to France, but names commissaries taken out of the Province of France, and dwelling in France, to judge them upon the place, to avoid the costs and other inconveniences, that the length and difficulty of the way, would bring upon the witnesses and parties, which was that, that principally did hurt the Africans.  
The fourth advertisement shall be, that it was not of set purpose, and of the first design, that the African Fathers moved the controversy of the beyond-Sea Appeals of Bishops, but by accident, and in continuance of Apiarius his appeal. For the Africans had always till then observed this difference between Bishops and Simple Priests; that Bishops might Appeal beyond the Sea, and Priests not; as it appears, both by the declaration that saint AUGUSTINE made, That 
Aug. ep. 162.  Cecilianus might reserve the definition of his cause, to the judgements beyond Seas, because he was not of the number of simple Priests, or other inferior Clerks, but of the number of Bishops; And by the testimony he gives; that many African Bishops, the Sea Apostolic judging them, or confirming the judgements of others, had been preserved to the title of their Bishopric without retaining the exercise thereof. And by the tacit exception of the order of Bishops, that the Fathers of the Milevitan. Council had set into the decree of the Appeals, 
Concil. Milevit. can. 22.  when they had ordained that the Priests Deacons and other inferior Clerks, could not appeals to the Provinces beyond the Sea. And therefore, when Apiarius Priest of the Church of Sicca in Africa, came to appeal beyond Sea, the African Bishops opposed themselves against it. And from thence by occasion, the question of Episcopal appeals, took, the original, as an incident set on the back of an other affair. For upon this opposition, the Pope sent the Rule of the Council of Sardica concerning appeals into Africa, which consisted in two articles; whereof one treated of the Appeals of Bishops, and the other of the appeals of Priests. Now the Pope sent these two Canons in the quality of Canons of the Council of Nicaea, for as 
Concil. Carth. 6. c. 3.  much, as the Council of Sardica was an Appendix, and a supply of the Council of Nicaea. The African Prelates then not finding the Canon of Bishops Appeals in the copies of the Council of Nicaea, that they had with them no more than that of the Priests Appeals; And besides being much vexed with the frequent Appeals of Bishops from their provinces, besought the Pope to be pleased, that they might send into the East, to see if this Rule were to be found in the copies of the Council of Nicaea, which were kept in the Eastern Churches: and putting in compromise the Title, which was produced to them of that, which they had till then observed by custom, in regard of Episcopal Appeals, took occasion also to put the continuance of the custom to compromise; that is to say, to contest, not only the Priests Appeals, but also to beseech the Pope to reject, or more rarely to receive the Appeals of Bishops.  
The fifth advertisement shallbe, that the allegation that Pope Zozimus made of the Canons of the Council of Sardica, under the title of 
Conc. Carth 6. c. 〈◊〉.  Canons of the Council of Nicaea, was not as shall hereafter appear, by fraud; or to make an advantage of, seeing contrariwise it had been more advantageable to him for the matter then in question, to have alleged them under the title of Canons of the Council of Sardica, then under the title of the Canons of the Council of Nicaea; for as much as in the Council of Nicaea, there was but one only Bishop of Africa, to wit, Cecilianus; whereas in the Council of Sardica, there were thirty six Bishops of Africa present, that subscribed it: but that it was, because it was the custom of the Roman Church to cite the Canons of the Council of Sardica, under the title of the Canons of the Council of Nicaea, because the Council of Sardica, had been an Appendix of the Council of Nicaea: as it is the custom of the greeks. to allege the Canons of the Council Trullian, under the title of Canons of the sixth General Council, because they pretend the Council Trullian to be an Appendix to the sixth General Council. And as Gregory of Tours alleges, and that with much less reason, the Canons of the Council of Gangres, for Canons of the Council of Nicaea, when he saith; Then arriving at the Monastery, I read over again 
Greg. Turon. hist. l. 9 c. 33.  the decrees of the Canons of the Council of Nicaea, wherein it is contained, because that if any woman leave her husband, and she despise the bed wherein he hath lived honestly, saying there is no part in the glory of the Kingdom of heaven, for him that hath been joined in marriage; let her be Anathema: For these words are the words of the Council of Gangres, and not those of the Council of Nicaea, for as much as the Council of Gangres, was as a branch and a slip of the Council of Nicaea; and that the same Osius, who had presided at the Council of Nicaea, assisted there, if we believe the ancient Latin inscriptions of the Council of Gangres, and the report of Eunodius ancient Bishop of Pavia.  
The sixth advertisement shallbe, that whereas the African Fathers, did not perceive that these Canons which they found not in the copies of the Council of Nicaea, were in those of the Council of Sardica, happened from this that the Donatists had suppressed in Africa, all the copies of the true Council of Sardica, which had been holden by the Catholic Bishops at Sardica, and had substituted in their steed the copies of the false Council of Sardica; which had been holden by the Arrians near Sardica. For in the same time, when the three hundred Catholic Bishops, which represented all the Catholic Church, held their Council at Sardica, where they confirmed the faith of the Council of Nicaea, & the absolution of S. ATHANASIUS; the seventy Arrian Bishops which had separated themselves from them, held their heretical mockcouncell, which they falsely and impudently entitled, the Council of Sardica, at Philippopolis, a city near Sardica, where they condemned the Faith of the Council of Nicaea, and the person of S. ATAANASIUS. Now it happened, that in the address of the Epistle of this false Council of Sardica, the Arrians amongst the Bishops of their communion, inserted the name of Donatus, Bishop of the Donatists of Carthage; for as much as this Donatus, besides the heresy of the Donatists, was 
Socrat. hist. Eccl l. 2. c. 20. &.  also infected with that of the Arrians. The Donatists then thinking, they might infer from thence, that their communion had in former 
Sozom. l. 3. c 10.  times been spread out of Africa, & by this means avoid the reproaches that the Catholics of Africa made to them, that their Church was imprisoned 
In frag. Hilar. p. 6.  within the lymitts of Africa, and consequently was not Catholic; advised themselves to call in, and supprese secretly in Africa, all the copies of the true Council of Sardica, which had been brought thither by Gratus, Catholic Archbishop of Carthage, and to sow in their steeds, the copies of the false Council of Sardica, which had been addressed to Donatus his competitor, and wrought so in it, that in the time, of saint AUGUSTINE, and of the sixth council of Carthage, as it shallbe hereafter proved by many places of S. AUGUSTINE, there were to be found in Africa, none of the copies of the true council of Sardica, but only those of the false council of Sardica.  
The seaventh Advertisement shallbe, that the African Fathers, never went so far as to make any decision or any decree upon the Article of the Episcopal Appeals: contrariwise before the coming of the copies from the East, all their proceeding was to beseech the Pope, to cause their 
Concil. dict. Afric. epist ad Bonifac. c. 101.  contents to be observed, with protestation the while to practise what was set down in his Legates Instructions. And after the copies had been brought out of the East, so far were they from making any decree upon the Article of the Bishops Appeals, as they hindered not those of Simple priests. For after the death of Pope Boniface, under whom the copies of the East were brought into Africa, Apiarius being fallen into new crimes, for which he was again condemned, by a Council of Africa, and Pope Celestine, upon a pretence of Appeal, having again sent Faustinus his Legate into Africa, to cause a new Council to be holden there, where Apiarius did not only forbear to hinder it, but also to obey the Pope's Bill of Appeal, assembled a new Council, where, in his Legates presence, Apiarius his cause was again put to trial; and they did 
Epist. Concil. Afric. ad Pap.  not awake the contention of Appeals, but upon the occasion that was given them by the subsequent and unexpected confession of Apiarius, 
Caelest. c. 101.  who vanquished by the remorse of his own conscience, voluntarily discovered all the infamous crimes, whereof he was accused. This 
Ibidem.  confession then, having renewed in the spirit of the Africans, the memory of the greevances that they received by Appeals, which in steed of serving, as they ought, for a shield for innocence, when the raynes were let too loose, served for a Shield for incorrigibilitie and impunity; they took occasion from thence to write an Epistle of 
Ibid.  complaint to the Pope. But yet even then they passed not so far, as to make any decree of the Episcopal appeals, but contained themselves within the simple lymitts of complaints, petitions, and Remonstrances. Which the Bishops of the Council of Constantinople surnamed Trullian, that the greeks call the sixth general Council, 
Conc. in Trull. c. 2.  acknowledged when they said, we receive the Canons made by the holy Fathers assembled at Sardica and at Carthage; words which showed plainly, that they believed not the Council of Sardica to have been disabled by the decrees of the Council of Carthage.  
The eight and last advertisement shall be, that the end & issue of the affair was, that after all these contentions, searches, and proceedings, the Pope remained in full and entire possession of the Right of the Episcopal Appeals of Africa, and that the Africans were satisfied, that what they hadnot found in the Council of Nicaea, was contained in the Council of Sardica, whose Canons upon this occasion, they inserted into the Canon law of their provinces; and in sum that all the African Church continued and persevered, in the practice of yielding Episcopal Appeals to the Sea Apostolic, and in the communion and obedience of the Pope, as long as Christianity lasted in Africa: This is the history; Apiarius priest of Sicca, a city of the province of Numidia in Africa, after he had been condemned, deposed, and excommunicated by the African Bishops in a cause, that he had against Vrbanus Bishop of Sicca complained to Pope Zozimus, that he had appealed to him, & that the Africans would 
Conc. Carth 6. c. 3.  not suffer the cause to pass beyond Sea. Pope Zozimus upon this occasion sent into Africa the rule of the Council of Sardica, upon the matter of Appeals; which consisted in two Articles; whereof the one contained, that the Bishops after they had been deposed by the Counsels of their Provinces might appeal to the Pope: & the other contained that the Priests which had been deposed by the Council of their Province might have their cause reviewed, by the Bishops of the next Provinces, which was the point that concerned Apiarius his controversy. For whereas the 
Conc. Carth 1. c 1 & Conc. 〈◊〉 2. c. 10.  rule of the Counsels of Africa imported, that the Priests should be judged by the Bishop of their Diocese, and by six Bishops of the same Province, and that in case they would appeal from it, they might not appeal but to the Primate, and to the Council of their Province; to the end, that the cause might be determined within the Lymitts of that particular Province, where it had been begun: The Council of Sardica ordained, that after they had been judged by the Primate and the Council 
Concil. Sardic. c. 14.  of their Province, they might appeal to the Primate, and to the Council of one of the next Province. Which thing being applied to Africa, to wit, that it might be lawful to every Priest of Africa to appeal from the Primate and from the Council of his Province, to the Primate and Council of one of the next Provinces; Apiarius pretended, that it belonged to the dignity and the Privilege of the Sea Apostolic, that it might be in the power of him that was a Numidian Priest, to choose amongst the Churches next the Province of Numidia the Roman Church, although it were out of the continent of Africa, before any of the rest, because besides the neighbourhood that Tertullian expresses by these words; If thou be'st a neighbour to Italy, thou hast the Roman 
Tertul. de prescript. c. 36.  Church, whose authority is near and at hand to us, she hath the prerogative and pre-eminence of dignity above all the rest.  
Now it happened that the Pope sent into Africa these canons of the Council of Sardica under the title of the Canons of the Council of Nicaea. For the mention of the Council of Sardica inserted into some Latin copies of the sixth Council of Carthage, is a quotation of the copyists, which slipped out of the Margin into the Text, as it appears both by the current of the discourse, & by the latin collections of Dionysius, and by the copies of the Greek edition, where it is not to be found. And this he did not to deceive as is above said, but because it was the custom of the Roman Church, to cite the Canons of the Council of Sardica, which was an Appendix of the Council of Nicaea, under the Title of canons of the Council of Nicaea, as it is the custom of the Greek, to cite the canons of the Council entitled Trullian, under the title of the Canons of the sixth General Council for that the Council of Sardica was an Appendix, and a supply of the council of Nicaea holden in the same age, and for the same cause with the council of Nicaea, the greeks, yea even those that are schismatics, are of agreement with us. It pleased (said Zonara) the two Emperors 
Zonar. prae: fat. in Concil. Sardic.  to cause a Council to be holden to decide those things that had been decreed in the Council of Nicaea. At Sardica then assembled three hundred forty one Bishops, who made a decree confirming the Synod of the Fathers of the council of Nicaea, & excommunicating those that held the contrary. And Balsamon; It pleased the Emperors, that the Bishops should assemble at Sardica, to dispute 
Balsam.  about those things that had been decided at Nicaea; the assembly then was made of 
Ibid.  three hundred forty one Bishops, & the holy Creed of the Fathers called at Nicaea, 
Glyc. Annal. l. 4.  was confirmed. And Glycas; By the advice of the Emperors, the Council was assembled at Sardica where there were three hundred forty one Fathers who confirmed the sacred and holy Creed made at Nicaea. From whence it is, that the Emperor justinian, who entitles the Council of Sardica; a general Council; yet nevertheless reckons but four General Counsels, as comprehending and confounding the Council of Sardica, under oneself same title with that of Nicaea, because the Council of Sardica had made no creed in chief, like the other General Counsels, but had contented itself, with confirming 
justin. in edict. de fide Orthodox. apud. Leunclave. l. 8.  and expounding that of the Council of Nicaea. Likewise also, that the custom of the Roman Church, was often to cite the canons of the Council of Sardica, under the title of the canons of the Council of Nicaea (aswell because the Council of Sardica was annexed as an appendix to the Council of Nicaea, as because the Council of Nicaea and that of Sardica had been set down in the Latin edition by oneself same pen, and brought to Rome by one selfe-same Messenger; to wit, by Osius, who had presided at both, and they were written one following an other, yea in some copies, where of they say, one is to be found at Arras, without being distinguished the one from the other.) It appears from the letters of the Pope's Innocent and Leo the first, who allege the one in his Epistle to Uictricius reported by Charlemagne, and by Hincmarus; and the other 
Theod. hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 15.  in his Epistle to the Emperor Theodosius the second annexed to the front of the copies of the Council of Chalcedon; the decrees of the Council of Sardica, under the title of the decrees of the Council of Nicaea. And indeed, if this extension of title had been a fallacy, how came it that the 
Capitul.  Pelagians, which barked with so much fury against Pope Zozimus his 
Carol.  ashes (who had condemned them) and slandered and defamed him of prevarication, 
Magn. addit. 4.  never reproached him of this falsehood? And how could S. 
Hincmar. in opusc. 55 capitul. c. 6 In ep. praeam.  AUGUSTINE, and Prosper, who undertook the defence of his memory, have qualified him after his death, Holy, Reverend, and most blessed? And how could Pope Leo, thirty years after, have fallen into the same crime? And then what profit could it have been to the Pope, to allege by fallacy 
Concil. Chalced. c. 9  the Council of Sardica, under the title of the Council of Nicaea; contrariwise if he had regarded his own particular interest, why had it not 
Aug. ep. 157. & contra duas.  been of less advantage to him to conceal the title of the Council of Sardica, which in regard of general authority, was as authentical, and 
Epist. Pelagiani ad Bonisac. l. 2 c. 3. Prosp.  in regard of the particular discipline of Africa, was more authentical, and more obligatory than that of Nicaea? For first, as for general authority, there were these equalities between the Council of Nicaea & the Council 
Contra 〈◊〉.  of Sardica, that they had been holden in times near and contiguous one to the other, and celebrated, the one for the explication and strengthening of the other, & that the same Osius, which had presided at the one, had presided at the other: And that there were like number of Bishops in the one, as in the other; and that the one was called from all parts of the world, as well as the other. That it was so, not only saint ATHANASIUS, and after him Socrates and Sozomene testify, that in the Council of Sardica, there were more than three hundred Bishops, amongst which were the Patriarch of Alexandria, who was saint ATHANASIUS 
Athanas.  himself; the Bishop of Jerusalem, who was Maximus: the 
Apol. 2.  Bishop of Constantinople, according to Sozomene who was Paul: the 
Socrat. hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 20.  Archbishop of Carthage, who was Gratus; and many of the same Bishops which had assisted at the Conncell of Nicaea, as Osius Bishop of 
Sozom.  Cordua in Spain; Nicasius Bishop of Dina in Gaul: Protogenes Bishop 
ibidem. c. 12.  of Sardica in Illyria; Marcellus Primate of Aneyra, in Galatia: Asclepas 
Athan. A. pol. 2.  Bishop of Gaza in high Palestina, Aetias, Bishop of Lydda in Lowe Palestina; Paphnutius of Egypt; Spyridon of Cyprus and others: But also saint 〈◊〉 affirmeth that the Council of Sardica was called by the commandment of the two Emperors of East and West, a thing which appertained only to general Counsels; and that it was compounded of more than thirty five Provinces, and in this reckoning counting Africa but for one; Spain, but for one; the Gaul and Almany but for one; Great Britain but for one; Macedon but for one; Thrace burr for one; Galatia but for one; Egypt but for one; and the three Arabia's, and three Palestinas but for one; as it shall appear in the Chapter following, where we will treat of deliberate purpose, of the authority of the Council of Sardica and confute all the objections that the Pope's adversaries make against it. And this is to be said of the equality of the Counsels of Nicaea and 〈◊〉 as concerning general authority. For to the particular obligation of Africa, so far of is the Council of Sardica from being less authentical than that of Nicaea, as contrariwise the Council of Sardica had this advantage above that of Nicaea; that in the Council of Nicaea there was but one only Bishop of Africa, to wit, Cecilianus Archbishop of Carthage, as the second general Council of Constantinople notes in these words: Only Cecilianas' Bishop of Carthage came from all Africa, to the Council of Nicaea; whereas in the Council of Sardica, there were thirty six African Bishops, amongst which was Gratus Archbishop of Carthage: Of Africa (saith S. ATHANASIUS) there signed at the Council of Sardica, Nessus, Gratus, Magesius Coldeus, 
Conc. Const. 5. Act. 5.  Rogatianus, Consortius, Raphinus Manninus, Cecilianus, Erennianus, Marianus, Ualerius, Dinamius, Nyronius, justus, Celestine, Cypryan, Victor, Honour at, 
Athan. Apo. 2.  Marinus Pantagathus, Felix, Baudeus, Liber Capiton, Minersall, Cosmus, 〈◊〉, Hesperion, Felix, Severian, Optantius, Hesper, Fidetius, Salustus, Paschasius. And Osius speaking to the Council of Sardica; Many Bishops make a custom of travailing to the court, and principally the Africans, that as we have understood by our well-beloved brother and Colleague Gratus, receive not wholesome Counsels. And Gratus himself citing in the first Council of Carthage (concerning 
Concil. Sardic. can. 7.  the credit whereof we are all agreed, and which is alleged by 〈◊〉 Archdeacon of Carthage) one of the Canons of the Council of Sardica: I remember (said he) that in the most holy, Council of Sardica, it was 〈◊〉, that none should usurp a man of another diocese for his Clerk. By means whereof not only the Council of Sardica was of more authority than the 
Fulg. Ferand. in Breu. Can. artic. 24. 122. & alibi.  Council of Africa, as Zonarus himself acknowledgeth, when he saith speaking of the intituling of the Archbishopps: The Council of Chalcedon agreed rather to the Canon of the Council of Sardica, then to that of the Council of Africa; but also in regard of discipline was more strong and obligatory, in respect of the Africans, than the Council of Nicaea. 
Conc. Carthag. 1. c. 5.   
Now it happened as we have already touched above, that when the 
Zonar. in Concil.  Pope sent this Rule to the Africans, the Canons of the Council of Sardica 
Carthag. c. 42.  were no more to be found in the African Provinces; for the 〈◊〉 had so wrought by craft, as they had suppressed and banished out of Africa all the true Acts of the Council of Sardica, that had been brought thither in the time of Gratus and of the first Council of 〈◊〉, and had supposed and slipped into their steed, the acts of the Anticouncelle of Sardica: that is to say, the acts of the false Council holden by the Arrians at Philopolis near Sardica, under the title of the Council of Sardica, because that in the Epistle of this false Council, the 〈◊〉 made mention of Donatus, Bishop of the Donatists of Carthage. This appears by conferring the places of S. AUGUSTINE with the rest of 〈◊〉. For S. AUGUST. testifies, that the Acts of the Council of 〈◊〉 which were in his time currant in Africa, were the acts of the 〈◊〉 Council & which had condemned S. ATHANASIUS & the Council of Nicaea. He offered me (said S. AUGUSTINE, speaking of Fortunius 
Aug ep. 163.  the donatist) a certain Book, where he would show me, that, the Council of Sardica had written to the African Bishops of the commnnion of Donatus. And a little after: Then having taken the Book, and considering the statutes of the 
Id. ibidem.  same Council, I found that Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria, etc. and lulius Bishop of the Roman Church, no less Catholic, had been condemned by this Council of Sardica; whereby I was assured, that it had been a Council of Arrians. And in the third Book against Cresconius the Donatist, who had alleged the same Council of Sardica: The Council of Sardica (saith he) was 
Aug. x Crescon. l. 1. 3. c. 34.  a Council of Arrians, as the copies that we have in our hands do manifest, principally holden against Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria a Catholic. And all antiquity chose teacheth us, that the true Council of Sardica had confirmed the Council of Nicaea and justified S. ATHANASIUS, and was a most holy and most Catholic Council. The holy Synod of Sardica (saith S. ATHANASIUS, who assisted there in person) compounded of 
Athan. ad Solit. vit. agent.  above thirty five Provinces, received us in our iustifieable proceedings. And a little after, They declared Athanasius, and those that were with him pure and free 
Id. ibid.  from all crime, and their adversary's slanderers and wicked persons. And elsewhere; In the great Council of Sardica, our adversaries were deposed as slanderers, 
Athanas. de fuga sua apol  and more than three hundred Bishops subscribed to our justification. And again, The holy council assembled at Sardica decreed, that therein nothing of faith should be concluded, but that they should content themselves with the confession of the council of Nicaea. And Gratus Archbishop of Carthage, who was also there in person; I remember (said he) that in the most holy council of Sardica 
Conc. Carthag. 1. c. 5.  it was decreed, that none should usurp a Clerk of an other diocese. And the Epistle of the same Council of Sardica: We have declared our dear brethren 
Epist. Conc. Sardic. apud, Athan.  and fellow-ministers, Athanasius, Marcellus, Asclepas, and others their adjuncts in the service of God, innocent and blameless. And Socrates; The Bishops assembled at Sardica condemned before all things the desertion of those of Philopolis, 
Apol. 2.  and then deposed the accusers of Athanasius, and confirmed the decrees of the Council 
Socrat. hist Eccl. l, 2. 20  of Nicaea: Sozomene: They answered that they would not separate themselves 
Sozom. hist. Eccl. c. 〈◊〉. 1  from the Communion of Athanasius and Paul, and principally julius' Bishop of Rome having examined their cause, and not having condemned them, and the Council of Chalcedon: The fathers assembled at Sardica combated against the Relics of Arrius. A manifest proof that the Africans in the time of S. AUGUSTINE, and of the sixth Council of Carthage had no other but the Acts of the false Council of Sardica holden by the Arrians at Philopolis near Sardica which had condemned S. ATHANASIUS, and overthrown the council of Nicaea, and not those of the true council of Sardica which had justified S. ATHANASIUS and confirmed the council of Nicaea. But let us return to our history.  
The Bishops of Africa then finding neither of these Canons in the copies of the council of Nicaea, and not being able to find them in those of the council of Sardica because they had them not, they stretched out upon the occasion of the question of the priests, for which at the beginning the conclusion was moved, even to Bishops; and seeing that the title upon which that was grounded, which had until then been observed by custom concerning Bishops Appeals, did no more appear then that of Priests, took their time and opportunity to complain of the progress of this custom, and of the greevances that the Appeals, aswell of the one as of their other; that is to say, as well of the Bishops as of the priests, brought upon them, not by the fault of the appeals, but by the malice of men which is such as the gate cannot be opened for Appeals, but there will happen great evils in the frequent, executions of this remedy, as the contempt of the first judges, the delay and prolonging of justice, the cost and vexation of the parties, the incommodity of the transportation of witnesses of all sexes, and all ages: nor wholly shut it up from them lest worse may come of it. And therefore they writ to Pope Sozimus, whom their letters found already dead; and after to 〈◊〉 his successor, an Epistle by which after they had remonstrated to him the troubles that the past examples of appeals had brought upon them; and had represented to him that they had not found the rule which was in question in the Canons of the Council of Nycea, they required time to send into the East to take Copies out of the original: but with what humility, and with what respect? Always praying, always beseeching, always protesting to observe in attending the coming of the copies of the Council of Nicaea, that which was contained in the instruction of the Pope's legates: and in case that this Rule were not found in the Canons of the Council of Nicaea, requesting his Holiness to cause them to observe that which had been decreed by the Canons of the Council of Nicaea: Because (said they) it hath pleased God, that of the things 
Conc. Afric. ep. ad Bonifac. c, 101.  that our holy brethren Faustinus our Colleague, and Philip and Asellus our fellow Priests have treated with us, our Humility gave answer, not to the Bishop of Blessed memory Zosimus from whom they brought us commandment and letters, but to thy Reverence that have been divinely instituted in his steed; we ought here briefly to insinuate those things which have been determined by the reciprocal agreement of both parties. And again; We request your Holiness, that as these 
Ibidem.  things have been done or decreed by the Fathers of the Council of Nicaea, so you will cause them to be observed by us, and that you will cause to be prastised amongst you, that is, on 〈◊〉 side the sea, the points contained in the instructions. And again, 
Ibidem.  These things have been registered in the acts until the coming of the more certain copies of the Council of Nicaea; within the which, if they be set down in the same sort as they are contained in the instruction that hath been showed us by our brethren, sent by the sea apostolic and observed amongst you in Italy we will no more make mention thereof (For so is the reading in the greek text, and so we have proved heretofore that it must be read) nor further contest of the not enduring it. And presently after speaking of the Article of the Priest's appeals, which was the last article that they came from reporting, and that which most troubled them by reason of the insolence of the African Priests, who under pretence of these Appeals despised and shaken of all their Bishop's jurisdiction; But we believe with the help of God's mercy, 
Ibidem.  that your Holiness presiding in the Roman Sea, we shall no longer suffer this typhe (that is to say, this meteor, or this vexation, or this insolence of Priests despising and shaking of the yoke of Episcopal discipline) but that those things that brotherly charity (yea though ourselves were silent) requires to be observed towards us, and which yourselves according to the wisdom and justice that the most high hath bestowed upon you, do know aught to be observed, shall be observed to us ward, if at least the copies of the Council of Nicaea speak otherwise then your Legates instruction. For that is intended by the word, typhe, which being taken in his proper and natural sense, signifies, globe of smoke, or meteor; from whence it is, that the greek Mariners call the meteors and whirlwinds, short from the clouds in the form of Globes and rolls of smoke, Typhons, and being taken in the figurative sense, signifies sometimes vexation, by allusion to the smoke with which bees are driven; sometimes pride, sometimes insolence, and sometimes fury and madness: terms all agreeable to the persecution that the Bishops of Africa received from the insolent appeals of their priests, whereof they 
Ibidem.  had newly said in Apiarius his case; For as much as many such examples have caution must be used, that hereafter there may happen none such or yet 〈◊〉 And the while to obey the present commandment of the Pope, they restored Apyarius to the Communion and to his Priesthood, as they testfie 
Ibidem.  by these words of their Epistle to Boniface; Apiarius craving pardon 〈◊〉 
Ibidem.  his faults, hath been restored to the communion. And again; It hath pleased 〈◊〉 
Ibid epist. ad Celest. cap. 105.  that Apiarius should retire from the Church of Sicca, retaining the honour of his degree. And by these in their Epistle to Celestine; Apiarius had been formerly restored to Priesthood by the intercession of Faustinus. And not only that, but also protested in expecting the coming of the copies out of the East, to observe 
Concil. Carthag. 6. c. 4.  from point to point what was contained in the instructions of the Pope's legates. We protest (said Alipius) upon the reading of the first article, to 
Ibid c 7.  observe these things until the coming of the perfest copies. And S. AUGUSTINE 
Concil. Afric. c. 101.  upon the reading of the second; We protest also to observe this article, saving a more diligent inquiry of the Council of Nicaea. And the Fathers of the council in the Epistle to Boniface; We protest to observe these things, until the proof of the Canons of the Council of Nicaea, and we trust in the will of God, that your Holiness also will help us in it. By means whereof, the appeals remained in the estate contained in the instruction of the Pope's legates until the coming of the copies from the East.  
When the copies of the council of Nicaea had been brought out of the East wherein these Canons which also were of the Council of Sardica and not of the Council of Nicaea were not to be found: the African Bishops sent a Duplicat, thereof to Pope Boniface, nevertheless without innovating any thing in matter of appeals. When Pope Boniface was dead, who deceased a few years after, and Celestine created Pope in his place; Apiarius who had retired himself from Sicca to Tabraca a City of the same Province, to wit; of Numidia to exercise his priesthood there, fell in to other crimes, for which, at the instance of the Tabracians he was condemned, and deposed by the Council of the Province, & from this Council Appealed, or feigned to have Appealed to Rome to Pope Celestin upon this pretence of appeal, sent Faustin ' again, who had assisted at Apiari his judgement of appeal against those of Sicca, to cause a new Council to be holden in Africa, where the cause of Apiarius against those of Tabraca, was in the presence of the same Faustinus again put to trial, & the while restored and reintegrated Apiarius by form of provision to the Communion. The Africans to obey the Pope's commandment, assembled a last Council, where they remitted Apiarius his cause to examination in the presence of the Pope's Legates, and found themselves so troubled to clear 
Epist. ad Celest.  the crimes, for which they had deposed him, which he affrontedly and 
Conc. Afric. c. 15.  impudently denied; as, if he had not convinced himself, they despaired of ever compassing it: God so pressed the imposthume of Apiarius his hart, 
Ibid.  as he broke it, and constrained him to vomit up by an unexpected confession, all the filth, rottenness, and infamyes, whereof he was accused, and which he had denied with so much fraud and impudence. The Africans then pricked and stung with these infamous and insolent proceedings of Apiarius, and moved with this, that the Canons of Appeals that had been sent them under the title of the Canons of the Council of Nicaea, were not in the copies of the Council of Nicaea that had been brought out of the East; and not knowing that they were in those of the Council of Sardica which was the Appendix and the seal of the Council of Nicaea, they took licence to write an Epistle to Pope Celestine, to beseech him no more so easily to receive the Appeals of the Clergy men of Africa. Now some might call in question the credit of this Epistle, as well because it is a piece out of the work, and annexed to the continuance of the sixth Council of Carthage, which had been held three year before, as a foundling, without any mention of the date or of the acts, or of the history of the Council where it was written, as, because it was full of clauses, and cannot be compatible with the discipline of the Africans, for it takes for a first foundation, that if the Council of Nicaea excluded Priests from being to be adjudged by Appeal out of their Provinces, the Bishops may by stronger reason be excluded. And the foundation of the Africans contrariwise in the question that they had against the Donatists was, that Cecilanus after he had been deposed by the Bishops of Africa might have reserved the judgement of his 
Aug. epi. 162.  cause to the beyond sea Churches, for as much as he was not of the number of Priests or other inferior Clerks; which the Council of Nicaea 〈◊〉 Cecilianus assisted, could not be ignorant of. It takes for a second foundation that ecclesiasticals condemned might appeal to the Council of their Province, yea even to the general Council of all Africa which is manifestly against the history and discipline of the Counsels of Africa, and principally for the inferior Clerks, as Priests, deacons and Subdeacons'. For, the holding of the anniversary Counsels of all Africa, had been suppressed twelve years before Celestine in the Council holden under the seaventh Consuslhip of Honorius; where it had been ordained that the universal Counsels of Africa should no more be ordinary and anniversary, and should no more be holden but for extraordinary and universal causes. And that the causes that were not common, should be 
Concil. dict. African. c. 62.  judged in their Provinces; And that if there were an appeal, the appellant and the party should choose judges, from whom it should not be lawful to appeal. And finally, it takes for a third foundation, that there was no difference of privilege, between Clerks of the Superior order, in the matter of passive jurisdiction; and that the same which had been ordained concerning the one, aught by a stronger reason, to have place 
Con. Car. 1. c. 1. & citat. a. Fulg.  concerning the others, which is directly contrary to the African discipline, which makes so great difference between the one and the other, as to judge Priests in the second instance, there needed but six Bishops with 
Ferrand. in Breu. Can. art. 244.  the Diocesan, and to judge a Bishop in the first instance, there must be twelve with the Archbishop of the Province. But for as much as this Epistle 
Et Conc. Carth. 2. c. 10. & citat. codemart. 55.  is in the collection of Dionysius, whether it have been added since, or whether it were inserted from the beginning; and that after Dionysius, Pope Adrian and the Emperor Charlemagne made mention thereof, although there be ancient copies, where neither of these Epistles are to be 
Diony. Ex. collect. Canon. diverse Concil.  found, I will not resist it. Only I will say, that S. AUGUSTIN assisted not at the Council where it was written; as appears, as well because there is 
Afric. Provin. tit. 138.  no mention made of him, neither at the beginning nor end of the Epistle, a thing which would never have been forgotten, to authorize and fortify the action, as well as it had been in the Epistle to Boniface, as because 
Adrian. Pap. collect ex Synod. & Canon diverse Capit. Carol. Mag. l. 6. c. 287.  those that were after him in order of promotion, and which were wont to be enroled after him in public actions, and amongst others The asius 〈◊〉, and Fortunatianus, are named in the inscription of the Epistle, and not he. For that S. AUGUSTINE did use to precede The asius, appears by the forty fifth and two and sixtith Canon of the council entitled African and that he used to precede Uincentius and Fortunatianus 
Collat.  appears by the collation of Carthage where the deputies for the Catholics, 
Carthag. pag. 〈◊〉.  vere Aurelius, Alipius, Augustinus, Uincentius, Fortunatus, Fortunatianus and Possidius. Now this Epistle contains two parts, to wit, a narration, and a supplication, which we report from the Greek text, for as much as the Greek edition, as we have above showed, is more entire and correct in matter of Epistles than the latin. The narration than it Our holy brother and colleague Faustinus coming to us, we believed that he had 
Paulo post. princ.  been sent with Apiarius, to the end, that as by his means Apiarius had been formerly restored to his Priesthood; so now by his labour he might be purged of so many crimes, as had bene objected against him by the Tabracenians, But the multitude of our Synod running over the crimes of Apiarius; found them to be so great and in so great number, as they have surmounted the protection, rather than judgement: and affection of a defender, rather than the justice of a Judge of the same Faustinus; for first he hath throughly resisted all the assembly charging it with diverse contumelies under colour of pursuing the privileges of the Roman Church; and willing to cause himself to be received unto our Communion, because your Holiness believing he had appealed to you, which yet he could not prove, had restored him to the Communion. 〈◊〉 this succeeded not with him, as you may know better by the verbal process of the acts; contrariwise after a laborious inquiry of three days, during which we examined with much anguish the diverse charges which were objected to him, God a just judge powerful & patiented hath cut off by a great abridgement, the delays of our colleague Faust. and the tergiversations of the same Apiarius, by which he attempted to hide his infamous villainies, etc. For our God pressing the conscience of this fraudulent denier, and his will being to publish to men the Crimes that his providence condemned, being yet hidden in his hart, as in a bog of vices, he hath blazed out and suffered himself to fall into a confession of all the vices, which were objected against him etc. and hath converted our hope by which we believed and desired that he might purge himself from these so shameful blotts and stains into grief, but that our grief hath been eased by this only comfort, that we have been delivered from the affliction of a longer labour. After the narration marcheth the supplication which consists in three requests; The first request is, that the Pope should no more so easily receive those that should appeal to him from Africa. Premised then (said 
Circamed.  they) the office of a due salutation, we beseech you with all our affection, that you do no more so easily admit these to your 〈◊〉, that shall come from hence, and no more receive those to the Communion, that have been excommunicated by us, And a while after. That so those that in their own Province have been deprived of the Communion, may not seem to be rashly and unfitly restored to the Communion by your Holiness, And this request they propped up with five reasons. The first, that the 
Conc. 〈◊〉. c. 5.  Council of Nicaea had forbidden, that those which had been excommunicated in one Province, should be received to Communion in an 〈◊〉 Your Reverence (said they) will easily acknowledge that this hath been so defined by the Council of Nicaea; for although it seems to restrain the caution to inferior Clerks and to lay men by how much stronger reason did they intend it also to Bishops; A thing that the heat of contention drew from their mouths, and which is directly against S. AUGUSTINE, who saith, speaking of Cecilianus Archishop of Carthage, who had been deposed by a Council of seventy African Bishops assembled at Carthage: He might contemme the conspiring multitude of his Enemies, because he knew himself to be united by communicatory 
Aug. epi. 162.  letters to the Roman Church, in which hath always flourished the principality of the sea Apostolic, and from the other Countries from whence the Gospel first came into Africa. And against the Council of Nicaea itself which precisely limits the words to Priests and Laymen, which having been excommunicated by their Bishop, could not be received to Communion, by any of the other Bishops of the same Province. For whereas the African Fathers infer, that if the Council of Nicaea spoke these words of Priests and Laymen, they must be much more intended of Bishops; this is formally opposite to saint AUGUSTINE'S foundation, who saith that Cecilianus tymefellowe with the Council of Nicaea, might have appealed beyond Sea, because he was not of the number of Priests and other inferior Clerks, but of the number of Bishops, They did not handle the cause (saith he) of Priests, Deacons, or other inferior Clerks, but of Bishops, which might reserve their causes to the judgement of the churches beyond Sea. 
Id. ibid.  The second that the Council of Nicaea commits the causes as 
Concil. Nicen. c. 6  well of Bishops as of Priests, to the Metropolitan; which is true for the judgement of Priests in the second instance, and of Bishops in the first. But not for the judgement of Bishops in the last instance, as appears by the testimony of saint ATHANASIUS, who had assisted in person at the Council of Nicaea, which alleges for his defence an Epistle, where Pope Julius writes, that the Council of Antioch, and other Counsels of the East could not depose ATHANASIUS from the Bishopric of Alexandria, without expecting the decision 
jul. ep. ad Eusebian apud A than. Apol. 2.  of the church of Rome; Are you ignorant (saith he) that the custom is, that they should first write to us and so from hence should proceed the just decision of causes, and therefore if there were any suspicion conceived against the Bishop there, that is to say, of Alexandria, they must write to the Church here; that is to say, to the Church of Rome. The third that the grace of the holy Ghost shall not be wanting to every provision, or to every Province, to discern the equity of causes, and that it is not credible that God should inspire the Justice of the trial, to one only man what soever he be, and deny it to an infinite number in a Council. A certain proof that they spoke of the causes of equity and justice, as well civil as criminal, and not of causes of faith, of which contrariwise they had written a year or two before to Pope Innocent upon the subject of Pelagius and Celestius his cause, 
Aug. ep. 92  which was a cause of Faith. We doubt not with the help of God's mercy, who will vouchsafe to hear thee praying, and to guide thee consulting; but those that hold these perverse things, will more easily yield to the authority of thy Holiness, derived from the authority of holy Scriptures. And Pope Innocent, 
Aug. ep. 93  to themselves: Always, and as often as matters of faith are handled, I conceive that all our brethren and colleagues can have no reference but to Peter; that is to say, to the author of their name and dignity. The fourth, That it was very hard to assure beyond Sea judgements, because of the difficulty of causing witnesses to pass the seas: How can (said they) the judgements beyond Sea be certain, wherein the necessary persons of witnesses for the debility of sex of age, or many other hindrances intervening cannot appear? An evident Argument, that they spoke of particular and personal causes. And the fifth that it had never been taken from the African Church, by any decree of a Council, that Appeals should go out of Africa, and that to send Legates from Rome into Africa to judge them upon the place, it was not constituted by any Council: A thing the ignorance whereof they might well excuse, forasmuch as they had no more than in Africa, the true copies of the Council of Sardica, but only as had been above showed those of the false Council of Sardica, composed by the Arrians, and published by the Donatists, which gave ground to all this question. The second request was, that the Pope should no more grant them clerks executioners, so were certain clerks of the Roman Church called committees, to cause to be executed (with the help of secular power, and of the imperial forces; that is to say, by the strength of Ushers, Sergeants, and Soldiers) the judgements of the Pope or of his Legates; a thing which provoked much murmur in Africa. For although the malice of the African people, who after they were fastened in the hate of any Ecclesiastical person would hardly let go their hold, did sometimes make this remedy necessary; Nevertheless, the abuse of those, which did too violently apply it, did often convert it into a pretence and occasion of complaint, as S. AUGUSINE testifies in an Epistle to the same pope Celestine, when he saith speaking of Anthony Bishop of Fussala in Numidia, who had appealed to the Pope from the judgement 
Aug. epi. 261.  which the inhabitants of Fussala had caused to be given against him. He threatens them (saith he) with secular power, and with the fury of soldiers, as if they should come to execute the judgements of the Sea apostolic, in such sort as the miserable inhabitants being Christians and Catholics feared more grievous usage from a Catholic Bishop, than they did when they were heretics, from the laws of the Emperors. For these causes then, the African Bishops besought the Pope, to grant no more Clerks executors to those which demanded them; That you will not also (said they) send your clerks for executors to all those which demand them, nor permit that we should seem to introduce the typhe or smoky meteor of the age into the Church of Christ, which propounds the light of simplicity and the day of humility to those that desire to see God. Calling the force and military violence with which those executors did execute the judgements of the Sea apostolic, Secular typhe; for this is that which the marriage of these two words, Typhe of the age, signifies; to wit, the furious and violent manner with which the worldly and secular powers were accustomed to cause themselves to be obeyed; as when the author of the life of Fulgentius, saith; That Fulgentius, commanded nothing with the Typhe of secular dominion. And as when 
Author. vit. Fulg. c. 25.  the Council of Ephesus calls the use that john Patriarch of Antioch, had made of the letters of Dionysius Governor of Syria, to the Captain of the Garrison and of the soldiers of Cyprus to hinder the Bishops of Cyprus, from electing to themselves an Archbishop without the permission of the Patriarch of Antioch, Secular Typhse, and drawing from this particular case a general law, ordains, That no Bishop usurp the Provinces which have not been from all antiquity 
Con. Eph. tom. 2. c. 4. in appendic.  under his predecessors, &c: And under pretence of the execution of sacred things, introduce not the Typhe of secular power. And a little after; And that all letters obtained to the contrary, may remain disannulled, and of no effect. And finally, the third and last request, but expressed in terms of Confidence and assurance, is that the Pope will not suffer that 
Ibidem.  Apiarius, to whom by the first judgement it had been permitted to remain in Africa, and exercise his Priesthood where he would; provided it were not at Sicca, should remain any longer in Africa, and that he would not cause him to be assisted with Secular authority to this effect; Behold the words of the clause, which contain also the end and conclusion of the Epistle, which I have translated from the Greek text, because the Greek edition of the Epistles, as hath been above showed, is more correct than the latin. For as for the wretched 
Edit. 〈◊〉.  
Conc. Car. c. 138.  Apiarius, having already been condemned for his infamous crimes, by our Brother Faustinus, we are no more in care for it, as much as by the means of the approbation and moderation of your Holiness, for the preservation of brotherly charity, Africa will no longer endure him. Now upon this, what answer the Pope made them, we have it not, but that it is easy to be judged by the success, that he satisfied them of the mistaking of the Council of Nicaea, for that of Sardica, and made 
Leo epist. ad Epise. African ep. 8.  it appear to them, that what they found not in the Council of Nicaea, had been ordained, yea even by their predecessors, in the Council of Sardica. For, the Appeals of the African, Bishops, to the Pope, continued as before; as it appears both by the Rule that Pope, LEO; only eight year later than CELESTINE; made upon the appeal that Lucifrinus a Bishop of Africa had cast into the Sea apostolic; and by the care that the Africans had afterward to insert into their Canon law, the Canons of the Council of Sardica. 
Fulg. Ferr in Breu. 〈◊〉. art 59 〈◊〉 60.  upon the matter of Appeals to the Pope. For Fulgentius Ferandus deacon of Carthage, a little later than S. AUGUSTINE, and tyme-fellow with S. FULGENTIUS, registers into the collection that he made of the Canons, these decrees, under the title of the fixth and sifth Canon of the Council of Sardica: That a condemned Bishop may appeal, if he will to the sea apostolic, and that during the appeals, an other cannot be ordained in his Chair. By means whereof, this question brought no interruption to the possession wherein the Pope was of appeals, even in minor causes, and by consequent much less in mayor causes, as those of Faith were, for which Theodoret Bishop of Cyre, a City near upon Persia appealed in the same time, to pope 〈◊〉 and was judged and restored by 
Theod. ep 〈◊〉 Leo n. inter epist Leon post. 60. & in epist. Grae. manuscr.  him, all the General Council of Chalcedon, holden a while after the Council of Carthage, approving and confirming it. For I will not allege the Epistle of S. AUGUSTINE to Celestine, which is in the supply of S. AUGUSTINS' Epistles imprinted by Plantine where the same S. AUGUSTINE pursues in the behalf of Celestine, the judgement of the appeal, made by Anthony Bishop of 〈◊〉, to Pope Boniface; and represents to 
Theodor.  
Concil. Chalced. 〈◊〉. Aug. ep. 261.  him to justify the sentence of the bishops of Africa who had left him his title, and deprived him of this Bishop's Sea: That there had been many like 〈◊〉 in Africa, even the Sea 〈◊〉 judging it, or confirming the judgement of others; as particularly of 〈◊〉, Victor, and Laurence Bishop of the Cesarian 〈◊〉; because it seems, that this Epistle was written before that of the Council of Africa to Celestine. It sufficeth that neither the possession of the appeals from Africa to Rome, were interrupted by this question; neither 
Aug. con. duas epist. Pelag. ad 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  did the Bishops of Africa cease to remain in the same Communion and reverence of the Sea apostolic, as they were before, as the words of S, AUGUSTINE to Pope Boniface written in the current of the difference 
Epist. 〈◊〉 lest ad 〈◊〉 quae 〈◊〉 tom 7. bea. August. & citatur a Petro Diaco. lib. de incarn, & great.  testifies Thou disdainest not, thou which presumest not 〈◊〉, though thou presidest highly to be a friend to the 〈◊〉. And these of Pope Celestine after the death of S. AUGUSTINE, We have always had Augustine of holy 〈◊〉 in our communion, which Prosper citeth to justify to the Bishops of the Gauls S. Augustins doctrine against the Pelagians And these of Capreolus Archbishop of Carthage, & immediate successor to Aurelius, under whom the sixth Council of Carthage, was holden, writing to the fathers of the Council of Ephesus; 〈◊〉 pray you to resist 〈◊〉, with such constancy, 
Prosp. con. Collator. Actor.  at the authority of the sea Apostolic and the severltie of the Prelates assembled in 〈◊〉, seem not to permit that the doctrine of those that the Church hath long since 
Conc. Ep. tom. 2. Fulgent de inca 〈◊〉. & gratia c. 11.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉; come to be borne again. And these of Eugenius one of the other successors to the same Aurelius to the Lieutenant of Hunnericus Lord of Africa; The Roman Church is the head of all the Churches. And these of Fulgentius, and of the Bishops of Africas the Roman Church which is the head of the world.   

Of the Council of Sardica; CHAPT. XI.  
I Remember that I promised in the former chapter, to handle in this, the truth and authority of the Canons of the Council of Sardica; the time summons me now to perform my promise, and with so much the more need, because the Pope's adversaries have a while ago, caused a Greek Code of Canons to be imprinted, which they have entitled, A Code of the 〈◊〉 of the Universal Church: from whence 
Iust. apud Hadria Beys. 〈◊〉  they have eclipsed and cut off the Canons of the Council of Sardica, against the credit of all the Greek Canonists Photius, Zonara, Balsamon, Harmonopolus; and against the Greek impressions, even of Basle Wittenbourg, and other Protestant Cities; and in sum, against the truth of all the Greek codes, as well printed as manuscript, of all the western and Eastern libraries. Then to compass this design with some method, I will advertise the readers, that there past two things in the Council of Nicaea which gave an occasion soon after, for the holding of the Council of Sardica: the one was the decree of the consubstantiality of the Father and the Some; and the other the decree of Appeals. The first was inserted into the Creed of the faith published by the Fathers of the Council of Nicaea, the second into the original acts of the Council of Nicaea, with which it hath been lost; only there remains to us, some light tract of it in an Epistle of Pope julius reported by S. ATHANASIUS, and by the Council of Alexandria, where Pope julius writes to the Arrians; It hath not been without the providence of God that the Bishops assembled in 
jul. apud 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. 2.  the great Council of Nicaea have permitted that the acts of a former Synod, should be examined in an other Synod. For that this decree was not the same which 
Con. Nic. c. 〈◊〉  is contained in the Canons of the Council of Nicaea where it is ordained, that when a Bishop hath excommunicated any Churchman or Layman of his diocese, the cause of the excommunicated person may be reviewed in the Synod of his Province: it appears both by this, that he speaks of the review of the judgements given in the first instance by the Synods, & infers from thence; that S. ATHANASIUS having been judged in the first instance in the Counsels of Tyre and Antioch, might again have been judged at Rome in a new Council. And because that he adds; That if this custom being of itself ancient, and having been renewed and set 
jul. 〈◊〉.  down in writing in the great Synod, you will not permit that it have place amongst you, such a refusal is undecent, a thing that shows, that this decree whereof he speaks was resisted by the 〈◊〉, which cannot be said of the reviewe of the sentences of the diocesan Bishops by the Council of the Province. And therefore it must be supposed, that this decree had been inserted, not into the catalogue of the Canons of the Council of Nicaea, which contained but the twenty articles which we have; but into the very acts of the Council of Nicaea which have been lost. And of this kind of decrees inserted not into the list of the Canons of the Counsels, but into the acts of the Counsels, there are many examples, and in the 
Concil. Anthioch. c. 1.  matter of the Council of Nicaea itself. For the Epistle of the same Council of Nicaea and the Council of Antioch teach us, that the Council of Nicaea 
Am. ep. 82.  made a decree of the Pasch, and S. AMBRO. teacheth us that the Council of Nicaea made a decree of the exclusion of these that were in 〈◊〉 from Priesthood: and the Caluinists themselves are agreed, that the Council of Nicaea made a decree of the Eucharist; All which decrees are not enrolled into the Canons of the Counsels of Nicaea, but have been necessaryly inserted into the Acts. Now what the conditions of these following Synods ought to be, which judged by Appeal of the judgements of former Synods, there is nothing to be found in Pope julius his Epistles, only it is left to us to conjecture, that the subsequent Synods should be greater than the former Synods. But wherein this majority consisted; that is to say, whether it should be a simple majority of number, as the Arrians had monopolised it in the Council of Antioch; or whether it should be a majority as it seems the third Council of Carthage requires, when it says, That when there hath 
Conc. Carth c. 10.  been an Appeal from what Ecclesiastical judge soever, to other Ecclesiastical judges, where there is greater authority, the disannulling of the former Sentence, hurts not the first judges, there is nothing found in Pope julius his Epistle: only we learn from the practice of antiquity, that the majority of Counsels did not always depend of the number of Bishops, but was often measured by the quality of him, that was the head thereof, although the number of Bishops were fewer as the Council of the Primate of the Nation, was reputed greater, then that of the Metropolitan of the Province; and that of the Patriarch greater, then that of the Primate; and that of the Pope yet greater, then that of the Patriarch, although there were four Bishops. For in the Council of Rome, which judged saint ATHANASIUS 
Ath. de fug. sua Apol 〈◊〉 ad Solit.  his cause, after the Council of Antioch, there were but fifty Bishops, whereas in that of Antioch, there were above ninety. And in this sense Balsamon a Schismatical Greek Author, who ranks the 
Sozom. hist. Eccl. l. 3. c 5.  Patriarch of Constantinople above the Pope pretends that the title of Universal Bishop, which in the Council of Chalcedon, had been given 
Concil. Chalced.  to the Pope, should be also communicated to the Bishop of Constantinople; 
Act. 3. in libel. Cleric. Alex.  for as much as Constantinople, bore the title of second Rome; and will have it, that the Synod of the Bishop of Constantinople, should 
Conc. Const c. 3 & Conc. Chalced.  be esteemed greater, then that of all the other patriarchs of the Empire of the East. Although (saith he) that the Synod of Constantinople, 
Act. 15. & 28.  were not universal, for as much as other patriarchs assisted not there; nevertheless, it seems to me greater than all the other Synods; and the Patriarch 
Balsam in Conc. Const 1. c. 6.  thereof is called universal Patriarch. Now it fell out a while after the holding of the Council of Nicaea, that the Arrians made two breaches 
Theod. hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 21. & Sozom. l. 3. c. 〈◊〉.  in these two decrees: The one by abolishing the word, Consustantiall, which they eclipsed from all their creeds; And the other, by the resistance that they gave to the restitution that the Pope made of Athanasius Patriark of Alexandria; of Paul Bishop of Constantinople: 
Sozam. hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 9  of Marcellus Primate of Ancyra in Galatia; Asclepas Bishop of Gaza in Palestina; and of Lucius Bishop of Adrianopolis in Thrace, deposed a 
Id. ib. c. 7.  little before by the Counsels of Tyre, Antioch, and Constantinople, for diverse pretended crimes: Some Secular, as Athanasius for the crimes of Treason, Adultery, and homicide; and other Ecclesiastical. The history of the first contravention appears by all the testimonies of Antiquity: And the history of the second by the report of Sozomene; who 
Sozom. hist Eccl. l. 3. c. 7.  after he had said; julius' Bishop of Rome having heard the accusations attempted against Athanasius of Alexandria; Paul of Constantinop le; Marce llus of Ancyra in Galatia; Asclepas Bishop of Gaza in Palestina; Lucius Bishop of Adrianopolis in Thrace; and having found them all consenting to the doctrine of the Council of Nicaea, received them to his Communion, and because to him for the dignity of his Sea, the care of all things appertained; he restored them each one to his Church, and writ to the Bishops of the East, chiding them for not having observed the right forms in the judgement of these men, and that they had troubled the Churches with not having kept within the compass of the decrees of the Council of Nicaea, and commanded them to send a small number from amongst them all, to appear at a day prefixed, and to justify their Sentence; Adds, These things julius writ, and Athanasius and Paul, received each one his 
Idem. Ibid  Church, and sent the letters of julius, to those of the East; who finding themselves sharply touched therewith, assembled themselves at Antioch, and writ back to Pope julius an Epistle, adorned with flowers of eloquence, and composed in an orators style full of many figures, and not free from grievous threatenings, for although they avouched by their letters, that the Roman Church obtained the prize of honour from them all, as having been from the beginning the School of the Apostles, and the Metropolitan of Religion; although the Doctors of the Christian world, were come thither from the East; Nevertheless, they did not think, they ought to be put behind; under colour that they were inferior in Greatness and multitude of Churches; since contrariwise they were much Superior in virtue and election of opinion; that is to say in Arianism; And as for julius they reproached it to him for a crime, that he had admitted into his communion, Athanasius and his consortes, and were offended at it, pretending that by that Act, their Council had been injuried, and their Sentence abrogated; a thing that they calumniated as unjust, and repugnant to the ecclesiastical Rule. For that the authors of that Epistle that Sozomene argues of ironia, because they feigned by their exordium, to confess the primacy of the Roman Church, which they denied by their conclusion of slander because they pretended, that the abrogation that the Pope had made of their Council, was a thing outrageous, and contrary to the law of the Church, and of impudence, for as much as they set upon him, to whom for the dignity of his Sea, the care of all things belonged, 
Athan. apol. 2. Statim. post. epist. jul. & alibi.  were Arrians, it appears both by the testimony of S. ATHANASIUS who called them Eusebians, that is to say, of Eusebius his Sect, the chief firebrand of the Arrians heresy: And by the reproach that julius made to them, that they had altered the decision of the Council of Nicaea; 
jul, apud Athan. apol 2.  and by the answer that themselves made to that reproach; to wit, that as for the things they had done against the decision of those that had been assembled at Nicaea, they Answered nothing; although they signified that they had many causes to excuse their Actions, but that it was superfluous then to enter into defence of it, since they were suspected to have violated justice in all things, by the glory that they attributed to themselves, to be more excellent in belief then the Roman Church: And 
Sozo 4. hist Ecccl. l. 3. c.  finallly, by the offer that they made to Julius, to enter again into peace and communion with him, if he would admit the deposition of S. ATHANASIUS, and of his consortes. And that Sozomene calls them, those 
Ibidem.  of the East, it is in part, because the principal Seat of the Arrians heresy was the East; and in part, because they were the Bishops of the Patriarkship of Antioch, and other Arrians their adherents, who after the Council of Antioch, holden in the dedication, reassembled themselves at Antioch, to answer Pope julius; which Patriarkship of Antioch, was called the Patriarkship of the East, because amongst the Asian provinces, which acknowledged the Roman Empire, the division of Antioch held the 
Cornel. Tacit. Ammian Marle. 22.  place of the East; from whence it is, that Cornelius Tacitus, & Amianus Marcellinus, say that Antioch was the head of the East; and that the Council of Constantinople ordains, That the Bishops of the East; that is to say, of the Patriarkshipp 
Concil. 〈◊〉 Const. c. 2.  of Antioch, should only rule the East. And that john Patriarch of Antioch saith, in the Schismatical Council of Ephesus speaking of the Bishops of his Patriarkship: we that are called of the East. And it is not to be said, that julius in the Answer that he sent to Danius (it must be read Dianus) and to Phlacillus (it must be read Placitus) and to Narcissus, and to 〈◊〉, and to Maus, and to others which had written to him from the second mockcouncell of Antioch, styles them his brethren; For he calls them his Brothers because of the communion of the Episcopal character; 
Collat. Carth. Act. 3. & breucoll. p. 3.  As S. AUGUSTINE calls the Donatists his brethren, because of the Communion of the character of Baptism, but not, but that all those Bishops were Arrians, and the most impious of all the Arrians, for this Dianius was a Bishop of Cesaria in Capadocia an Arrian; and this Placitus was a Bishop of the Arrians of Antioch, and this Narcissus was an Arrian Bishop of Veroniade in Cilisia; and this Eusebius was Bishop of Nicomedia, Ensign-bearer of the Arrian faction, who procured as S. ATHANASIUS 
Athan app. 2.  notes the second Council of Antioch, and the Council of Sardica and likewise the others. But let us again pursue the course of our history of Arrianisme; upon the complaint propounded by the Catholics against the Arrians, of the wounds made in these two decrees of the Council of Nicaea, the two Emperors, the one Catholic, and the other 〈◊〉, agreed upon the holding of a General Council and called from the two Empires to Sardica, a City situate in the confines of both the Empires, to decide it; Paul and Athanasius (saith Socrates) demanded to have 
Socrat. hi. Eccl. l. 2. c. 20.  an other Council called, to the end, that as well their cause as that of faith, might be 〈◊〉 in a general Council showing that their depositions had been made with a purpose to destroy the Faith. Then upon their request, a general Council was published at Sardica; Now of this Council the issue in regard of Faith was; that the fathers assembled at Sardica, confirmed the Creed of the Council of Nicaea, as Harmenopolus a Greek author and a schisrnatike 
Harmeno. in epi. tom. can.  reports after thousand others in these words; By the advice of the Emperors and of the Bishop of Rome, the Synod of Sardica was assembled, composed of three hundred forty one Fathers; which confirmed the Council of Nicaea, and published the Canons. For that which S. ATHANASIUS saith, that, the Council of Sardica, would not permit that any thing of faith should be reduced into writing, aught to be understood, that it would not permit, that there should be any new Creed made, but ordained that they should hold themselves to that of Nicaea which they amplified, not by way of innovation, but by way of exposition. And as for the matter of Appeals; they approved the restitution that the Pope had made of Paul, of Athanasius, and of the other Bishops with had been deposed in the Counsels of Tyre and Antioch, and received them into their Communion under this title, that the Pope having examined their cause had not condemned them. They answered (saith Sozomene) that they would not 〈◊〉 
Sozo. hist. Eccl. l. 3. c. 9  the Commnnion of Athanasius and of Paul for as much principally, as julius' Bishop of Rome having examined, their cause, had not condemned them: and to prevent the Churches trouble thereafter in like accidents, reduced into writing three Canons upon the matter of appeals; where of the first was propounded by Osius, Precedent of the Council, and concluded by all the Council in these terms. 
Concil. Sar. c. 3.  If any Bishop in any cause in likelihood ought to be condemned and that he presume to have, not an evil but a good cause to the end the judgement may be renewed, if it please your charity that we should honour the memory of the Apostle Peter, let it be written to julius' Bishop of Rome by the same Bishops that have given the judgement, to the end that if it be needful, it may be renewed by the next Bishops; and let the Bishop of Rome give the Judges: but if the affair be such, as there is no need of a new judgement, let not the things once judged be disabled, but remain firm. The second was propounded by Gaudentius and authorized by all the Council, in these words: If it seem to you necessary to add to this sentence full 
Concil. Sar. c. 4.  of sincere charity that you have propounded; That if any Bishop be deposed by the next Bishops, and say that his affair ought to be judged a new, let no other be installed in his sea, till the Bishop of Rome have pronounced upon it, with examinations of the cause. Which Canon was made as Balsamon notes, to disannul the 
Balsam. in Concil. Sardic. c. 4.  Canon that the Arrians had published in the Council of Antioch against S. ATHAN. which ordained that it should not be lawful for a Bishop after he had been deposed by all the votes of a Synod to exercise any Episcopal function, nor to hope for restitution; and to condemn the intrusion the Arians had made of Gregory in steed of S. ATHAN. without attending the review of the process. And the third was again propounded by Osius, and confirmed by all the council, in these words: It hath pleased, that 
Concil. Sardic. c. 5. or. 7.  if a Bishop have been accused, and that he have recourse by way of Appeal, to the Blessed Bishop of the Roman Church, and that he will hear him, and done esteem it just, that the examination of the affair should be renewed, let him vouchsafe to write to the Bishop's neighbouring that province, that they should carefully and with diligence examine all things, and judge the affair according to the credit of the truth: and if any one demand that his cause should be heard again, and seem to move the Bishop of Rome by his prayer, that he should send Priests from his own side it shall be in the power of the Bishops, of Rome, to do what he shall think fit and if he conceive that he should send to judge with the Bishops, persons having the authority of him that sends them, let it be so done; and if he think it will suffice, that those that are already upon the place should examine the affair and the judgement of the Bishop; let him do what shall seem best in his most wise judgement. Now these words do so dazzle the eyes of the Pope's adversaries as they cannot support their light, and therefore they attempt to resist and weaken them with seven objections.  
The first, that the Council of Sardica propounds the overture of Appeals to the Pope, not as a thing before practised; but as put to deliberation, and instituted at that present time, and in words of the future 
The first objection against the Canon of appeals to the Pope.  tense; from whence they infer, that the Right of Episcopal appeals, was not from all Antiquity yielded to the Pope, but only since the Council of Sardica; and add that the Council specifying the name of Pope Julius and saying, let it be written to julius' Bishop of Rome: shows that this instituntion began only in the Papacy of Julius, and had no place in his predecessors times. To this objection than we say, that it is ordinary to ancient Counsels when they renew unwritten customs, yea even the very written laws of the Church, to propound them as if they did new institute them, and to take the notes of the assistants to conclude them, and to declare them, by words of the future tense: As in the same 
Concil. Sardic. c. 〈◊〉.  Council of Sardica the prohibition to pass from one City to an other renewed because of Eusebius of Nicomedia, head of the Arrian faction, who was passed from the Bishoprik of Nicomedia to that of Constantinople: and the prohibition to a Bishop to receaive a Clerk from an other Bishop 
Ibid. c. 16.  excommunicated by him, and others the like, were propounded in future words, and with receiving the votes of the assistants, although the 
Conc. Nic. c. 6.  custom were time out of mind in the Church, and that they had been even set down in writing in the Council of Nicaea. And Pope Julius after he had cited the Canon of the Council of Nicaea for the review of the judgements of Synods, adds: that this Canon had been formerly practised by custom in the Church, and after reduced into writing at the Council of Nicaea. And the Council of Constantinople writing to Pope Damasus: Doth it not say of the ordination of Bishops by the metropolitans, It is as you know, both 
Conc. Const. 1. ep ad Damas. & alios Episc.  〈◊〉 grounded upon ancient custom, and decision of the Council of Nicaea; For as for the name of Pope julius, which is specified in the first of the three canons of the Council of Sardica, besides that it is not found in the ancient latin Editions, which were produced in the Council of Africa in saint AUGUSTINE'S time, where the text saith simply as in the other following canons: The Bishop of Rome, and not julius' Bishop of Rome: By means whereof there is a Ground for suspicion, that it is a quotation of the exemplifiers, which is slipped out of the margin into the Text; there can be nothing inferred from it but this, that the Fathers of the Council of Sardica inserted the name of julius there, to show that the Council by this canon, ratified not only in general Appeals to the Pope, but justified and ratified in particular, the restitution that Pope julius had made of saint ATHANASIUS; Paul of Constantinople; Marcellus of 〈◊〉 Asclepas of Gaza, and other Bishops, that the Arrians had deposed in their false Counsels, agreeably to the Answer that they had made to the Arrians, that they could not reject the comunion of Athanasius and the other Bishops, deposed by the Counsels of Tyre, Antioch, and Constantinople; because julius' Bishop of Rome having examined their cause, 
Soz. lib. 3.  had not condemned them. And indeed if the Council of Sardica had given beginning to the Right of Appeals, how could Pope julius many years before have written to the Arrians; Are you ignorant that it is the custom 
jul. apud Athan. Apol. 2.  that we be first written to, that from hence may proceed the just decision of things; and therefore if there were any suspicion conceived against the Bishop there, that is to say, against the Bishop of Alexandria, you should have written to the church here; that is to say, to the church of Rome? & how could Socrates 
Soc. hist. Eccl. l. 2. C. 11.  & Sozomene have said, that Pope julius, many years before the Council of Sardica, restored 〈◊〉 Patriarch of Alexandria; Paul Bishop of Constantinople; 
Sozom. hist. Eccl. l. 3. C. 7.  Marcellus Primate of Galatia, and other Bishops, deposed by the Counsels of the East, because to him for the diginty of his Sea the care of all things belonged.  
The second objection is, that the Council of Sardica, grounds the canon 
The second objection against the Canon of Appeals.  of appeals to the Pope not upon divine right, but upon the desire of honouring of saint Peter's memory; from whence they infer that the attribution of the Episcopal appeals to the Pope, is not by divine Right: but who sees not, that even this is to ground it upon divine Right; for tosaie, that to honour the memory of S. PETER, it was to purpose to yield Episcopal Appeals to the Pope, what is it but to say, that the Pope was S. PETER'S successor, and that in this quality, Appeals aught to be yielded to him, as to him that had the succession of head of the church, and by this succession was himfelse made head thereof? And in truth what the Fathers of the council of Sardica express in their Canon by these words; 
Epist. Concil. Sardic ad jul. Pap. insert. in fragm.  That we may hovor the memory of Peter, let it be written to Julius the Bishop of Rome; do they not express in their Epistle to the same julius, by these? It is very good and fit that from all the provinces, the Bishops have reference to their head, that is to say to the sea of the Apostle Peter? And doth it not from thence appear, that to honour in the persons of the Bishops of Rome, the 
Hilar. & citat. a Nicol. x. in Epist. ad Episcop. Galliar.  memory of Peter, and to ackdowledge the sea of Peter in the persons of the Bishops of Rome, for head of the Church, is according to the Council of Sardica, one and the same thing, and by consequent that the right of Appeals which was implicitly contained in the title of, Head of the Church, had belonged to the Pope by divine right from all antiquity, although the custom had been first reduced into an express law but in the Council of Sardica? For who knows not that all the prerogatives, that are implicitly contained in any Title, belong to him to whom the Title is given, from the very time it is given him, though the law's 〈◊〉 
The third objection against the Canon.  are made for the explicit declaration of any of those prerogatives 〈◊〉 later? The third objection is, that saint HILARY and saint EPIPHANIUS, 
S. Hilar.  and the second Council of Constautinople, call the Council of 
l cont.  Sardica the Council of those of the west; From whence Zonara, Hormenopolus, 
Const.  and some other later greeks and Schismatics, and the Protestants 
Aug.  
Epiphan. haeres. 71. cont.  who join with them conclude, that the Council of 〈◊〉 was not General. To this objection than we answer two things; the one, that the word of the west, did then extend much farther, than it 
Photinian.  doth now, for by the word of the West; the fathers intended not only, all 
Concil.  
Constant. 1 c5.  the Provinces of Africa, of Italy, of Spain, of the Gauls, of England, of Germany, of Hungaria, of Dalmatia; but also all the Provinces of Greece; 
Zonar. in Conc.  as Achaia, Peloponesus, Macedonia, the Isle of Crete; and left nothing for 
Const. 1. c. 5.  the East; but Thrace, Egypt, and Asia. And the other; that their calling the Council of Sardica, the Council of the west, is not to distinguish it from the General Counsels, as some late greeks have supposed, but to distinguish it from the false Council of Sardica, which was called the Council of those of the East. For after the whole Council, composed of three hundred Cotholicke Bishops, and of seventy six Arrian Bishops, was arrived at Sardica, the seauentie six Arrians separated themselves, 
Socrat. his. Eccl. l. 2. c. 20 Et Soz. l. 3. c. 10.  from the Body of the Council, and retired themselves to Philopopolis, a city near Sardica, where they kept an Anti-councell, which was called the Council of those of the East; Not that all the Bishops of the East assisted there, but for two other causes: the one, for as much as the principal Bishops of this mockcouncell, were Steven Patriarch of Antioch, and the other Bishops of his Patriarkship, which was called the Patriarkship of the East. And the other, because of the two cities, whereinto this Council was divided, situate on the two sides of the mountain of Thuscis which was the bound of the two Empires of the East, & of the west; the city of Sardica wherein the catholics remained was situate in the western side of the mountain; and the city of Philopopolis into which the Arians retired themselves, was situate on the Eastern side. For so far of were all the Bishops of the East from assisting at this Antisynod, as the Arrians themselves confessed that held it, that there were but eighty of them there, and avowed, that the Bishops 
Decret.  of the Empire of the East, which were present at the true Council of 
Synod.  Sardica, were an immense number. There came (say they) to Sardica, an 
Oriental. apnd Sardic. in fra. Hilar. p. 10.  immense number of wicked and lost Bishops, flowing from Constantinople, and from Alexandria, whom Osius and Protogenes held assembled with them in their Conventicle. And yet even to take the East particularly for the Patriarkship of Antioch, many of the Bishops of the East, though taken in this sense, assisted not at the false Council of Sardica. Contrariwise all the Catholic Bishops, as well of the Patriarkship of Antioch, as of the neighbouring Provinces, as Diodorus Bishop of Asia minors Asterius Bishop of 〈◊〉 in Arabia; Maximus Bishop of Jerusalem; 〈◊〉, Bishop of Lydda; Arius Bishop of Petra in Judea; Theodosius, Germanus Silvanus, Paul, Claudius, Patrick, Elpidus, Germanus, 〈◊〉, Zenobius, Paul, and Peter Bishop of Palestina, assisted and subscribed with the body of the catholic Bishops at the true Council of Sardica; By means whereof this distraction, consisting in so small a number of Bishops, and being made by the Arrians only, could not hinder the true Council of Sardica, which represented all that were catholic Bishops in the world, from preserving the title of General which had been imposed upon it at the calling it; no more than the distraction of those of the East; that is to say, the Bishops of the Patriarkship of Antioch, which maintained Nestorius, and held an Antisynod in his favour at Ephesus, hindered the true Council of Ephesus from being perfectly and absolutely general; and from taking this quality even then, when those of the East; that is to say, the Bishops of the patriar kship of Antioch, held their mockcouncell a part. And therefore saint ATHANASIUS, not only calls it, the Great Council of Sardica; and Socrates and justinian, a General Council; but also saint ATHANASIUS, and after him Sulpitius' 〈◊〉, Theodoret and Vigilius ancient Bishop of Trent, affirm that it was composed from all the christian Provinces of the Earth. The holy Council of Sardica (saith saint ATHANASIUS) assembled from more than thirty five Provinces, knowing the malice of the Arrians, received us in our justifiable acts, And elsewhere, explicating 
Athan ad Solit vit. ageut.  the list of the same Provinces: In the Great Council of sardica, called by the commandment of the Religious Emperors, Constantius and Constans; There subscribed for us more than three hundred Bishops of the Provinces of Egypt, of Libya 
Id. de ap  of Pentapolis, of Palestina of Isauria, of Cyprus, of Phamphilia, of Licia, of Galatia, of Dacia, of Misia, of Thracia, of Dardaniae, of Micedonia, of the 〈◊〉, of Thessalia, of Achaya, of Crete, of Dalmatia of Siccia, of Pannonia, of Horica, of Italy, so they called the Provostship of Milan, of Picena of Tuscany, of Campania, of Calabria, Apulia, of Brussa, of Sicilia, of all Africa entirely, of Sardinia, of Spain, of France, and of the Britain's. And Theodoret registering the inscription of the same Council: The holy Synod assembled by the Grace of God at Sardica, from Rome, from Spain, from France, from Italy, from 
The odor. hist. Eccl. l. 2. fug. c. 8.  Campania, from Calabria, from Africa, from Sardinia, from Pannonia, from Misia, from the first Dacia, from Dardania, from the second Dacia, from Macedonia, from Thessalia, from Achaya, from the Epiruses, from Thracia, from Rhodope, from Asia, from Caria, from Bithynia, from Hellespont, from the first Phrigia, from Pisidia, from Capadocia, from Pontus, from the second Phrigia, from Cilicia, from Phamphilia, from Lydia, from the Cycladeses Jlands, from Egypt, from Thebaidis, from Lybia, from Galatia, from Palestina, and from Arabia. And elsewhere exagerating the obstinacy of Acacius. Archbishop of 〈◊〉 in Palestina, one of the heads of the Arrian, faction. The Council assembled at Sardica, deposed this Acacius (said he) but he obeyed not the deposition, 
Id. l. 2. c. 27.  despising so great a number of Bishops. And Sulpitius Severus describing the convocation of the Council of Sardica, first projected, as he pretends by Constantine, and after executed by his children; He commanded (said 
Sulp. Set. hist. Sacr. l. 2.  he) that from all the world, the Bishops should assemble themselves at Sardica. And Socrates reporting the history of the Council of Sardica; Paul and Athanasius demanded, that their Cause & that of faith might be examined in a general Council. By the ordinance then of the two Emperors, there was a 
Socrat. hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 20.  General Council called at Sardica. And the Emperor Justinian in the Edict of faith indicted as Hincmarus' notes, by the second Council of Constantinople, 
Hincm. opuse. 55. c. 26.  that we call the fifth General Council; They were (said he, speaking of the Adversaries to the Council of Nicaea) anathematised; some whiles they lived, and some after their death, by Damasus of holy memory, Pope of 
Apud Leunclau. l. 8.  old Rome, and by the General Council of Sardica. And Uigilius the old Bishop of Trent: The holy Bishops (said he) assembled at Sardica; from all the 
Vigil. x Eutych. l. 5.  provinces, that is; from Rome, from Spain, from France, from Italy, from Campania, from Calabria, from Africa from Sardinia, from Panonia, from Missiae, from Dacia, from Dardania, from the other Dacia, from Macedonia from Thessalia, from Achaya, from Epirus, from Thrace, from Rhodope, from Asia, from Caria, from Bithynia, from Hellespont, from Phrigia, from Pisidia, from Capadocia, from Pontus, from Cilicia, from the other Phrigia, from Pamphilia from Lydia, from the Islands of the Cycladeses, from Egypt, from Thebaides, from Lybia, from Galatia, from Palestina, and from Arabia, expounded this faith. To which I will add above my bargain for an over measure, that the title that saint HILARY and saint EPIPHANIUS give to the Council of Sardica, 
Hilar. l. cont. Con. Aug.  of the Council of those of the West, is so far from abating any thing of the quality and authority of a general Council, as chose 
Epiphan. 〈◊〉. 71. contra Photinian. Faber praefat. 〈◊〉. Hilar.  Monsieur le Feure a great Reader and Examiner of saint hilaries writings, causing a new fragment of the works of the same saint HILLARY to be printed, doth iugeniouslie acknowledge the Council of Sardica for a general Council in the preface of his Edition by these words; Athanasius approved his innocence in the Synods of Alexandria, and of Rome, and in the General council of Sardica.  
The fourth Objection is, that in the Code of the Canons of the Greek 
The fourth objection, against the Canon of Appeals.  church, which was produced in the Council of Chalcedon in the cause of Bassianus and Steven, the Canons of the Council of Sardica were not contained: to this objection we bring three answers; the first, that there were two volumes of Canons produced in the Council of Chalcedon; the one where the Counsels were set down in heads, and with the inscriptions of their titles and the particular number of their Canons, as appears by the fourth and fifteenth act of the same Council of Chalcedon, where the fourth and sixth Canons of the Council of Nicaea were read with the titles of the fourth and sixth Canons of the most holy three hundred and eighteen Fathers assembled at Nicaea. And the third Canon of the Council of Constantinople, with the title of Synodical of the second synod held by the hundred and fifty Fathers at Constantinople under Nectarius. And the other where the canons were annexed one after an other under a continued cipher in the form of a chain and of a rhapsody and without inscription of the titles of the Counsels whence they were taken, and without distinction of the particular number of the Canons of every Council, as appears in the fourth and eleventh act, where the third, forth, sixteenth, and seaventeenth Canons of the Council of Antioch were read under a simple quotation of Canon 84. 85. and 94. and 95. without any mention neither of the title or of the particular cyphers of the Council from whence they were taken. Now it is not of the volumes in heads where the Canons of the Counsels were inserted with inscription and distinction of the titles of their Counsels, but of this rhapsody where the Canons were annexed one at the end of an other without inscription and distinction of the titles of their Counsels, that the adversaries to the Sea apostolic speak: and therefore it is but the only copy of this rhapsody that raiseth all this question. The second answer is, that there is no proof that even in the copy of this rhapsody, the Canons of the Council of Sardica are not comprehended with the Canons of the other Counsels. For that the four Canons which are cited of this copy, which are the fourth, the fifth sixteenth, and seaventeenth Canons of the Council of Antioch, are cited under the title of rule, eighty fourth, eighty fifth, ninety fourth, ninety sixth is good to show, that before those Canons, there were but the twenty Canons in the same volume of the Council of Nicaea, the twenty of the council of Ansyra: the fifteen of the council of Neocesarea, the twenty 
Hincmar. 〈◊〉 opusc. 55. c. 21.  one of the council of Gangres, and the siftie nine of the council of Laodicea. And therefore Hincmarus' ancient Archbishop of Rheims argues pertinently out of this copy, that the council of Nicaea had made but twenty Canons, but not to conclude that the Canons of the council of Sardica, which had been made after those of the council of Antioch were not in the same volume. And the supply of proof which they pretend to draw from Dionysius Exiguus, is nothing as shall appear hereafter; chose, there are many proofs that the Council of Chalcedon had both acknowledged and observed the canons of the Council of Sardica. For not only the first Council of Constantinople, 
Con. Const. 1. c. 5.  which was alleged in the Council of Chalcedon, confirms the tome of those of the West, that is to say, (if we believe zonara 
Con Chal. Act. 1.  and Balsamon,) the Council of Sardica, and not only the Epistle 
Zonar. in Conc. Con. 1. c. 5.  of Valentinian the third addressed to the Emperor Theodosius the second for the holding of the Council of Chalcedon, and inserted with the 
Balsam.  Greek Acts of the same Council of Chalcedon saith; That Flavianus Bishop 
ibidem.  of Constantinople, had appealed to the Pope, following the custom of Counsels,, which had principally reference to the Council of 
Valent. 3. 〈◊〉 ad The. in ep 〈◊〉. Con. Chal. Con. Chal. ep 1.  Sardica, and not only the Senate of Constantinople, deputed to cause policy to be observed in the Council of Chalcedon, received Theodoret Bishop of Cyre, who had appealed to Pope Leo, and made him enter and have a seat in the assembly of the Council; because Pope Leo had restored his Bishopric to him; a thing which was grounded 
Con. Sard. c 6.  upon the canons of the Council of Sardica: but also Zonara explaining the canon of the Council of Sardica, which calls Metropolitans, Archbishops, 
Zona. in in Concil.  And conferring it with the sixth Council of Carthage which rejects the use of this word; saith that the Council of Chalcedon hath 
Cart c. 42.  retained it; yielding rather to the authority of the Council of 〈◊〉, 
Balsam in Con. Sar. 〈◊〉. 5.  then to that of the Council of Carthage. And Balsamon, Nilus, and other Greek Schismatiks, will have it, that the Council of Chalcedon yielded the appeals of the Eastern provinces, to the Patriarch 
Nil. de primate. 〈◊〉 l. 2.  of Constantinople, pretending that it was grounded upon the canons of the Council of Sardica, which gave the appeals to the Pope; and they have extended this right to the Patriarch of Constantinople; for as much as Constantinople, was a second Rome. For as for the supply of proofs, that the Pope's adversaries pretend to collect from Dionysius Exiguus, it shall be satisfied hereafter. The third Answer is, that the very copy of this rhapsody which was produced in the Council of Chalcedon, was a falsified code, as appears by the canons thereof, that were produced in the same Council; for the four canons which were read in the Council of Chalcedon under the title 
Sozom. 〈◊〉. Eccle. l. 〈◊〉. c. 5.  of, Rule eighty fourth, eighty fifht ninety fourht and ninety sixth, were four canons of the Council of Antioch, celebrated under Constantius. 
Athan. de Synod. Ar. etc.  Now this Council was an heretical Council holden by the Arrians, and at the instance of Constantius an Arrian, against saint ATHANASIUS. And of these four canons, that which was quoted under the cipher of the canon eighty fifth that is to say; under the cipher of the canon correspondent to the fourth canon of the Council of Antioch, had been particularly framed against saint ATHANASIUS. This appears both by the history of Socrates, which reports, that the fifteenth canon of this council of Antioch having been produced against S. CHRISOSTOME when the Emperor Arcadius 
Socrat. hi. Ecc. l. 6. c. 18.  would have caused him to be deposed; S. CHRISOSTOME answered, that this canon was come out of the shops of the Arrians, and had been forged by them against S. ATHANASIUS. john (saith Socratès) answered, 
Sozo. 〈◊〉. Eccle. l. 〈◊〉. c. 20.  that this Canon was not of the Church, but of the Arrians: For those that assembled themselves at Antioch, for the destruction of the faith of consubstantiality, published this canon out of hate to saint ATHANASIUS; And by that of Sozomene, who writes; And for that of the Ecclesiastical Canon, john refusing it, they received not his apology, but deposed him although he insisted (for it must be read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) that it was a Canon of heretics. And by the Epistle of Bope Innocent the first, to the Constantinopolitans, reported in the same Sozomene, were Pope Innocent saith, speaking of the canons of the Counncell of Antioch, that werè produced against saint CHRISOSTOME; These canons ought not to be 
Soz. hist. Eccl. l. 8. c. 26.  received by catholic Bishops for we must not patch up the invention of heretics, with the canons of catholics. And by the testimony of Paladius a Greek author, and time mate with saint CHRISOSTOME, who saith 
Pallad. in vit. Chryst.  in the life of saint CHRISOSTOME, and upon the subject of the same canons; Theophilus had sent Canons composed by forty of the Complices of Arrius. So spoke he, because that of ninety Bishops which assisted at the Council of Antioch, there were but forty or according to the Epistle of julius thirty six, which actually condemned saint ATHANASIUS: but these, forty did so oppress the rest, by the force and tyranny of Constantius an Arrian Emperor, who was there present, that they alone caused, to be ordained and published what they listed. And a little after; Elpidius Bishop of Laodicea and Tranquillus, 
Id ibid.  showed the Emperor Arcadius, that these Canons were heretical. And finally this appeared, by all the authors of saint CHRISOSTOMES' life; who say that his defendors, offered the Emperor Arcadius, to quit his protection, if his adversaries would sign, that they held the same Faith with those that framed these canons. And this is alsoe acknowledged 
Hic Canon in odium & detrimentum pij Athanasij factus esse videtur.  by the ministers of Germany, who in the last Greek impression of the canons of the Council, that they have made at Witenberge, say upon the fourth canon of the Council of Antioch, which is that that was read in the Council of Chalcedon, under the name of canon eighty three; This canon seems to be made in hate and ruin of the pious Athanasius; 
Et hic Canon contra S. Athan. compositus est.  And upon the eleventh; This canon was likewise framed against saint Athanasius. And upon the fifteent; This canon was also undoubtedly made against the Good Athanasius, to take from him the power of Appealing to an other Synod. And upon the twenty fifth; This Council of Antioch, not only neglected 
Et hic Canon haud dubiè contra virum optimum Athan. factus est, ut illi appellatio ad alium Synodum adimeretur Fuit autem Concilium Antiochenum etc.  the faith of the Council of Nicaea, touching Christ's divinity, but also strove cautelouslie to disannul it. By means whereof it is clear, that the rhapsody which was produced at the Council of Chalcedon, in the cause of Bassian, and Steven, where these canons were inserted, was not the true universal Code of the canons of the Greek Church which had been preserved in the Episcopal Bibliotheque of Constantinople, since the time of the Council of Constantinople, to that of saint CHRISOSTOME, but was the same falsified code that Cyrinus Bishop of Chalcedon who was an Egyptian by extraction, and for that cause a partaker which Theophilus, and a cruel adversary to sainr CHRISOSTOME; And other Asians Enemies to saint CHRISOSTOME, 
Nicen 〈◊〉 verò fidem Orthodoxam, defilij Dei divinitate non 〈◊〉 neglexit verum etiam callidè abolere studuit.  conspiring, and assembled with Theophilus, had produced against the same saint CHRISOSTOME, and which remained after the death of Cyrinus in the Episcopal Bibliotheque of Chalcedon; a thing whereto the fathers of the Council of Chalcedom took no heed, because the canons which were inserted into this rhapsody, were there inserted without in scription of titles, and without distinction of Counsels, and with suppression of the name of the Council of Antioch. And against this it avails not to say, that S. HILARY speaking of the Synod of Antioch holden in 
Con. Cal. Act. 11.  the dedication, calls it, the Synod of the Saints; for he saith it to accommodate 
Hylar. de Synod.  himself to the infirmity of Eleusius Bishop of Cyzica and other secret catholics of the Asian provinces amongst whom he inhabited for foundation whereof you must know that Eleusius and the other covert catholics of the Asian, provinces, that were called Demy 〈◊〉, for as much as to shun the Emperors, persecution, they communicated with the Arrians, in the Sacraments, and were different from them in belief, seeing themselves constrained by the tyranny of Constantius, an Arrian, Emperor, to adhere to some one of the forms of faith of the Council, that he had caused to be published, rather chose to adhere to that of the Council of Antioch, then to any of the rest, as being the least pestilent, and the least, estranged from Catholic, doctrine. For of all the Counsels, holden by the Arrians, the most moderate in impiety, was the Council of Antioch, holden in the dedication, whereinto the Arrians had infused no other thing of their venom, but that they had taken away the word, Consubctantiall, which had been inserted into the creed of the Council of Nicaea, and had set in steed thereof, inviolable image of the substance, and one in concord; without instilling into it any proposition which besides the omission of the word, Consubstantial, might not be avowed by the catholics. For those causes then, when the Arrians, and amongst others Acacius Bishop of Caesarea in Palestina, would in the Council following, and namely in that of Seleucia, propound other creeds, wherein they did more plainly express their impiety; Eleusius and the other covert catholics of the Asian provinces opposed themselves to it, crying out that they must hold to the creed of the Council of Antioch. With such words, saith 
Socrat. l. 2. c. 40.  Sabinus, and after him Socrates, Eleusius opposed himself to Acacius, calling the faith of the Fathers, the faith published in the Synod of Antioch. And therefore saint HILARY desiring to suffer the infirmity of Eleusius, and of the other covert catholics of the Asian provinces, amongst whom he was confined, and which he maintained against the other Asians, who were complete Arrians, as himself testifies in 
Hylar. de Synod.  these words; Except the Bishop Eleusius, and a few others with him, the ten Asian provinces amongst whom I inhabit, know not God, truly. And choosing rather to retain them within the bounds of the Council of Antioch, and to provoke the rest of the Asians, by their Example, to return to it and to come one step nearer by this means to the catholic doctrine, then to let them fall into the precipices of the other more impious creeds of the Arrians, speaks less hardly of the Synod of Antioch and calls it (in comparison of the other Arrians, Synods) the Synod of the Saints; because there were in this Synod, some, catholics for whose respect, (although they were oppressed by the force and, violence of the Arrians who commanded there, and held there both the sceptre and the pen, and by the tyranny of Constantius the Arrian 
Athanas de Synod. Ar. & Seleu.  Emperor, who was there present, the Arrians durst not at the first blow, vomit up all their impiety; But not that the Arrians, had not been the sole masters, authors, and directors of this council, and had framed the draught and indicted all that was there ordained: for not only saint ATHANASIUS, who was he against whom the Council 
Athan ep. de Synod. Arimin. & Seleu.  had proceeded, and who should better know the history, than any other, witnesseth that the Council of Antioch, in the dedication, was an Arrian Council, and celebrated by the Arrians in the presence of 
Socrat. hi. Ecc. l. 〈◊〉. c. 8  Constantius the Arrian Emperor. But he also affirms, and Socrates after him, that those that indicted the faith of the Council of Antioch published in the dedication; that is to say, that whereof saint HILLARY speaks; were Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia and Acasius Bishop of Caesarea in Palestina, the two principal maintainers of Arrian heresy, and their complices. The Eusebians (saith saint ATHANASIUS) after they had in 
Athan. ubi supra.  the Synod of Tyre extolled all the perverse doctrine of Arius; and after they had ordained to receive the Arrians to the communion, and had themselves first executed it, esteeming nevertheless, that there yet wanted some thing to their intention, held a new Synod at Antioch, under pretence of the dedication of the Church of Antioch. And a while after; The Bishops agreeing to the dedication were 
Athan. ibid.  ninety under the consulship of Marcellus and Probinus, the impious Constantius being present. And again; With what face could Eusebius and Acasius 
Ibidem.  and their Complices, after they had used words not formerly written, and had 〈◊〉 that the first of all creatures, was the invariable image of the substance, power, Council and glory, murmur against the Fathers, for making use of words not formerly written; and that they used the word substance. And Socrates answering by way of Apostrophe to the same Eleusius of whom S. HILARY speaks; How (said he) ò Eleusius dost thou call those that assembled 
Socrat. hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 40.  at Antioch, Fathers, and abjure those that had been their Fathers? for the Bishops that met at Nicaea, and decreed consubstantiality, ought more properly to be Fathers; aswell for having been before them, as because they had promoted them to Priest: hood then if those that held the Council of Antioch, rooted out their Fathers, do not they forget themselves, that following them, they follow Parricides for Fathers? As little doth it avail to say; that John Bishop of Antioch, and the other Eastern Bishops; that is to say, Syrians that were with him at the mock Council of Ephesus erected in the face of the general Council of Ephesus, and amongst others Theodoret Bishop of Cyr, alleged against saint CYRILL, the same canon of the Council of Antioch which had been framed against saint ATHANASIUS; and after produced against saint CHRISOSTOME; And that Theodoret also in the collection of Counsels that he hath made, insertes the canons of the Council of Antioch, with the canons of the other Counsels of the Eastern Church. For Malesius Patriarch of Antioch, in whose branch John Patriarch of Antioch had succeeded, and to whose Successors Theodoret and the other Eastern Bishops that were at Ephesus, adhered, had been of the number of the covert Catholics, which communicated with the Arrians; and even when he was made patriarch of Antioch was joined in external communion with the Arrians, although he held the catholic doctrine. By reason whereof to have means to resist the Arrians, under pretence of some confession of faith authorised by the laws of the Arrian Emperors, under whose tyranny Asia groaned, they protected and defended the Council of Antioch against the other Council of the, Arrians, and gave it the greatest authority they could in their Patriarkshpp; to the end that weak catholics might have means to shadow themselves under the authority of his Council against the Arrian Emperors that persecuted them; And from thence it came, that the liberty of catholic Religion having been restored in the East, this Council yet remained in authority amongst the covert catholics of Syria, who during their oppression, had made use of it, as a bulwark against the Arrians, and other Asian provinces, near the Patriarkship of Antioch. Less availeth it, to say, that in the general Council, of Constantinople, holden under the Emperor, Theodosius the great, the Council, of Antioch, was approved in these words; As, for the tome of those of the West, we receive it, and also 
Concil. Const. 1. c. 5.  those that at Antioch, have confessed one Deity, of the Father, of the son, 〈◊〉 of the holy Ghost. For it is not of the council of Antioch holden in the dedication and under the Emperor Constantius, that they speak: as it appears as well because they set it after the tome of those of the West which was holden long after the Council of Antioch in the dedication; as because they say, that this Council confessed one and the same deity of the Father, of the Sonn, and of the holy Ghost; whereas the council of Antioch in the dedication, calls the unity of the Father, of the Son, and of the holy Ghost, an unity of Concord: but of an other Council of Antioch, holden in the beginning of the Empire of jovian; which conformed the faith of the Council of Nicaea, as it appears both 
Socrat hist l. 3. c. 25.  by the Epistle of the Bishops of Constantinople, assembled the year after the general Council of Constantinople, and by Socrates who reports the whole history, and by S. GREGORY of Nisea; and by Cassianus, and many others. To think also to escape by saying, that it is from this Council of Antioch holden under the Emperor jovian, that the Canons of the Council of Antioch have been taken, that we have at this day in our hands, is a thing wholly vain: for these very Canons of the Council of Antioch, that we have, were in use amongst the Arrians, and Demy-Arrians from before the Council of Seleucia which was holden under Constantius, as appears by the reproach that Sabinus, the Macedonian, made to cyril of Jerusalem, that against the Ecclesiastical law; that is to say, against the fifteenth Canon of the Council of Antioch, he had recourse to the Emperor, Constantius, to appeal to the Council of Seleucia. It is yet more vain to say, that Fulgentius Ferandus, Yuon, Gratian; and other latin canonists, have inserted the canons of the Council of Antioch, in the dedication amongst the canons of the Council received in the latin Church. For it is certain, that in the time of Pope Jnnocent the first, and of saint CHRISOSTOME, the latin Church received them not, as appears by the Epistle of Pope Jnnocent to the Constantinopolitans, about the matter of the Canons of the Council of Antioch, which were produced against saint CHRISOSTOME, of which Sozomene reports these words above cited, such Canons are rejected by the catholic Bishops, for we must not patch the inventions of Heretics with the canons of Catholics. And whereas afterward some latin collectors have inserted them into their copies, it was in part, because they were deceived about the Canon of the Council of Constantinople not considering that the Council of Antioch which was there approved, was the Council of Antioch holden under the Emperor jovian, and in part because in those Canons, there was nothing either against faith nor against the greater part of Ecclesiastical discipline. chose in regard of Ecclesiastical discipline, there were many good things, and which had been taken from the customs and constitutions of the former Church. And that if there were any canon that hurt the policy of the church, it had been corrected and medicined by the Council of Sardica. But above all it is an impertinent thing to say that the Bishops of the Council of Antioch ordained by the first of their canons, to observe the canon of the great Council of Nicaea, concerning the day of the celebration of Pasch; and so that they were not Arrians. For this Council of Nicaea having been holden as Eusebius testifies for two causes, the one to decide the controversies of faith, and the other to reconcile the difference of the Pasch, the Arrians did embrace jointly with the catholics the decree of the Council of Nicaea, concerning the observation of the Pasch & rejected only that of the Faith: And therefore the ministers of Germany in the last greek impression of the canons of the counsels, that they have made at Wittenberg, do justly note, that although the council of Antioch approves the decree of the council of Nicaea, touching the celebration of the Pasch; nevertheless, that hinders it not from being Arrian. For behold what they say upon the first canon of the same Council of Antioch, These Antiochian Fathers, excomcommunicated 
High patres Antiocheni eos éxcommunicant & deponunt qui in rebus adiaphoris peccant: eos verò neque excommunicant, neque deponunt, qui pium & in verbo Dei fundatum Decretum Synodi 〈◊〉 de Filij Dei aeterna & & consubstantiali divinitate convellere ausi sunt. Sed Ariani 〈◊〉 damnare Arianos.  and deposed those that sinned in indifferent things; so spoke the ministers ignorantly following Socrates his error, and the other Novatians, who put the decree of the Council of Nicaea concerning the observation of Pasch amongst indifferent things, and excommunicated not, nor deposed those that have presumed to reverse the pious decree, and grounded on the word of God of the Council of Nicaea concerning the eternal and Consubstantial divinity of the Son of God: but the Arrians would not condemn the Arrians.  
The third objection that the adversaries of the church make against the canons of the Council of Sardica, is, that they were not contained in the Greek Code of the Canons of the universal Church, compiled and authorised by the Emperor justinian: which objection as it contains two heads; the one that justinian compiled and authorised a Code of Canons; and the other, that in this Code, the canons of the Council of Sardica were not comprehended; so they accompany it with two proofs, for that the first head; to wit, that the Emperor Justinian compiled and authorised a Code of canons containing the Body of the canons of the universal Church, they produce the hundred thirtieth one new constitution of justinian, where he useth these words, We decree, that the holy Ecclesiastical Canons, which have been constituted and confirmed by the four holy Counsels, shall hold the place of a Law. And for the proof of the second, to wit, that the canons of the Council of Sardica, were not in the code compiled and authorised by justinian, they allege the Epistle of Dionysius exiguus, timefellowe with justinian, who saith, that to the translation that he had made of the Greek code, he had added the canons of the Counsels of Sardica and Africa, which had been framed in latin: To the first proof than we auswere, that it is a proof, woven with the thread of a Cobwebb; for juctinian speaks not there of any volume of canons confirmed by the first four counsels, and intends not to say, that he authorises aswell the canons that are actually contained in the first counsels, as those which are there contained but relativelie; that is to say, by the confirmation which is there made in gross of the counsels where they are contained; but that he authorises, and erects into the title of a temporal law all the canons actually contained in the four first counsels, aswell those that were there first composed, as those that having been before observed by an unwritten tradition, have been there confirmed, and reduced into writing: for so signifies there, this alternative, constituted, or, confirmed, which is set there for as much as the more part of the canons of the four first counsels had been before observed, by an unwritten law, as the Fathers of the council of Constantinople 
Epist, Cócil. Const. 1. add Damas'. Ambros. & alios.  testify, when they say, speaking of the Oeconomy of the Ecclesiastical ordinations: It is as you know both a law descended from antiquity, and a Canon of the Council of Nicaea. Now, that this is the intention of justinian, to wit, to speak only of the four first general counsels, it appears both because he saith, that he receives their Dogmas, as the holy 
Gregor. Mag. l. indict. ep.  scriptures. A phrase since practised by S. GREGORY upon the matter of the first four general counsels, and which cannot be stretched to any of the other counsels holden before the Emperor justinian and by this that he adds, that he receives their Canons as laws; We receive (saith he) the dogmas of the four Synods above named, as the holy scriptures, and receive their Canons as laws. And by this that he concludes: For these causes we ordain, that according to their distinctions, the holy Pope of old Rome, be the first of all the Prelates, and that the Bles. Bishop of Constantinople the second Rome have the second place after the Sea Apostolic of old Rome, and be perferred before all the Seas. A thing which evidently shows, that he speaks precisely of the four General counsels only, where the order of the patriarchs had been observed, and not of the particular counsels, where there had been no concurrence of patriarchs. And indeed, how could justinian have pretended to have given by this constitution, the force of an imperial law to all the Canons of particular Counsels; he that disanulls and infringes the fifteenth Canon of the Council of 〈◊〉? for the Council of Neocesarea, had made a Canon by which it ordained, that according to the Book of the acts, there should be but seven deacons in one city, how great soever it were. Where justinian ordains, that there shall be an hundred Deacons in the cathedral church of Constantinople. And that is not to be reckoned of, which Balsamon saith that justinian and the council of Trullio after him, interpret the Canon of the council of Neocesarea, for they do indeed interpret the place of the acts which they pretend to be evil understood by the Council of Neocesarea, 
Concil. Neocaesar. c. 15.  and that it ought to be expounded, of the dispensers of alms and not, of the ministers of the Altar; but they correct and abrogate the Canon 
Act. c 6.  of the council of Neocesarea, as Zonora acknowledges in these terms: 
Lib. 3. Im. Constitut. tit. 〈◊〉.  From before the Council Trullian, the Canon of the Council of Neocesarea was no more observed; for justinian instituted sixty priests, and an hundred deacons, and forty Deaconesses in the great Church of Constantinople. And therefore Balsamon is constrained to confess, that the Council Trullian corrects 
Balsam. in Concil. in Trull. c. 16 Zonar. in Conc. in Trul. c. 16.  the Canon of the council of Neocesarea; The present Canon (saith he) interpreteth, or rather correcteth the fifteenth Canon of the Council of Neovesarea. And then if justinian in saying; We ordain that the Canons constituted or confirmed by the four first Counsels, shall hold the place of a law; had pretended 
Balsam in Conc.  to mean not only the Canons contained in the catalogues of the four first counsels, but also those of the other Counsels which they 
Iust. in edi. fid. Ortho. apud Leun. clau. l. 8.  pretend to have been confirmed in gross by these four first. What caution can they give that he did not intend to comprehend the Canons of the council of Sardica, that he, and the fifth council of Constantinople 
Conc Con. 1. c. 5.  call a general council, comprehending it consequently under the title 
Zonar. in Conc Con. 1 c 5.  of the council of Nicaea; and whereof the first council of Constantinople canoniseth the authority in these terms: We receive the Council of those 
Bal Ibid.  of the west: that is to say, (if we believe Zonara and Balsamon) the Council of Sardica. But this is enough for the first head; let us examine the second.  
To the proof then of the second head, which is that Dionysius Exiguus a Scythian monk, but habituated at Rome, and versed in the Greek and Roman letters, who lived in the time of justinian the Emperor, in translating the Canon of the counsels saith; that he hath taken the council of Sardica from the latin edition and hath not taken it from the Greek 
Chr. Inst. apud Adr. Beys Paris 1610.  text, because it was not in the Greek edition, a proófe that hath seemed so strong to the Pope's adversaries; that two year since they have caused to be printed a greek Code of the Canons of the universal church, from which they have eclipsed and cut of the council of Sardica against the credit of all the greek editions of the counsels, both ancient and modern, which are at this day to be found in the world. We answer that the greek copy that Dionysius Exiguus had in his hands, was a maimed and defective copy, as appears, besides many other lamenesses, by the omission of the Canons of the council of Ephesus which are wanting there; for Dionysius Exiguus passes immediately from the Canons of the council of Constantinople, to those of the council of Chalcedon, and omitts the Canons of the council of Ephesus; a thing which manifestly shows, that the greek copy that he had in his hands, and which he had brought out of Scythia, was lame and imperfect, for as much as not only the council of Ephesus was the third of the first general counsels: and that in this quality the canons thereof are inserted into all the collections and mentions of the greek collections: as in the greek collection of Theodoret; and into the concordances of john Scholasticus Patriarch of Constantinople; and into the catalogue of the Council Trullian, and into the Nomocanon of Photius; and into the greek copies of Zonara, Balsamon, Alexius, Blestares, Simon Logotheta, Harmenopolus, and others; But also that the Emperor justinian quotes and expresses them by name in the law produced for the proof of the first head which hath these words: We ordain 
Novel. Iust. 131.  that the holy Ecclesiastic all Canons that have been constituted or confirmed by the four holy Counsels, shall hold the place of a law; to wit, those of the Council of Nicaea, celebrated by the three hundred and eighteen Fathers; and those of the Council of Constantinople, celebrated by the hundred and fifty Fathers; and those of the first Council of Ephesus; and those of the Council of Chalcedon. And to the end to convert our defence into an act, we will arm it with seven counter-Batteries, which do not only destroy the proof drawn from Dionysius Exiguus, but also shows expressly, that in the Emperor justinian's age and long before him, the Canons of the council of Sardica were acknowledged by the greek church and inserted intò the greek collections of counsels. The first is, that Paladius Bishop of Helenopolis in Bithynia, an Author greek in stile, and Asian in nation, (who lived a thousand two hundred years years ago; that is to say, a hundred and fifty year before justinian, and whom Photius Patriarch of Constantinople, calls 
Phot. in Georg. Alex.  a most diligent Writer of the life of S. CHRISOSTOME;) And George Patriarch of Alexandria, (who lived a thousand year ago) witness not only, (as hath above appeared) that the Canon of the Council of Antioch that the schismatics of the East produced against S. CHRISOSTOME, had proceeded from the Shop of the Arrians; but also that it had been abrogated with the common voice of the Greek and Latin Bishops, by the Canons of the Council of Sardica. This Canon (saith Palladius, and after Palladius, George Patriarch of Alexandria, and after 
Pallad. dial devit. Chris.  George, Patriarch of Alexandria, Photius Patriarch of Constantinople) was as impious, and the work of impious men, abrogated in the Council of Sardica, by the Romans, Italians, Illyrians, Macedonians, and greeks. The second that Sozomene, an ancient Greek historian, and who lived near an hundred years before justinian, reports for the defence of the same S. CHRISOSTOME, an Epistle of Pope Innocent the first, to the Constantinopolitans, 
Sozom. hist. Eccl. l. 8. c. 20.  where he writes speaking of the canons of the Council of Antioch; We say not only that they are not to be followed, but also that they must be condemned with heretic all and Schismatical doctrines, as was done in the council of Sardica, by the Bishops that have been before us. The third that Balsamon Patriarch of Antioch and guardian of the charters of the Church of Constantinople, notes after all them that the 〈◊〉 canon of the Council of Antioch, was abolished by the fourth canon of the Council of Sardica; Note (saith Balsamon commenting the fourth Canon of the council of 
Balsam. in Conc. 〈◊〉, c. 4.  Sardica that by this Canon, the fifteenth Canon of the council of Antioch, was abrogated. And comenting the fifteenth Canon of the council of Antioch; This 
Id. In. Con. Antioch. c. 15.  Canon (saith he) was disannulled by the fourth canon of the council of Sardica.  
The fourth counterbattery is, that the greek edition of the Canons of the council of Sardica, is not a translation of the ancient latin edition, which was current, whether in the time of Pope Zosimus, or whether since, in the time of Dionysius Exiguus; but that it is a greek edition, primitive and original, which was made in the council itself, whereof (as holden upon the confines between both empires) the Canons were published from the beginning in both tongues. This appears by many differences which are between the old latin edition: and the greek edition; nor in substance, but in the order, in the phrases, forms, and circumstances: and amongst others in the seaventh Canon of the latin edition, which is the fourteenth in the greek; for the latin edition produced by Pope Zosimus his legates in the sixth council of Carthage, and inserted into the collection of Dionysius Exiguus, and into that of Isidorus Mercator hath; 
Con. Cart. 6. c. 6.  Osius saith, If a Bishop moved with choler against a priest or deacon of his, would 
Con. Sar. c. 17.  cast him forth of the church, it must be provided, that being innocent he be not condemned or excommunicated; and therefore the excommunicated person, shall have power to interpeale, the Bishops of the next Province, and procure his cause to be heard by them. And the greek edition, besides many other differences, hath it thus: The excommunicated person shall have power, to have recourse to the Bishop Metropolitan of the same Province; and if the Bishop Metropolitan be absent, to address himself to the Metropolitan of the next province, and to require that his cause may be diligently examined. A thing which evidently showeth, that the Greek edition was not taken from the latin edition which was curret, be it in the time of Pope Zosimus, be it in the time of Dionysius Exiguus, but it is the ancient original greek edition of the council, of which some clauses were lost in the latin edition, from the time of Pope Zozimus and Dionysius Exiguus.  
The fifth counterbatterie is, that not only all the greek editions as that of Photius, Simon Logotheta, Zonara, Balsamon, Alexius and other greek canonists contain the same canons of the council of Sardica; but also all the other Eastern editions, aswell Russian, as Syrian, Armenian, Egyptian, and Ethiopian, as it appears: for the Syrian editions by the Syriack collections of the canons which is at Rome in the Bibliotheque of the great Duke Cosmo, yet living; whither the great Duke Ferdinand his Father made to be brought all the Syrian books that he could recover in the East; And in regard of the Ethiopian Edition, by the Code of the Ethiopian canons which is at Rome, in the house of the Ethiopians, and for the rest by the copies which are to be found in all the provinces of the East; by means whereof, the canons of the Council of Sardica, must have been currant in the East, long before Justinians time, the natural Egyptian Churches which we call Cophtiches and Ethiopians, having separated themselves from the greek and latin churches from the time of the council of Chalcedon, and have had since the time no communion with them. And finally the sixth counterbatterie is, that Theodoret who lived near one hundred year before Justinian and that john Patriarch of Constantinople, who lived in the same age with justinian, inserted into the collection of the Greek Counsels, the canons of the Counsels, of Sardica with the other canons of the Greek church, for in the greek Library of Queen Catherine of Medicis, which was brought from Constantinople to Floremce, by Demetrius, Gara, Lascaris, & other greeks 〈◊〉 from the sack of Conctantinople, and which is now united with the library of the most Christian king, there is found an old Synagogue a manuscript of the canons, reduced into fifty titles by Theodoret Bishop of Cyre, under which there is annexed a concordance of the imperial laws of justinian with the canons contained in these fistie titles, made by john Scolasticus Patriarch of Constantinople; in both which works, the canons of the cowncell of Sardica are quoted and inserted equally with the other canons of the Greek church. Now that this Synagogue (which was the name that they gave to the ancient collections of counsels, as it appears by the report of Socrates, who cities the collections of Counsels made by Sabinus, under the title of a Synagogue of the counsels) is truly ancient, and certainly Theodoret's, is not to be doubted. For besides this, that the manuscript which is very ancient, bears this title; Synagogue of the Canons reduced into fifty titles by Theodoret Bishop of Cyre; And besides that the stile of the author is wholly agreeable to the stile of Theodoret; there are many 
Socrat l. 1. c 5 & l. 2. c. 13. hist. Ec.  things to show that this collection could not but be made in Theodoret's time, that it is so, first the author testifies in his exordium, that there were but ten Synods celebrated since the Apostles to his time: There have been (said he) ten great Synods of the Fathers since the Apostles. And propounding a while after in the form of a table the canons of the same ten counsels, whereof his work is compiled, he placeth that of Nicaea first, and that of Chalcedon last in this order.  

1. Of the 318. holy Fathers assembled at Nicaea under the Consulship of the Illustrious Paulinus and julianus, the ye are of the death of Alexander 606. the 19 of the month of Decius; that is to say, the 13. before the Kadends of june; 20. Canons.  
2. Of the blessed fathers assembled at Ancyra, more ancient than those of Nicaea but placed after them because of the dignity, and authority of a general Council; 25. Canons.  
3. Of the holy fathers assembled at the Synod of Neocesarea, in time also before that of Nicaea, and later than that of Ancyra; but for honors-sake placed after that of Nicaea; 14 Canons.  
4. Of the fathers assembled at Sardica, after the Fathers of the council of Nicaea: 21. Canons.  
5. Of the fathers assembled at Gangres: 20. Canons.  
6. Of the fathers assembled at Antioch: 25. Canons.  
7. Of the fathers assembled at Loadicea in Phrigia: 59 Canons.  
8. Of the fathers assembled at Constantinople: 7. Canons.  
9 Of the fathers assembled at Ephesus: 7. Canons.  
10. Of the fathers assembled at Chalcedon: 27. Canons.   
From whence it appears, that this Author must have written a little while after the council of Chalcedon, which is the time wherein 〈◊〉 writ his dialogues against the Euthycians, and before the fifth general council, which was holden under justinian the first: and the sixth which was holden under Constantine Pogonat: and the council surnamed Trullian which made canons under the name of both the others: and by consequent that he was long before Photius, and all the other compilers of the greek collections, whose copies are to be found, be it in the East, or in the west. Secondly he saith that he is not the first that hath compiled the canons in a volume, for as much as before him, there had been some, that had made a collection distributed into sixty titles: but that he is the first that hath distributed them into titles distinguished by the dates of the matters; A thing that shows, that he is more ancient than the old Nomocanon reduced into fifty titles, before the time of Photius whereof Balsamon speaks. thirdly he inserts none with the Canons of the Counsels, but only the Canons of S. BASILL: And he saith more, that before him they had never been inserted; which testifies, that he is more ancient, than the council entitled Trullian: and then all the collections of Photius, and other later greek copies, wherein there are inserted the canons of many other greek fathers, and amongst others of S. CYRILL. fourth, he makes no mention in his work, of the Canons of the council of Carthage, an evident testimony that he is more ancient than justinian, who cities in his edict of faith, the Canons of the council of Carthage; then the council of Constantinople, surnamed Trullian: then the Nomocanon of Photius; and then all the other late greek compilations, in the which the canons of the council of Carthage, are inserted and incorporated. Moreover he assigns but three Canons to the first Council of Constantinople, which is the number that the old greek and latin manuscripts contain: and that Dionysius exiguus, (who saith he hath taken his translation upon the greek original,) assigns to it, and gives but twenty seven Canons to the Council of Chalcedon, which is the number that the same Dionysius, and the other ancient greeks and latins attribute 
Dionys.  
〈◊〉 in Cod. Can. Theo. An. ad Calcem hist. Eccle. Theod. in edit. Rob. Steph. col. l. 1.  thereto, and that the history of the Council as we have above proved shows, aught to be attributed thereto; for the twenty eight having been propounded by the fathers of the council, at the instance of Anatolius, the Pope's legates opposed themselves to it, and Pope Leo refused to confirm it, and the Emperor and Anatolius himself desisted from pursuing it, in such sort as it began not to take place amongst the Canons of Chalcedon till a long time after; from whence it is, that S. GREGORY 
Gre. Mag. l. 5. ind ep. 14.  the Great saith: That the synod of Chalcedon had been falsified in one place by those of Constantinople: And as for the two later Canons they are two canons made upon particular occurrences, which have been transferred from the fourth act of the council, into the catalogue of the canons. By means whereof, it is necessary that the author of this collection, should be more ancient than S. GREGORY the Great: and then the council of Constantinople, surnamed Trullian, in whose times the twenty vl Canon had already been inserted into the catalogue of the canons of the Council of Chalcedon: and then the copies whereof Photius, Zonara. Balsamon, and other later greeks have made use, within all which this addition is inserted. Besides he assigns but seven Canons to the Council of Ephesus, omitting the vl which had been made against john Patriarch of Antioch, in favour of the Bishops of Cyprus during the Schism of the council of Ephesus, and of john Patriarch of Antioch, and which is inserted in all the greek collections of Photius, Zonara, Balsamon and others. From whence it appears, that the compiler of this Synagogue was one of the Bishops of the Patriarkship of Antioch who had during the schism, taken part with John Patriarch of Antioch against the Council of Ephesus: and who reunited themselves with the council of Ephesus, when john Patriarch of Antioch and the Bishop's 〈◊〉 his Patriarkship returned to it. By means whereof they received not this Canon with the other Canons of the Council, for as much as it had been made against their Patriarch; and during the schism, and by contumacy, and upon hearing of one party only. And finally the Author which hath begun this collection, and hath illustrated it with conferring the imperial laws annexing to the end of every title, legal concordances, answerable to the matter of the titles, had been tymefellowe with justinian himself, and writ a little after his death, as appears by the preface that he put before his concordances, which contains these words; To the glory of our great God and saviour jesus Christ, I have now conferred the sacred canons of the holy and blessed Apostles, and of the holy Fathers, who have followed their tracks in every Synod, with a choice of texts that I have transcribed from the sacred new constitutions of justinian of holy memory, publiht dispersedly after the Code, the which not only are agreeable to the canons of the orthodox fathers, but also communicate to them the authority of the imperial power, with an addition of legal right, and pleasing to God, which provides in the imitation of God, what is profitable for every human creature. And by the end of the work to which are annexed these words, written in greek breviatures; The end of the Chapters of the new constitutions, concerning Ecclesiastical decisions by john Archbishop of Constantinople, which had been Scolasticus. For this john Archbishop of Constantinople, surnamed heretofore Scholasticus whom the adversaries of the Pope's authority acknowledge for one of the collectors of the greek counsels, was established by justinian himself in the Sea of Constantinople in the steed of Eutychius, and deceased twelve years after the death of justinian. And it derogates not from this, that Balsamon rejects all the Nomocanons; that is to say, all the marriages of laws and canons which have been made before that of Photius: And amongst the rest, one Nomocanon, which distributes the laws and canons into fifty titles. For be it that he speak of that of john Patriarch of Constantinople, surnamed Scholasticus: be it that he speak of an other later, he rejects it not, for not having been ancient enough, but for being too ancient, for as much, as many laws of the Emperor justinian which are there inserted, have ceased to be in use having been abrogated by the later Emperors: yet less is this repugnant to it, that the canons entitled from the Apostles are quoted in this synagogue, under the number of eigthie five canons; Whereas Doonisius exiguus, and after him Cresconius report but of fifty. For 
Dionys.  bsiedes this that the greek code of Dionysius (as hath been above noted) 
〈◊〉 in Co 〈◊〉 Crescon. in Coll. Can.  was very lame and defective, it is certain, that the greeks both before Theodoret, and before Dionysius Exiguus retained eighty five, as appears by these words of the council of Constantinople surnamed Trullian: We ordain, that the eighty five canons which have been received and confirmed by the holy Fathers, who have preceded us, and have been given us by them under the name of the canons of the holy and glorious Apostles, remain from hence forward 〈◊〉 and unmoveable. And by the council of Constantinople holden under Nectarius 
Conc. in Trnll. c. 2.  in the cause of Agapius and of Bagadius more than sixty years before Theodoret, that the council Trullian canoniseth in these words; We seal also the canons of the holy fathers, which reassembled themselues anew in this religious & imperial city under Nectoirius Archbishop of the same city, & under Theophilus' Archbishop of Alexandria. Which council holden under Nectarius in the cause of Agapius and Bagadius, cities the seventy sixth Canon of the Apostles: for I will not renew the difference that hath been since Pope Gelasius between the greek and latin church in regard of these Canons entitled from the Apostles. It sufficeth to defend the antiquity of this Synagogue, that from before the time of Theodoret, the greeks held eigthie five canons for Apostolical canons: and this may be said, touching the sixth objection, let us dispatch the two others.  
The seaventh objection, that the Pope's adversaries propound against the authority of the canons of the Council of Sardica, is that Pope Adrian the first in the epitome of the canons that he addresses to Charlemagne, saith, that the Canons of the council of Sardica are not to be found amongst the greeks, and that Pope Nicholas the first, in his Epistle to Photius Patriarch of Constantinople and to the 〈◊〉, 
Nicol. 1. ad Phot.  writes, The Council of Sardica which you say you have not. To this obection then, we answer two things, the one that if Photius who was author of the schism which lasts to this day between the greek and Latin Church, should have said by malice, and to cover his intrusion in to the Patriarkship of Constantinople, which he had usurped upon 〈◊〉, true and lawful Patriarch, that the greeks had not, or received not the Council of Sardica, it were no great marvel; no more than that the Bishops of Egypt writ to the Emperor Leo, to cover their heresy that they knew not the Synod of the hundred & fifteen fathers: that is to say, the first general Synod of Constantinople, in the which nevertheless, Timothy the first, their Patriarch, had assisted and presided. For Photius having intruded into the Patriarkship of Constanstinople against the Canons of the Council of Sardica, which forbade Laymen to usurp ecclesiastical charges, there is no doubt, but he would willingly have avoided that which condemned him. And the other, that it is a mistaking in Pope 〈◊〉, who deceived himself upon the Epitome of the Canons of Pope Adrian, who was deceived upon Dionysius his collection For not only the Council of Constanstinople, surnamed Trullian, that the greeks entitled the sixth general Council, & which was more than an hundred and fifty 〈◊〉 before Pope Adrian, & more than two hundred before Pope Nicolas 〈◊〉 before Photius, & that Photius himself canoniseth & registers it in his 〈◊〉 as an universal ecumenical Council, writes, We seal also the 
Concil. in Trull. c. 2.  〈◊〉 that have been published by the fathers, assembled at Sardica & Carthage, & by those which reassembled themselues the second time in this Religious and imperial 〈◊〉, under Nectarius Archbishop of this imperial City, and Theophilus 〈◊〉 of Alexandria. But Photius himself in his Nomocanon insertes almost 〈◊〉 every title, the canons of the council of Sardica, & those particularly of the Episcopal appeals to the sea apostolic: & after Photius, Simon 〈◊〉, Zonara, Balsamon, Alexius Blastares, Harmenopolus, & other later 〈◊〉 Canonists. The eigteenth & last objection, that the adversaries of the church make against the authority of the canons of the council of Sardica 〈◊〉, that the practices of episcopal appeals, which are the subject of the third, fourth, and fifth Canon of the Council of Sardica, hath been long 〈◊〉 to the Eastern Church. For proof whereof they allege six 〈◊〉; the first is, that Socrates speaking of cyril Bishop of Jerusalem 
Socrat. hist Eccl. l. 2. c. 40.  who had appealed from the Council of Palestina holden under Acacius Archbishop of Caesarea to a greater judgement, that is to say, to the judgement of the Council of Seleucia, saith that cyril practised the first, and 〈◊〉 one of this kind of proceeding, making use against the custom of the ecclesiastical Canon, of appeals, as in a lay judgement. The 〈◊〉 that the first Council of Constantinople, that was called the 
Concil. Const. 1. c.  〈◊〉 general one, ordained that after the Synod of the Province, the 〈◊〉 of the Patriarkship might examine in the second instance of the 〈◊〉 of Bishops, but that if after the Synod of the Patriarkship any one 〈◊〉 dare to importune the ears of the Emperor, or of secular Princes, 〈◊〉 disquiet the general synod, that he be no more received to pursue his 〈◊〉. The third that the Emperor justinian saith, that from the sentences of the patriarchs there is no appeal, no more then from the sentences of the Provosts of the Pretory. The fourth, that the Emperor justinian ordains, that if a Clerk attempt any Cause against his Bishop, 〈◊〉 be judged by his Metropolitan; and in case, the one of the party's 〈◊〉 to obey the judgement, the Patriarch of the diocese shall end 〈◊〉. The fifth that the Emperors Leo and Constantine declared, that the sentence of the Patriarch, was not subject to appeal, as being the Prince of Ecclesiastical judgements. And the sixth that Photius in his Nomocanon saith, there is no appeal from the sentence of the patriarchs.  
To the first then of those objections; which is, that Socrates saith, that cyril Bishop of Jerusalem, was the only and first man, who against the Ecclesiastical canon made use of an appeal; we bring two Answers; the one that those words, are not the words of Socrates but the words of an heretical author from whom Socrates reports them; to wit, from Sabinus who to calumniate saint CYRILL, who although for fear of Constantius the Arrian Emperor, he did then communicate outwardly with the Arrians, nevertheless was in doctrine and belief a catholic; reproaches it to him that he had appealed rome the Council of Cesarta, in Palestina wherein he had been deposed by the Arrians, and had put in his appeal to the Council of Seleucia holden by the Arrians, but wherein there were many covert catholics, and which communicated not with the Arrians, but in the receipt of the Sacraments, and differed wholly from them in faith. The truth of his Answer appears, both by this, that Socrates in the beginning of this history saith, that he 
Socrat. hist 〈◊〉. l. 2. c. 39  hath abridged it from the collection of Sabinus; Let the Readers, saith he, curious to know things in particular; search them in the collections of Sabinus, where they are at large set down; we running over them, have but extracted heads. And by the canon whereto this Author saith that cyril contradictes, which was a canon of the Council of Antioch holden in the dedication; which Council Socrates was so far from thinking it lawful, as chose, not only in the same history, he makes an Apostrophe against the memory of Eleusius, who had qualified the Bishops of the Council of Antioch with the title of Fathers, and asks 
So crat. hist Eccl. l. 6. c. 18.  him; How, ò Eleusius dost thou call those Fathers, that were assembled at Antioch and deniest that title to their Elders? And a little after; that if those that were assembled at Antioch have rooted out their Fathers, those that follow them follow Parricides; but also in the cause of saint CHRISOSTOME he saith, that the canon of the Council of Antioch which was produced against 
Socrat. hist Eccl. l. 2 c. 8.  him, had been forged by the Arrians. And in deed, how could Socrates have held the Bishop's appeals for a new thing, and contrary to the canon of the Church, he that allegeth for a reproach of nullity against the Council of Antioch, that the law of the Church imported that those things that were done without the Bishop of Rome's consent, were nullities? And who had said, speaking of Paul Bishop of Constantinople, of Asclepas Bishop of Gaza in Palestina, of Marcellus primate of Ancyra in Galatia 
Socrat. ibidem 〈◊〉. 15.  and other Bishops deposed by the Council of Antioch, and other Counsels of the East, and yet had had recourse to the Pope, the Bishop of Rome, because of the prerogative of his Church, armed them with confident letters, and writ into the East, and restored them every man to his place; and that a long while before, the action of Cyrill, and of the Council of Seleucia. The other answer is, that Sabinus himself did not pretend to say by that, that Cyrill had done a new thing, and contrary to the laws of the Church; or as the words of Sabinus imported from a less Tribunal to a greater; that is to say, from the Council of Palestina, to that of Seleucia, in appealing from one Synod to an other. For the Council of Antioch itself upon which Sabinus grounds himself, ordains that a Bishop còdenned may have recourse to a greater Synod. But for this that he had in his appeal, followed the form of secular appeals, for as much as he had taken, to speak according to the stile of this time, a relief of appeal from the imperial Chancery, that is to say, had taken letters from the Emperor, to oblige the Bishops of the Council of Seleucia, and particularly the Acacians who being Arrians and favoured by the Officers of the Emperor, who assisted at the Council who were 〈◊〉, would not have suffered that the cause of cyril who had been condemned by 〈◊〉 in the Council of Palestina, should again have been put to trial to receive his Appeal, and to renew the examination of his cause. This appears both by the beginning of the history of the Council of 〈◊〉, 
Socr. hist. Eccl. l. 2. c. 40.  where it is said that diverse letters of the Emperors were brought, where of some ordained that they should first treat of matters of faith, and others, that they should first handle the causes of accused Bishops: And by the very words of Sabinus against Cyrill which are; As soon as he had been deposed having sent a libel of appeals to those that had deposed him, he appealed to a greater judgement; to which appeal, the Emperor Constantius added his suffrage, and this cyril did only, & the first against the Custom: of the 〈◊〉 Canon, making use of Appeals, as in lay judgements. By which words, Sahinus intended not to say; that Cyrill was the first that appealed from a lesser Synod to a greater, but that he was the first the used the form of secular appeals in Ecclesiastical judgement; that is to say that had recourse to the Emperor to cause his appeal to be accepted. And therefore he saith not that he was the first that used appeals, but that he was the first that used them as in laie-Iudgments. And this finally appears by the same Canon of the Council of 〈◊〉; the transgression whereof 〈◊〉 objects to S, CYRILL; which Canon forbids not that we may appeal from a lesser Synod to a greater, chose ordains it in express words, but forbids that they should have recourse to the Emperor's authority, and sets down the defence in these words. If any Priest deposed by his own Bishop, 
Conc. Antioch. Can. 12.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishop deposed by a Synod, presume to importune the ears of the Emperor, whereas he should have recourse to a greater Synod, and refer the right that he 〈◊〉 he hath to a greater number of Bishops, let him not be received to 〈◊〉. From whence it appears, that this that Sabinus reprehended in Cyrill, was not that he had appealed from the Synod of Palestina to a greater Synod; to wit, to that of Seleucia, which was compounded of all the East; but for having recourse to the Emperor, & for having obtained letters from him, to cause his appeal to be accepted, which is that, that he calls to use appeals, as in lay judgements, for as much as in lay judgements, the Emperor gave letters to oblige the seconde judges to 〈◊〉 the appeal, and the first to yield to it,  
TO the second instance, which is, that in the first general Council of 
Concil.  Constantinople it was ordained that those that would accuse a Bishop, 
Const. 〈◊〉.  should accuse him to the Synod of the Province, and if the Synod of the 
Can. 6.  Province did not content them, they should have recourse to the Synod of the Patriarkship, and that after it should no more be lawful, neither to importune the ears of the Emperor, nor to disquiet a general Council; we answer that he speaks of the accusers of Bishops, and not of Bishops accused, that is to say, that he pretends not to ordain, that it should not be lawful for a Bishop accused, to appeal from the Patriarkall Synod, to them General Council, or to the Pope, who was the head thereof. and represented it: but that it should not be lawful for the accuser, after the Cause had been adjudged in the first instance by the provincial Council, and in the second by the patriarchal Coucel, to pursue it elsewhere, no not before a General Council, as appears by the Conclusion of the Canon, which is, If any one despising the things aforesaid, shall dare to importune the ears of the Emperor, or the judgement of the secular magistrates, or disunite the General Council &c: let him be no more 〈◊〉 way received in his accusation, Otherwise, how could saint chrysostom, being deposed a while after this Council, by a Council holden at the instance of the Emperor and the Empress in thè 
〈◊〉. hist. Eccl. l. 8. c. 17.  Suburbs of Constantinople, have appealed to a General Council: And how a little after, seeing himself deprived of the Pope of a General Council, because of the obstacle that the Emperor of the East (and the Empress his wife, without whom a General Council could not be celebrated) gave to it, could he have appealed to the Pope? And how could the Emporor Valentinian, have said, that Flavianus, Bisho of Constantinople; had appealed to the Pope according to the custom 
In ep. praeamb Conci. Chalced c. 25.  of Counsels? And how could the Council of Chalcedon, holden at the gates of Constantinople, have approved of the appeal of Theodoret Bishop of Cyre a city of the Patriarkship of Antioch to the Pope, and the judgement of restitution be given by the Pope upon his Appeal?  
To the third Instance which is, that the Emperor Justin, ordains, 
Concil. Chalced. Act. 1.  that clerks should be first judged by their Bishop, and then by their metropolitans, and then by the patriarchs of the Nation, and should obey the things decided by him as if from the beginning he had been the judge; for as much as against the sentence of such Bishops, the former Emperors had ordained, that there should be no appeal: We answer, that he speaks of the causes of inferior clerks who in the first instance ought to be judged by their Bishops; in the second by the metropolitans, and in the third, by the Patriarch; and not of the causes of Bishops And where as he saith, that against: the sentence of such Bishops, the former Emperors have ordained; that there should be no appeal; we say with Balsamon, that the place is corrupted; and thus it must be reads; against such sentence of Bishops; to wit, against the sentences of Bishop given in lay matters; and it must be interpreted of the appeal to the secular Tribunal; as appears by the same law of the Emperors Arcadius, Honorius and Theodosius; to which that of Justin, remitts the Readers; which ordains that the sentences of Bishops, should be as those of the Provostes of the Pretory: from whence it is not lawful to appeal. We ordain (said the Emperors. writing to Theodorus Provost of the pretory) that the Episcopal sentence 
Cod. l. x. tit. 4. l. 4.  shall remain firm in the behalse of those which have desired to be judged by the Bishops, add that like reverence be given to their judgements, as to yours, from whence it is not lawful to appeal. And by the report that Photius made of the same law in these words: The ninth constitution of the fourth title of the first book, of the code saith; That the Sentences of Bishops, should be as those of the provosts of the 〈◊〉, from whence it is not lawful to appeal; that is to say, that it is no more lawful to appeal from the sentences of Bishops, to the imperial Tribunal; then from those of the Provost, of the Pretory for the Emperors might well ordain? that for things temporal, there should be no appeal from the Bishops to them; but not that for things spiritual there should be no appeal from Bishops, to the superior ecclesiastical Tribunals.  
To the fourth instance, which is that the Emperor justinian, ordains, that if any clerk or layman, attempt an action against a Bishop for what cause soever, the cause should be judged before the metropolitan, and that if any one contradict the things judged, the cause should be referred to the Blessed Archbishop and Patriarch of the diocese, and there according to the laws and canons he must end it. And a little before, that if two Bishops of oneself Synod, have a contestation one against the other, the Metropolitan with two of the Bishops of the Synod; that is to say of the Episcopal societies of the Provinces, shall judge thereof; and that if one of the parties contradict it, the blessed Patriarch of the nation shall decide it, without that either of the parties can contradict it: We answer, that he speaks of the causes of Bishops, where there interuenes no deposition, the final deposition of Bishops, having been aliwaies subject to appeals, be it to the Pope or to a General Council; as appears by the history of 〈◊〉, timefellowe with justinian, who saith that John, Patriarch of Alexandria, having been deposed at the instance of the 
Liberat. in Breviar. c. 17.  Emperor Zeno, by the Synod of the Province, appealed to the Pope: And by saint ATHANASIUS, who reports these words out of the 
Athan. apol. 2. id. ibidem.  Epistle of Pope julius; They must write to all of us, that by all of us that may be judged which is just: For those that were disquieted, were Bishops. And again; Are you ignorant that it is the custom to write first to us, and that from hence should proceed, the decision of things? And therefore if there were any suspicion conceived against the bishop there, it must have been written off to the Church here. And besides we say, t'has whereas he ordains, that the Patriarch should end causes, he incends he should end them in regard of secular judgements; that is to say, that after the Patriarch, no secular judge, should dare to examine it, nor should any of the partles contradict before any Secular judge; as when he saith in the former Paragraphe; that if it be an Ecclesiastical cause which is attempted against any clerk, the secular judges should not intermeddle in it, but, the Blessed Bishop must end it: For he intends not hereby to say that there can be no appeal from the Bishop, to superior ecclesiastical judges; but that there should be no appeal from the Bishop to the Prince and the secular Magistrate. And it is not to be said, that the Pope saint GREGORY the first, cities the constitution of justinian, whereof there hath been above mention in the cause of the Bishop Steven, who seemed to be accused of a crime meriting deposition; to wit of the crime of treason; for besides that those that make this allegation, forget to add to it the train of saint GREGORY'S text 
Greg. Ma. l. 11. in. d. 6 ep. 54.  which is, That if they say chose, that there is no Metropolitan nor Patriarch, it must be answered that the cause ought to be judged and decided by the Sea Apostolic, which is the head of all the Churches. That S. GREGORY, allegeth this law, it is not to apply it to the merit of Stevens cause, but to show that Steven ought to be drawn in judgement before the Council of his Province, and not before the Council of an other province. And indeed, how could S, GREGORY have pretended that in mayor causes; that is to say, wherein there were handled either the final deposition of Bishops, or matters of Faith, the Patriarches sentences 
Cre. Mag. l. 4. ep. 82.  not to be subject to appeal; he that cries out; Do not you know, that in the cause that John the priest had (he means John a priest of Chalcedon who had been condemned for a matter of faith at Conctantinople,) against our brother and Colleague, john Bishop of Constantinople, he hath had recourse according to the canons to the Sea Apostolic, and that it hath been defined by our judgement?  
To the fifth Instance, which is that the Emperors LEO and Constantine 
Leo & con. apud Leun.  say that the Sentence of the Patriarch is not subject to appeal, and is not to be retracted by an other judge, as being the Prince of Ecclesiastical judgement: We say, that those two Emperors who have written since the Schism of the Greek Church, speak of the Patriarch by excellency; that is to say of the Patriarch, of Constantinople, whom they believe to hold the place of Pope in the East; for they esteemed the sentences of other patriarchs to be subject to appeals; but they believed that the sentences of patriarchs universal; that is to say, according to them, of the Pope, and of the Patriarch of Constantinoplee whom they associated with the Pope in the Right of universal Patriarch, for as much as Constantinople, was a second Rome, and the Patriarch of Constantinople, for this occasion, according to them, a second Pope, were not subject to appeal. This appears both by the tenth Article of the sixth title, were they say, the judgement of all Metropolitanshipps and Bishoprics, belong to their proper Patriarch; but to him of Constantinople, it is lawful to confirm, and reform, and determine, the contestations bred in other Seas. And by Balsamon who writes upon the fifth canon of the Council of Antioch, that this comdemnation is meant of Synods not subject to appeal, as of the Pope, and of the Patriarch of Constantinople.  
To the sixth and last Instance, which is that Photius saith, that from the 
Phot. in Nomocan.  Patriarches there is no appeal, we answer it is not Photius that speaks, for Photius inserts not in his Nomocanon, but the only texts of the constitutions of the Emperors, without mingling any thing of his own; but that these are the words of the constitution of justine, uncle to justinian, to which we have above answered, who saith alluding to the eighth law of the fourth title of the code, for against such Episcopal sentences, as it hath been ordained by our elders, there is no appeal; Of which words, the Greek Bookebinders' or Exemplifiers have made, for against the sentences of such Bishops; that is to say, of the Patriarches, there is no appeal. Together that if Photius the author of the Schism, that still continues between the latin and Greek Churches had written these words to defend the invasion made upon the Sea of Ignatius, true and lawful Patriarch then alive. and to hinder the appeal that Ignatius had put in against Photius, and his pretended Synod, to the Pope; 〈◊〉 taking effect, it would have borne no weight. But so far 〈◊〉 it from being so, as not only Photius, but after him Simon Logothetae, Zonara, Balsamon, Alexios, Blastares, Harmenopolus, and other greek canonists, insert into their collections, the canons of the Cowcell of Sardica, and particularly the third, fourth, fifth, & by which the Episcopal appeals of all the provinces, are yielded to the Pope, but also that under the very title of the retractation of the sentences of Bishops, under which he registers this constitution of justine, he quotes third, fourth, fifth canon of the Council of Sardica, which ordain that the Episcopal appeals should be remitted to the Pope. For to this that Zonara. to preserve the Eastern appeals to the Patriarch of Conctantinople saith that the Council of Sardica, in making the Rule of the Episcopal appeals, intended to yield no more to the pope, but the western Appeals, We say besides this, that this exception 
Zonar. in con. Sard. c. 5.  defaulketh not Africa, which made a part of the western provinces, and was subject to the Provost of the Pretory of Italy; it is against the precise intention of the Council of Sardica, which published this Rule expressly, to abrogate the canon of the Council of Antioch, and to justify the restitution that Pope 〈◊〉 had made of saint ATHANASIUS Patriarch of Alexandria, and of Paul Bishop of Constantinople, & of Marcellus primate of Ancyra in Galatia, and of Asclepas Bishop of Gaza in Palestina, who had been deposed from their Seas, by the Counsels of Tyre, of Jerusalem of Antioch, & other Eastern Counsels: Iulium (saith Zosom) received Athanasius Bishop of Alexandria Paul Bishop of Constantinople Marcellus Bishop of Ancyra in Galatia, Asclepas Bishop of Gaza in Palestina, and Lucius Bishop of Andrinople into his communion; and because that to him for the dignity of his Sea, the care of all things belonged, he restored to each of them his Church. 
Sozom. hist. Eccl. l. 3. c. 7  And elsewhere speaking of the Fathers of the Council of Sardica they answered that they would not separate themselves from the communion of Athanasius and of Paul, and Principally for as much as 
Id ibid. c. 10.  julius' Bishop of Rome had examined their cause, and had not condemned them. And therefore Balsamon seeing that this evasion could not subsist, hath invented an other, which is that the council of Sardica had indeed yielded to the Pope, the appeals of all Bishops, but that Constantinople having since been erected to the title of the second Rome, the right of appeals hath been divided between the Pope, and the patriarch of Constantinople: Those things (said Balsamon commenting the third canon of 
Balsam. in Council Sardic c. 3.  the council of Sardica) which are here defined of the Pope, ought also to be extended to the Patriarch of Constantinople, because by diverse Canons (he meaneth the canons of the council of Chalcedon, and of the conncell surnamed 
Id. Ibidem l. 5.  Trullian, by which he pretends that he Bishop of Constantinople was made equal to the Pope excepting precedence) he hath been honoured with privileges in all things equal to those of the Pope. And again, commenting the fifth canon of the same council of Sardica; This privilege belongeth not to the Pope alone, that it should be necessary that every condemned Bishop have recourse 
Nil. de Prim. Pap l. 2.  to the Sea of Rome, but it ought also to be understood of the Sea of Constantinople. And Nilus Archbishop of Thessalonica; The twenty eight canon of the council of Chalcedom, and the thirty sixth of the sixth synod, honouring the Sea of Constantinople with the same privileges as the Sea of Rome, yield also manifestly the 〈◊〉 to the Sea of Constantinople. And so much for the Council of Sardica.    

CARDINAL perron's REPLY TO THE KING OF GREAT BRITAIN. THE FOURTH BOOK.  

THE ESTATE OF THE CHURCH IN THE EAST. CHAPT. I.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
HAd any one presumed to alter or disguise ever so little the faith approved by the whole world: it was easy even for a Child to surprise and discover in his novelty him that should bring in a different doctrine, and the robber of the truth being surprised, all the pastors of the world if it were needful roused themselves up, and being once stirred up gave themselves no rest, till they had taken away the evil from amongst them, and had provided for the security of Christ's flock. This was heretofore the designation and felicity of the Catholic church, but which endured nont many ages.   

THE REPLY.  
APPELLES' answered one day to one of this Scholars that had painted a Venus loaded with pearls, carcanets and jewels; because thou couldst not paint her fair, thou hast painted her rich: so though this description be not adorned with truth, which is the simple naked and natural beauty of history, it is eloquent and adorned with rich and magnificent words: But S. BASILL and S. HIEROM, paint out the estate of Religion in their time, in the east much otherwise: S. BASILL when he saith: To what shall we compare 
Basil.  
Magn.  the state of the present times certainly to a Sea-fight, when Sea Captains chased with the war, and inflamed to the combat, set one upon an other with a violent hate, and nourished with old injuries. And a while after. The troubles stirred up by the Princes of the earth, swallow up the people more horribly, than all kinds of 〈◊〉 winds and tempests, and a dark and sad night possesses the Churches, the lights that God had placed to illuminate the souls of men being banished from their Seas And S. HIEROME when he writes; Because the East striking against itself by the ancient fury of the people, tears in little morsels the undivided coat of our lord woven on high, and that the foxes destroy the vine of Christ in such sort, as 
Hieron. ad Damas.  it is difficult amongst the dry pits that have no water, to discern where the sealed fowtaine and the enclosed garden is; for this cause I have thought, that I ought to consult which the Chair of Peter, and the faith praised by the mouth of the Apostle. 
ep. 〈◊〉.  And a while after; Now in the west the sun of justice is risen; and in the East 
Id. ibidem.  that Lucifer which was fallen, hath set up his, Throne above the stars; you are the light of the world; you are the salt of the earth, you are the vessels of gold & of Silver: and the vessels of earth or wood, do here attend the rod of iron and the eternal And the history of the following ages doth even the same. For when 〈◊〉 rose up, and after he had been judged in the first instance by Flanianus Bishop of Constantinople, appealed or pretended to have appealed 
Leo ep. 8. & in ep. praeamb.  to the Pope, and was again judged and deposed in the second instance by him; what came of it? The Emperor Theodosius governed 
Concil. 〈◊〉. c. 4.  by 〈◊〉 an abettor of Eutyches, caused a Council to be held, under the title of General at Ephesus, where by force and by strong hand he caused, Dioscorus the Patron of Eutyches heresy to preside; the legates of the Pope for this cause, quitting the place, fled. In that Council Eutyches was restored; Flavianus deposed and slain, after he had nevertheless appealed from his condemnation to the Pope and the Eutychian heresy 
Val enter. epist. ad Theod os. in praeamb. Conc. 〈◊〉 c. 25.  was subscribed by Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria, Maximus Patriarch of Antioch, juutnall Patriarch of Jerusalem, and almost by all the Bishops of the Council, some by their good wills, and others by force. The Pope again takes the cause of the faith in hand, pursues the holding of a new Council which was that of Chalcedon, were that heresy is condemned and Dioscorus and Eutyches and all his abettors deposed and excommunicated, and in Dioscorus steed there was substituted in the patriarkshipp of Alexandria, Proterius a catolicke and partaker with the Council of Chalcedon: to Proterius there succeeded Timothy an 〈◊〉 and parricide of his Predecessor, who again set on foot the Eutychian heresy in the Sea of Alexandria and in Egypt, and disannulled there the decrees of the Council of Chalcedon; a while after, into the Sea of Antioch, there entered PETER surnamed the Tanner, likewise an enemy to the Council of Chalcedon, and professor of the heresy of 〈◊〉. Likewise there came to Constantinople Acacius, who communicated with Peter Bishop of Antioch: and there was installed in the Empire Zeno an Eutychian and disannuller of the Council of Chalcedon; and all the Eastern Church miserable rend by the factions of those that held, some for the Council, and some against it, and others, neither for nor against it, whom they called neuters, so long that after some changes of Patriarches, sometimes Catholics, and some times Eutychians, all the natural Churches of Egypt, and those of Ethiopia, that is to say, all that acknowledged the Egyptian Patriarch of Alexandria have remained and persevered still to this day in the profession of the Eutychian heresy. Such was then in the east (under the Emperors, abusing their authority) the designation and felicity of the Church, and such was the facility even for Children (except those that cast their eyes upon the communion of the Roman Church) to know the robbers of the truth, and for pastors to drive away the evil from among them, For as for the west, the Patriarshipp of the Roman Church, hath always had this particular blessing that within the 〈◊〉, of the extent thereof, the Catholic Church, notwithstanding the infidelity of the Emperors, had been without comparison more visible and more eminent, (as being the Ensign Colonel, and that where to the others ought to have regard, and under which they should gather themselves) then in the other Patriarkships. From whence it is that what S. HIEROM writes in the form of a history of former times 
Hieron. ad Damas. ep. 57  when he saith to Pope Damasus. The wicked children having dispersed their patrimony; amongst you 〈◊〉 is preserved uncorrupted, the inheritance of the fathers: 
Leo ad Marcian. Aug. ep. 〈◊〉.  S. LEO seemeth to say it, inform of a prophecy of those that are to follow, who pronounces, That none of the patriarchal 〈◊〉 (saving that of Rome) shall remain firm and stable.    

What the division of the Empire hath wrought to the division of the Church. CHAP. II.  

The continuance of the King's answer,  
FOR after the Empire being overthrown, and the form of the common wealth changed, new governments have risen up, many in number, different in manners, distinct in languages, laws, and institutions. The division of the Empire hath drawn after it, the division of the Catholic Church, and all those things that we say now to have served 〈◊〉 to the preservation of the union and external Communion of the Catholic Church, have ceased by little and little.   

THE REPLY:  
THE division of the Empire, hath not caused the division of the Church, especially in the West; for whatsoever multitude of governments have had place there, under the title of Empire, Kingdom, Principality, and Common wealth, and whatsoever difference of manners, languages, laws, and institutions, that have reigned there, the Church hath been no more visible in the time when the Empire was one and ruled over all the East and west, than it hath been under this diversity of Princes and governments. Also the unity of the Church was not foretold by the Prophets, only for the time wherein there should be but one temporal monarch in the world, if ever that title could have belonged to any Prince, but also for that time wherein there should be several kings and Administrators of Estates, according to this Prophecy 
Psalm. 101.  of the Psalmist: The Kings and Kingdoms shall agree in one to serve our 
Aug. l. de unit. Eccl. c. 〈◊〉  Lord. Which caused S. AUGUSTINE to say, under colour that in the whole world, Kingdoms are often divided; yet for all that, Christian unity is not 〈◊〉, for as much as the Catholic Church remains on either part. And indeed, that the unity of the Church depends not from the unity of the Empire but from the relation to a visible centre of the Ecclesiastical communion, it appeared sufficiently even in the time of the greatest unity and extent of the Empire, when the Christians which were under Firmus King of the Barbarians in Africa, under Mania Queen of the Saracens; under Cosroes King of Persia, states all distinct, yea the most part of the time, enemies to the Roman Empire: And after in Damascus and other neighbouring Provinces under the Kings, of the Agarenians, did all agree in the union and communion of the Catholic Church. For as for the devisions which are at this day in the East, every one knows, that that of Egypt and Ethiopia, hath begun from the time of the unity of the Empire; And that of the Armenians likewise; as appears by the decisions made against them in the Canons of the Council holden under justinian 〈◊〉: And that of the Nestorians, and jacobites which have yet to this day their sect in Mesopotamia & other parts of Asia likewise. And as for the Greek Church, it is certain, that although it began to be divided since the separation of the Empire, nevertheless the cause of the division, was not the division of the Empire under which it persevered yet many years in unity with the Latin, but the Schism between the two competitors of the Patriarkship of Constantinople, Ignatius and Photius, to which to make it the more lasting, heresy was added, and which the Emperors, (according as they have been good or evil) have endeavoured themselves to foment or stop, and there have not wanted general Counsels, even of the two several Churches, to extinguish this division when they have desired it. For histories are full of these examples, witness that which was holden at Constantinople under the Emperor Basilius for the restitution of Ignatius, that which was holden under Pope Innocent the third which we call the great Council of Lateran, to reunite the Greek church with the Latin; and that which was holden for the same effect at Florence under Eugenius the fourth at which the Emperor and the Patriarch of Greece assisted in person. As also the division of the Empire, and the rule of the Greek Emperors, & after, of the Mahometan Princes, did not hinder the Churches that acknowledged the Patriarch of the Syrian tongue, whom we call Maronites, from persevering in the communion of the Roman Church. In such sort, as this variety and division of sects in the East, can not be attributed to the defect of the unity of the Empire, since in the time that the Empire was most united, these troubles and innovations had such place therein, as Socrates and Sozomene do in the time of the Emperor Constantius, set the mount Tuscis in Illiria, for a bound between the quiet peace of the Church, and the tempest and turbulency of heretics. But it ought to be attributed to the want of constancy of the Eastern people, or rather to the blessing of God upon the Roman church, which would show that this prophecy, Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock, I will 
Matth. 16  build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it, hath had some more special effect for the Sea of S. PETER, then for those of the other patriarchs, according to that oracle of the great Leo: Besides the stone 
Leo ep. 52.  that our Lord hat set for a foundation, no other building shall be steadfast.    

Of the interpretation of these words: Thou art Peter, 
Rock in French is, Pierre, in Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Syriack Cepha which words in the self same languages are the name of Peter.  and upon this Rock, I will build my Church. CHAPT. III.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
SINCE that time, the Catholic Church, in truth hath not ceased to be, for it shall always be, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against her, who is founded on Christ the true stone; and in the faith of PETER and of the other Apostles.   

THE REPLY.  
THat some times the Fathers expound these words; Upon this Rock I will build my Church, of the Faith of S. PETER, and say that the Church was built upon the confession of PETER: And that some times they expound it of the person of PETER and say that the Church hath been founded upon the person of PETER, they are not contrary expositions, the one excluding the other, but conjoint, the one including the other, for they intent the Church (to speak the School language) is built causallie upon the confession of PETER; and formally upon the ministry of the person of PETER; that is to say, the confession of PETER was the cause werefore Christ chose him, to constitute him for the foundation of the ministry of his Church: By that (saith saint HILARY) the blessed Confession hath obtained his reward: and 
Hilar. in Matt. c. 16.  that the person of saint Peter, hath been that upon which our Lord hath properly built his Church. So as to say that his Church is built upon the confessio of PETER, is not to deny that it is built upon the person of PETER 
Hieron. ad Pammach. adverse error. joann. Hierosol. ep 61.  but it is to express the cause wherefore it is built upon him; no more than to sale with saint HIEROME, that PETER walked not upon the waters, but Faith, is not to deny, that saint PETER walked truly, properly, and formally, upon the water; but it is to express, that the cause that made him walk there, was not the activity or natural virtue of his person, but the faith that he had given to the words of Christ. And therefore, as these two propositions, the faith of PETER walked upon the waters, and the person of PETER walked upon the waters, are both true, but in a different sense, for the faith of PETER walked upon the waters causallie, as the Schooleme sare; that is to say, it was the cause that the person of saint PETER walked there, and the person of saint PETER walked there truly, properly, and formally; so these two propositions the Church was built upon the confession of PETER, and the Church was built upon the person of PETER, are both jointly true, but in different sense; for the confession of PETER is the causal foundation of the Church, that is to say, it is the cause for which the Church is built upon the person of PETER, rather than upon that of any other Apostle, for as much as the primacy of this confession not proceeding nor prevented from or by any humane instruction, but proceeding immediately from the pure revelation of God, the other Apostles being silent & not knowing what to answer, was the cause, in favour whereof Christ chose (preferring him before all others) saint PETER to constitute him the foundation of his Church. And the person of Peter is the formal foundation of the Church; that is to say, him upon whose ministry, by preferring him before all others, Christ hath built and edified his Church. But the differenc of these two expositions is that the one is immediate and the other mediate; the one direct and the other collateral; the one literal, and the other moral the one original, and perpetual, and the other accessory and temporal; the one consigned from the beginning, and the other introduced by occasion. For before the Arrians were risen up; that is to say before the age of Constantine and of the first Council of Nicaea, the interpretation that was current in the Church, was that, not of the confession of PETER, but of the person of PETER. As when 〈◊〉 saith in his Book of Prescriptions against heretics; Was there 
〈◊〉 de 〈◊〉, c. 32.  any thing concealed from Peter who was called the stone of the building of the Church? And ORIGEN: See what is said to the great foundation of the Church, and the solid stone upon which Christ hath built his Church. And elsewhere, Peter upon whom the 
Origeu, in Exod. c. 14 hom. 5.  Church of Christ hath been built, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail. And in the comentary upon the Epistle to the Romans translated by saint 
Orig. apud Euseb. hist. Eccl. l. 6. c. 15.  HIEROME; When the Sovereign authority of feeding the Sheep was given to Peter, and that upon him as upon a stone, the Church was built, the confession of any other virtue was not exacted of him, but only that of Charity. And S. CYPRIAN, 
Id in epist. ad Roman. c. 6. l. 5.  Peter whom the Lord chose first, and upon whom he built his Church. And again; God is one, and Christ is one, and the Church is one, and the Chair is one, built by 
Cyprian. ep 71.  the voice of our Lord upon Peter. But after the coming of Constantine, when 
Idem ep. 4.  the Arrians had lifted themselves up against the divinity of Christ, the Father's finding no passage in the scripture, more express to prove unto them that JESUS CHRIST was the son of God, not by adoption, but 
Mat. 16.  by nature, than this Confession of saint PETER, Thou art Christ the Son of the living God, in which they held, that the word (living) had been expressly inserted, to show that JESUS CHRIST, was the son of God by generation; for as much as to engender, as say the Philosophers, is proper to living things, they took care as much as was possible for them, to 〈◊〉 the dignity of this confession. And because that in favour thereof, and for it S. PETER had been constituted, foundation of the Church, they licenced themselves to call it by Metonimy, that is to say, by translation of the name from the effect to the cause, the foundation of the Church, that they might have the more occasion to declaim against those that destroyed it, in reproaching them that they ruined the foundation of the Church that is to say, the confession in favour whereof, and for whose cause he that had made it, had been constituted foundation of the Church, but nevertheless, to show that they intended not, in doing this to exclude the person of PETER from being the formal foundation of the Church, that which the same fathers had said in one place of the confession of PETER, as causal foundation of the Church, they said it in an other, yea often times in the same place, of the person of PETER, as formal foundation of the Church. This appears by saint HILARY, who 
Hilar. de Trinit. 1. 6  disputing in his works of the Trinity against the Arrians, after he had said, This faith is the foundation of the Church, by this faith the gates of hell are disabled against her; this faith hath the keys of the heavenly Kingdom: Adds immediately after, to declare that this should be intended of the saith of saint PETER causallie and meritoriouslie, but of his person formally; that is to say, that this confession hath only been the meritorious cause, for which saint PETER hath received these things, but that it is the person of PETER, that hath properly and formally received 
Ibidem.  them: This is he, that in the silence of all the other Apostles, acknowledging beyond the capacity of human infirmity, the Sonn of God, by the Revelation of the Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Confession of his blessed faith, a supereminent place. And a little after. He hath confessed Christ to be the Sonn of God, and for that he is called blessed, This is the Revelation of the Father, this is the foundation of the Church; this is the assurauce of eternity, from hence he had the keys of the Kingdom of 〈◊〉; from hence his earthly judgements become heavenly. And a little before; After the confession of the Sacrament, the blessed Simon is submitted 
Ibidem. 10  to the edification of the Church, receiving the keys of the heavenly Kingdom. And in his commentaries upon the very place of the words of JESUS 
Hilar. in Matt. c. 16.  CHRIST, The confession of Peter hath received a truly worthiereward. 
Id. ibidem.  And a little after: in the title of a new name, blessed foundation of the Church, and worthy Stone of her edification, that destroyed the laws of 〈◊〉, and the gates of the deeps, and all the prisons of Death: O blessed Porter of heaven, to whose arbitrement, the keys of the eternal entry are delivered, whose judgements on earth have authority to prejudge in heaven. And elsewhere. Christ had so great a zeal to suffer for the Salvation of human kind as Peter the first Confessor of the Sonn of God, the foundation of the Church, the Porter of the heavenly kingdom, the judge of heaven upon earth, dissuading him, he called him by the name of Satan! And so saint chrysostom 
Id in Psal. 13.  interprets it; that is to say, sometimes of his faith, Upon this stone (said he) that is to say, upon the faith of this confession: And sometimes 
Chry so. in Matt. c. 6.  of his person: He promiseth (saith he) to make a fisherman more solid than any kind of stones. And upon the fiftieth Psalm, hear what he saith to PETER. That Pillar, that foundation, and therefore called Peter as made a Rock by faith: And again, that Pillar of the Church, that basis of 
Cyrill. de Trinit. l. 4  the faith, that be add of the Apostolic flock. And saint CYRILL doth even the same, sometimes of his faith, He hath (said he) called the immutable faith of Peter his disciple, a Rock, and sometimes of his person, he foretold him he should no more 〈◊〉 called Simon but 〈◊〉; signifiing most aptly by that word, that upon him, as upon a 〈◊〉 and a steadfast stone he should build his Church. And this may be said of the first point of this Article, which is of building of the Church, upon the faith, or upon the person of PETER: Let us pass forward to the second which is of that of the other Apostles. The Church saith his majesty, is founded upon the Confession of PETER & the other Apostles. Here it is needful to distinguish the diverse uses that this word, foundation of the Church, receives in the Scripture; for it is one thing to be the foundation of the faith of the Church, and an other thing to be the foundation of the Ministry of the Church And again, the foundation of the faith of the Church, is of two sorts, for there is an obiective foundation of the faith of the Church, and a suggestive foundation of the faith of the Church. I call that an obiective foundation of the faith of the Church, which is the first object that the Church is obliged to know and embrace for doctrine, of faith; and that is Christ, of whom S. PAUL saith, None can 〈◊〉 any other foundation besides that which 
1. Corinth. c. 3. vers. 11  is already laid, that is Chrict. For the first thing that enters into the object of the Christian faith, as it is Christian, is Christ God and Man crucified for our Sins; And all the other doctrines of Faith have no other place then as superedifications and accessories to that. I call that a suggestive foundation of faith of the Church upon which the Church grounds and assures the belief of those things which she holds for doctrines of faith, and this again is double, the one principal and original, to wit, the holy Ghost, of whom our Lord saith; He shall suggest to you all things that I 
joan. 14. vers. 26.  have told you, and the other instrumental and organical; to wit, the voice and pen of those, that he hath chosen to declare unto us the mysteries of faith, with certain and infallible authority. And in this sense, not only all the Apostles and Evangelists, but also all the prophets, are foundations of the faith of the Church according to this Apostolical sentence; We are edified upon the foundation of the Prophets and of the Apostles. And 
Eph. 2. vers. 20.  in this same sense saint PAUL said in the second to the Corinthians, 
2 Cor. c.  That he had been nothing inferior to the most excellently great of the Apostles. 
11. verse 5. etc. 12. verse. 〈◊〉.  And in the Epistle to the Galatians, That he had not received his Gospel from men, but from God: And that those that seemed to be something; that is to say, those that for the more particular familiarity that they had with our Lord, it seemed they should be more eminent in the doctrine of Faith, and should be the Pillars of Faith, had taught him nothing. For to be something according to the stile of those 〈◊〉 the east, is a word not of contempt, but of great and extraordinary estimation.  
I call him foundation of the ministry of the Church, that hath the supereminence and superintendency of the government and ministry of the Church, which I have distinguished from the foundation of the Faith, not but that the primitive and original Ministry of the Church, comprehends the Office of revealing the Faith; and that the perpetual and ordinary ministry of the Church, comprehends the office of preseruiug and propagating the Faith, from whence it is that saint PAUL calleth the 
1. Timoth. c. 3. vers. 15  Church, The pillar and foundation of faith: But because the foundation of the Ministry extends further; and many, as saint LUKE amongst others, have been foundations of the Faith of the Church, who nevertheless have not been foundations of the Ministry of the Church. Now it is of this kind of Foundation, to wit of the Foundation of the ministry of the Church, that is treated off in these words of our Lord: Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church; as it appears by what follows of the keys, and of the power to bind and lose. This quality then of foundation of the government and ministry of the Church to dispute; whether since it have been extended and communicated to the whole Body of the Apostles, it is an other point. For what S. PAUL saith: If they be ministers of Christ, I am so more than they, is to be 
2. Corinth c. 〈◊〉. vers. 23.  understood of the excess in the labour of the Ministry, and not in the authority. But at the least, when our Lord pronounced these words, 
Matth 16. vers. 18.  Thou art Peter and upon this Rock I will build my Church: It is certain that in that instant and in those words, it was conferred to none but to saint PETER; for the words are all pronounced in singular terms, 
Ibid. vers. 19  and excluding plurality, Blessed art thou Simon Sonn of 〈◊〉, and I say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church: and I will give thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven. Which saint AMBROSE declares, who after he had said, This man to wit, PETER when he had heard; but 
Ambros. de incarnate. Sacram. c. 4  〈◊〉; what say ye that I am? presently not forgetful of his place he made the primacy, adds to it, It is then this Peter that answered before the rest, but for the rest, and therefore he is called Foundation. Which saint CYPRIAN likewise acknowledges 
Cypr. de unit Eccl  in these words: Upon him being one, he built the Church. And it is not to be said, that the Condition of Foundation of the Church having been given to saint PETER in favour and for recompense of his Coafession, all the other Apostles that had part in his Confession, ought also to have their part therein. For the quality of foundation of the Church was not given to saint PETER in favour of his Confession simply, for than it should be common to all the faithful; but in favour of the primacy of his Confession, wherein the other Apostles had no actual part, but only by consent and non repugnancy, for as much as saint PETER only answered, as illuminated immediately from God, the others being silent and not knowing what to say, and learning it but my the means of saint PETER'S Answer: He was (saith saint 
Hilar. in Matt 〈◊〉 16. cyril Catech. 11.  〈◊〉 made worthy of first knowing what there was of God, in Christ. And 〈◊〉 CYRILL of Jerusalem: All the other Apostles being silent, for this doctrine was above their reach, Peter the Prince of the Apostles, and the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Church, not of his own invention, neither persuaded by human reason, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his soul by God the Father said to him thou art Christ the Sonn of the living God. And saint ATHANASIUS many years before them: 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Father revealed to Peter those things whereof our Lord demanded him, 
Athan. contr. Arian. Orat. 4.  〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not doubt but the same Lord who inquired, as if he had first revealed to 〈◊〉 those things that he had known from the Father, he asks him humanly, to 〈◊〉 in enquiring carnally that Peter that should tell them knew them 〈◊〉.  
FOR that in the sixth of S. JOHN, S. PETER answers in common for all the Apostles. We believe and know, thou art Christ the Sonn of the living God, besides that the Latin editions have not the word, living, We say it was a later thing, for as much as when saint PETER answered, We believe and know that thou art Christ the Son of the living God, he had been already constituted head and Prince of the other Apostles, and in this quality he answered alone for all the 
Cyrill in joan. lib. 4 c. 28.  rest, as saint CYRILL testifies in these words; By one that presided, or that was preeminent, all answered: and had already received the promises of our Lord, that upon him he would build his Church. As S. CYPRIAN declares in these words. Peter speaks here upon whom the Church had been built. And therefore as the Apostles had part in the primacy 
Cyp. ep. 69  of this confession only by adherence and non-repugnancie, so our Lord gave them part in the authority he had given to S, Peter by adherence and communication with S. PETER; that is to say, under condition of communicating and adhering and remaining in unity with saint PETER. And yet this part that he promised and gave them in the rule and ministry of the Church, was afterward, to wit, as in right in the eighteenth of saint MATHEW; What ye bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven. And as the instalment into the possession in the twentieth of saint JOHN Receive the holy Ghost, whose sins ye forgive, shall be forgiven, to the end to shewthat to saint PETER only the condition of being a Rock, that is to sa, rule and foundation of the building of the Church had been principally and originally given; and that afterwards it was extended to the other Apostles, it was by aggregation and association, and by communicating and adhering with him, and as having relation and correspondence to him, as to the Centre and middle form of the verity of the Church. For as God gave first his spirit to Moses, and after took of the Spirit that he had given to Moses, and gave thereof to the seven tie two Elders, not that God took away from Moses any portion of the spirit that he had given him, not that the spirit of God was divisible, but to the end to establish and show a relation of unity, dependency, and adherency of the seventy two Elders to Moses. So in some sort (for I compare not the two histories wholly) our Lord gave first the whole authority of the ministry and the Chair Apostolic, to saint PETER alone; I intent as in right, and not in actual possession, which he received not till after the Resurrection, and after 〈◊〉 it to all the twelve Apostles in common, to the end to show the relation of dependency, unitié, and adherence, that they ought to have with 
Mach. hom 26.  saint PETER, whom upon this occasion Macharius an ancient Egyptian divine, calls the successor of Moses; Afterward (said he) to Moses, succeeded Peter, to whom the new Church of Christ and the true priesthood hath been committed. Which hath caused the Fathers to say, that there was but one Chair, which was the Chair of PETER; but that in this Chair all the Apostles were placed, to wit, by the adherence, communion, and unity that they had with S. PETER. In the Episcopal Chair (saith saint OPTATUS Milevitanus) there is set the head of all the Apostles Peter, from 
Oped Milevit. contra Parmen l. 2.  whence he also hath been called Cephas, to the end, that in this only Chair, unity might be preserved in all, lest the other Apostles should attribute to themselves, every one his Chair a part, but that he might be a Schismatic & 〈◊〉 that against this only Chair, should erect an other. And therefore also the surname of PETER, by which this Condition of being the foundation of the rule of the Church is designed, hath been given to him only to bear it in the title of a proper name, and not to any other Apostle, to show that to him by excellency and eminency over all the rest, appertained the thing whereof he alone bore the name. For since our Lord should by the word PETER design the condition of being the ministerial foundation of the Church, for what cause should he affect it to Peter alone to bear it in the title of a proper and ordinary name, and not give it to any other, if he were not to bea foundation of the Church in an other manner then the rest? Which S. BASILL hath in such sort acknowledged, as desiring to show the difference which is between the substance and the hipostaticall proprieties of any subject, he allegeth for example of the substance, the substance of humanity, which is common to PETER & PAUL: although (said he) the appellations be different, yet the substance of Peter and 
Basil. contra Eunom l. 2.  Paul, and of all men is one; and allegeth amongst the examples of the hypostatical individual and incommunicable conditions of PETER, that is to say, which are particular to him only, and are not common to him with saint PAUL, nor with any other, the condition of being 
Id. ibid.  the foundation of the Church; Because, said he, the names of men signify not their substances, but the proprieties whereby each of them is designed in particular. From thence it is, that when we hear the name of Peter, we understand not his substance, etc. but conceive the sense of the proprieties which are particular to him. For as soon as we hear this word, we understand Peter the Son of jonas, he that was of Bethsaida, he that was Brother to Andrew; he that of a Fisherman was made an Apostle, he that 〈◊〉 reason of the supereminency of his Faith, received upon him the edification of the Church.  
AND for this same cause to saint PETER only there hath been conferred singularly separately and apart, the authority of the rule of the Church, and to all the rest only in common and jointly with him to the end to show, that he was the original, the source the centre and the beginning of the unity of the Church, and that no other out of his Communion could exercise the rule and ministry thereof, but that the rest had right to exercise it, it is only as associated, and aggregated with him, and as grafted and inserted upon him. For our Lord never said singularly to any of the Eleven; Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and I will give thee the keys of the Kingdom of heaven; nor, I have prayed for thee that thy faith shall not fail: And finally, Thou being converted, confirm thy brethren, nor, lovest thou me more than these? feed my sheep: But only hath said in general to all the 
Matt. 18. vers. 18.  Body of the Apostles, saint PETER being Colleague, present, and comprehended therein, that which he had said before 
joan. 20. vers. 23.  to saint PETER alone, as to the head, That which ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven, and they whose sins ye forgive, shall be forgiven. Which hath moved saint CYPRIAN to say, that Christ hath instituted saint PETER the original of unity: PETER (saith he) upon whom Christ hath built his Church, 
Cypr. de unit. Eccl. Id. ep. 40.  and instituted him the original of unity. And again, One chair built upon Peter by the voice of our Lord. And for this occasion as although in a tree, there be but the stock, and the body of the tree only that succeeds, and is tied by direct continuance with the root, nevertheless the other branches are tied to it by oblique and collateral succession and continuance. So though there be but only the Bishop of Rome that is saint PETER'S successor in direct succession, nevertheless all the Bishops are esteemed in some sort to be set in saint PETER'S Chair, and to be in a manner saint PETER'S successors; to wit by oblique and indirect succession, because of the communication that they have with the Chair of S, PETER. But the Bishops are never said, neither in their whole body, nor separately to be successor to any other particular Apostle; but are said either in general to be the Apostles successors, or in particular, successors to S. PETER, as to him that for being the head of the Apostleship, contains in virtue all the Apostolic Body, so as never any one Bishop hath called himself, successor to any other Apostle, except those that have succeeded locally to any one of the other Apostles; as the Bishops of Jerusalem are in title successors to saint JAMES.  
BUT against this exposition, the adversaries to the Primacy form thriteen oppositions; the first, that our Lord adds presently after, speaking to Peter, Got behind me Satan. The seconde that he cries out; If any one amongst you desire to be greatest, he shall be the least. The third that S. PETER forbids from domineering over the flocks. The fourth that the Apostles sent PETER: and JOHN into Samaria. The fifth that S. JAMES voted last in the Council of Jerusalem. The sixth that S. PAUL, names S. JAMES before S. PETER. The seaventh that the same S. PAUL saith, that the Gospel of the Gentiles was committed to him, as that of the circumcision to PETER. The eighth that he saith S, PETER walked not right in the Gospel. The ninth that he saith he resisted him to his face, because he was reprovable. The tenth that S. CYPRIAN writes, that the other Apostles were the same that Peter was. The eleventh that EUSEBIUS' reports out of S. CLEMENT Alexandrinus, that PETER, JAMES, and JOHN contested not amongst themselves for the honour but made JAMES Bishop of the Apostles. The twelfth that Saint CHRISOSTOME writeth, that the other Apostles yielded the Throne to JAMES. And the thirteenth, That the same S. CHRISOSTOME writes, that the Principality was committed to JAMES. To the first then of 
Matt. 16. vers. 23.  these objections, which is, that our Lord said a while after to S. PETER, Go behind me Satan; We answer. S. HIEROME hath solued it in these 
Hieron. in Matt. c. 16.  words: This blessing, beatitude, and edification of the Church upon Peter, is promised to Peter in future times, and not given to him in time present. I will build (said he) my Church upon thee. To the seconde which is, that our Lord 
Matt. c. 20 vers. 26. & Marc. c. 10. vers. 43.  cries elsewhere; If any one amongst you desire to be greatest, let him be the least, We answer, he doth there forbid the desire, and not the effect of the Primacy; the Ambition, and not the thing, the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and not the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, witness this train that follows, as the Sonn of man is come into the world, not to be served, but to serve; By which he pro pounds himself to his disciples for an example not of an Anarchy, but of Superiority accompanied with humility. To the third Which is that S. PETER 
〈◊〉 Petr. c. 5. verse 3.  writes; not domineering over the flocks, We answer, that the Greek word 
Match. 20. vers. 25. & Marc. 10. vers. 24.  signifieth a violent Dominion, (such as that whereof our Lord said: The kings of the nations domineer over them, And such as S. HIEROME representeth it in these words: The Princes of the Churches are wont to oppress the 
Hieron. 16 in Ezech. c. 18.  People with arrogance, of whom it is written, they have constituted thee Prince, be not puffed up, but be amongst them, as one of them: And not a presidency and fatherly direction, such as was that of Samuel over the people of Israel, who after he had exercised the Government of Israel, and judged 
Samuel apud 〈◊〉 ren. l. 4. adverse haeres. c 44  the people many years, justified himself in the end, saying: I have conversed with you from my youth to this 〈◊〉; answer me in the presence of God, and of his anointed, if I have taken any man's bullock or his Ass, or if I have commanded by force and oppressed any one of you. And such as that whereof saint PAUL said, Obey your prelates and be subject to them. 
Hebr. 13. vers. 17.  And elsewhere; Let him that presides, preside in all diligence. And our Lord himself, which is the wise and faithful servant, that our Lord hath constituted 
Rom. 〈◊〉. verse 〈◊〉.  over his family? It is Peter (saith saint AMBROSE) chosen by the judgement 
Matth. 24 Ambr. de fide l. 5. c. 1.  of our Lord to feed his flock, who hath merited to hear, feed my lambs, feed my sheep. To the fourth which is, that the history of the Acts testifies, that the Apostles when it was in agitation to form the Church of Samaria, sent thither PETER and JOHN: we answer, it was a mission of request, as that when the Israelites sent Phinees their high priest, and the princes of the tribes, and not a mission of authority. To the fifth which is, that S. JAMES voted last in the Council of 〈◊〉: We answer, that in Counsels, contrary to the order of secular companies, those that preside vote first. And namely saint HIEROME saith, that saint PETER, from whose words S. JAMES 
Hieron. ad Aug. ep. 89  took his Rule; was the Prince of this decree. To the sixth, which is, that S. Paul writes, that james Cephas, and john, seeing the grace that God had conferred 
Galat. 2.  upon him, gave to him and to Barnabas the right hands of fellowship: We answer, that the greek edition of Complutum and many several Readins, Greek and Latin have it Cephas, james and john. Witness S. CHRISOSTOME, who in his commentary upon the Epistle to the Galatians; reads Cephas, james, and john; and Theodoret, who in his commentary upon the fifteenth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, alleging this passage, reports it in these words: The Apostle teacheth this manifestly in the Epistle to the Galatians, for he saith; Peter james and john, who seem to be the pillars, gave the right hands of fellowship to me and to Barnabas: And saint AUGUSTINE who as well in the text as in the commentary reads, Cephas, james, and john, And saint HIEROME, who not only 
Hieron de script. 〈◊〉 cc. in Paulo.  both in the text and the commentary reads Cephas, james and john but even in his writings against Heluidius, citeth the text of saint PAUL in these words: Cephas james and Ishn. And moreover elsewhere speaking of saint PAUL'S Ordination to the Apostleship saith. Paul was ordained Apostle of the Gentiles, by Peter, and james, and john. And therefore when it is found written in any place; james, Cephas, and john, as in the poem of Theodoret upon the Epistle to the Ephesians; and in that of the Epistle to the Hebrews; we say that this order is to have reference to the priority of the knowledge that james received of the fruits of the grace of saint PAUL: for as much as when Paul and Barnabas came the first time from Antioch, into Jerusalem they found but only saint JAMES because 
Act. 12.  saint PETER was in prison. And indeed not only throughout the scripture where saint PETER is named with the other Apostles, he is first named; or if he be last named, it is in increasing and rising by degrees: 
1. Corint. 9  As when saint PAUL saith; The other Apostles and the brethren of our Lord, and Cephas. But also, when there is question of making the General catalogue of the Apostles, saint PETER is always first placed, and judas last, and all the rest without order, or at least without the title of second or third to show that there was not only handled simply primacy of order, but of dignity; and he is not only set down first, but he is set first with the expression of the word first. The first (saith S. MATTHEW) 
Matt. 10.  is Peter; which Beza finds so to press him, as he chargeth falsehood upon this place of the Gospel. I suspect (saith Beza) that this 
Beza in Matt. c. 10.  word (FIRST) hath been added by some one that would establish the primacy of Peter; for that saint ANDREW was called before saint PETER, because 
Ep iph haeres. 51.  saint ANDREW (as saint EPIPHANIUS saith) was the eldest. From whence it is, that Bethsaida, is called the city of Andrew and of Peter. 
Idem ibid.  This was in the first vocation described by saint JOHN, and before our Lord had said to saint PETER; Thou shalt be called Peter; in which word contained implicitly, the promise to make him VICAR of the true Rock, and to constitute him, ministerial head of the Church; and not in 
Matth. 16.  the second vocation described by saint MATHEW, and made after the 
Epiph. ubi supra.  imposition of the name of Peter; in the which as S. EPIPHANIUS saith; 
Galat. 2. vers. 7.  Peter preceded his brother.  
To the seaventh which is that saint PAUL writes, That the Gospel of the circumcision had been committed to PETER and the Gospel of the uncircumcision to him: We answer, this clause is not a division of the authority of ministry, but a more especial testimony of the blèssing of God upon S. PETER to persuade the jews, and upon saint PAUL to persuade the gentils? otherwise S. PAUL, had been excluded from preaching the Gospel to the jews; and nevertheless wheresoever he came, addressed himself first to the jews: and saint PETER from declaring the Gospel to the Gentiles, yet nevertheless, it was by his ministry, that God first opened the gate of the Church to the Gentiles; as appears both by the history of the conversion of Cornelius, and by the protestation that he made to the Council of 
Act. 10. v. 3.  
Act. 15. v. 7.  Jerusalem in these words: You know that God from the days of old hath willed to call the Gentiles by my mouth. To the eighth which is, that the same 
Galat. 2. v. 14.  S. PAUL saith: that saint PETER abstaining to eat with the Gentiles 
Tertull. de prescript. c. 23.  upon the coming of the jews, walked not with right steps in the Gospel: We answer, that it was, as Tertullian saith; a vice not of doctrine, but of conversation, and which consisted more in the occasion, then in 
1. Cor. 9  the thing; since saint PAUL himself; made himself, after ward a jew 
Act. 16.  
Act. 12.  to the jews, and a Gentile to the Gentiles, that he might gain all; and 
Gal. 2.  circumcised Timothy, and purified himself in the temple. To the ninth which is, that he adds, that he resisted S. PETER to his face, or in his presence, which is a phrase which we are accustomed to use, to express a resistance to any more eminent person because he was reprovable, or according to the Greek and S. HIEROME, reproved: We answer, 
Hieron. in epist. ad Galat. c. 2.  this resistance was not a reprehension of authority, but a reprehension of charity, as those of jethro to Moses, or of S. BERNARD to Pope 
Exod. 18.  Eugenius, that is to say, a reprehension that excluded not the superiority 
Bernard. de considerate l. 4.  of the reproved over the reprover: Witness these words of saint Aug. you see what saint Cyprian saith, that the holy Apostle Peter, in whom there shined 
August. de baptism. cont. Donat. l. 2.  so great a grace of the Primacy, being reproved by saint Paul, did not answer that he had the Primacy, and would not be reproved by new men later than himself. And again, The Apostle PETER hath left a more rare example of humility to posterity, in teaching men not to disdain reproof from their inferiors, than Paul in teaching the meaner to resist the greater, saviug charity for the defence of the truth. And these of saint CHRISOSTOME, giving 
Chrys. in ep. ad Galat. c. 2.  the reason of the humility that S. PETER showed in this action And from hence it comes (saith he) that Paul reproves, and Peter bears it; to the end, 
Cypr. de unit. Eccl.  that while the Master reproved holds his peace, scholars may change their opinion.  
TO the tenth objection which is, that S. CYPRIAN saith, that the other Apostles were the same that Peter was, endued with like authority and power. It is true but saint CYPRIAN speaks there of the internal and essential power of the Apostleship, and of the external and accidental power to the Apostleship, that is to say, that they were equal as concerning power, but not concerning the order of the exercise of the power: for the understanding whereof it must be known, that there are two things requisite to exercise the Apostleship lawfully, the one to exercise it with authority: for those that exercise it without power, as the false Apostles were usurpers, and sacrilegious persons, witness this sentence of saint PAUL, None attributes honour to himself, but he that is called like Aaron. 
Hebr. 5.  the other to exercise it in unity. For those that had exercised it out of unity had been schismatics, although they had true commission 
Opt. Milevit. contr. Parm. l. 2.  and authority to exercise it. At Rome (saith Optatus Milevitanus:) there hath been placed a Chair for Peter, that unity might be preserved by all, lest the other Apostles should attribute to every one his own. And again; he repeateth the knowledge that saint PETER had of the divinity of the Sonn of God; the promise that he had made him, to die with him; and how he had thrice denied him; And adds: yet nevertheless, for the good of unity, he had not merited to be separated from the number of the Apostles. And a little after: They remained all innocent, and a Fisherman received the keys, that the negotiation of unity might be form, etc. without which thing, unity which is so necessary, could not be. Now to preserve that unity, in which the internal and essetinall authority of the Apostleship ought to be exercised, it was necessary first to have a subject, which should be as the centre, the head, and root, of this unity, and by relation and adherence whereto all the college of the Apostles, and all the Body of the Church might be manitained in unity. For the things which are plural by themselves, and are not one with local unity, cannot without losing their undivided plurality, be reduced to a visible unity, unless by relation to some thing, which by itself may be visibly one. And secondly, to maintain this unity it is necessary further, beside the internal authority, essential to the Apostleship, there should be an other external authority, and accessary to the Apostleship, which might have the superintendency over the care of the preservation of unity, to cause the Apostles to exercise their Apostleship in unity. And as the office of the cause is to rule his effect, he that should be the beginning and original of this unity, should likewise have the superintendency over the rest, for what concerns the preservation of unity; and by consequence, that to him should belong, the supereminent jurisdiction over things necessary to the maintenance of unity; that is to say, over things necessary to prevent schism, and hinder the disorder and confusion of the exercise of the ministry; as are the distinction, and distribution, either mediate or immediate ofiurisdiction; the suspension & limitation of the exercise of the ministry, and other such like. Not that the Apostles for their maintenance in unity, had need that the effect of this Authority should be practised so evidently over them as over their successors, because of the assistance that they had every one in particular of the Spirit of God; but to the end to propound to the Church a form and a model of the order that she should keep after their decease: 〈◊〉 as although there were no need of a Council in the time of the Apostles, to decide questions of Religion whereof every particular Apostle might be informed with all fullness and certainty; nevertheless the holy Ghost would that they should use this form in the matter of legal things, to leave it for a pattern to the Church of the succeeding ages in like occurrences. It was then the internal authority, and essential to the Apostleship, which consisted in the power of revealing matters of faith, with assurance of infallibility to make canonical writings, to institute the first mission of pastors, remit sins, to give the holy Ghost, and other the like, that saint CYPRIAN spoke of when he said, that all the Apostles were endued with equal authority, and not of the external authority and accidental to the Apostleship, which was instituted to cause it to be exercised in unity.  
THIS appears first because he touches before and after the original 
Cypr. 〈◊〉 unit. Eccl.  of unity: The Lord, (saith he) builds the Church upon him being one, and commands him to feed his sheep. And although he confer like power after his Resurrection unto all his Apostles, and said to them. As my Father sent me, so send I you, &c yet to manifest unity, he constitutes the Chair, one, and disposeth by his authority, that the original thereof shall take beginning from one. That certainly that Peter was, the other Apostles were also, endued with a like share of authority and power; but the original takes his beginning from one, that the Church & the Chair may appear to be one. And a little after, according to the ancient manuscripts, 
Idem ibidem.  and the citations of juon and Gratian, He that abandons the Chair of Peter, upon which the Church is built, can he be confident of being in the Church? And elsewhere. Peter upon whom one God hath built the Church, and from whom he hath instituted the original of unity. This appears secondly because he 
Id. ep. 55.  calls the Roman Church, the Chair of Peter, and the principal Church from whence Sacerdotal unity proceeds. This appears thirdly because saint HIEROME after he had repeated the same sentence of S. CYPRIAN 
Hieron 〈◊〉. 〈◊〉. l. 2.  in these words: Thou wilt tell me that the Church is built upon Peter, though the like be done in an other place upon others, and that the fortitude of the Church, do lean equally upon all: Adds; but amongst twelve, one is chosen, to the end, that a head being appointed, the occasion of Schism might be taken away. To teach us that in all other things, the Apostles, were equal to saint, PETER, except in those that had regard to the prevention of Schism, and the preservation of unity, for the consideration whereof he had been constituted head of the Apostles. And finally because Optatus Milevitanus countryman to the one; to wit, saint CYPRIAN; and timefellowe to the other; to wit saint HIEROME, cries out. Thou canst not deny, but that at Rome, the Episcopal Chair hath been placed by the Apostle Peter; etc. in which the unity was observed by all; to the end, that all the Apostles should not attribute to themselves, to each one his Chair, but that he should be a sinner and Schismatic, who against the only Chair, should erect an other. And a little after: from whence is it then, that you would usurp to yourselves, the keys of the Kingdom, you that by your presumptions and audacious sacrileges, combat against the Chair of Peter?  
To the eleventh objection, which is that Eusebius, ill translated by Russinus reports from Clemens Alexandrinus, that Peter, James, and john, established james, brother to our Lord, Bishop of the Apostles: We answer, that it is from a faulty Grammar, a faultie-divinitie. For the greek text saith, of Jerusalem and not of the Apostles. Peter, (saith he) James, and John contested not for glory (or opinion, for greek word signifies 
Opt. Milevit. contr. Parm l. 2.  either) but unanimouslie constituted james brother of our Lord Bishop of Jerusalem; that is to say, James, and John, did no more stand upon it to dispute for honour with S. PETER, as they had formely done, but united themselves with him, to consecrate james, Bishop of jerusalem; whereto the words of CHRISOSTOME agree, about the jealousy that James and John formerly had of the Primacy of S. PETER; Hearken (said he) how this same john that lately demanded these things, afterward wholly yields the primacy to Peter.  
TO the twelfth objection, which is that S. chrysostom upon the proposition made by S. PETER in the first of the Acts, to substitute an other Apostle in steed of judas, writes; See the modesty of James, he had been made (the greek saith, he hath been made) Bishop of Jerusalem, yet he saith not a word upon this occasion. Consider also the singular modesty of the other disciples, how they yielded the Throne to him, and debated not more among themselves. 
Euseb. hist. Ecc. l. 2. c. 1  We answer, that this objection is Andabates fence. For this concession of a Throne, hath reference not to S. JAMES, but to S. PETER, who whilst he spoke, S. JAMES was so modest, (as although he were so excellent, that he was after made Bishop of Jerusalem) he opened not his mouth, and the other Apostles as James and john, Sons of Zebedeus, which had formerly been jealous of S. PETER, debated the Primacy with him no longer, but yielded him presidency. This appears as well by the text of the history where there is no track of respect given to S, JAMES but to S. PETER only, as by the time wherein S. JAMES was created Bishop of Jerusalem. For the first act that the Apostles did after the Ascension of our Lord, was the substitution of MATHIAS instead of 〈◊〉, in the history whereof saint chrysostom saith these words. And Clemens Alexandrinus and Eusebius testify, that the promotion of saint james to the Bishopric of Jerusalem, happened afterward. By means whereof the Apostles could not in that action; that is to say, in the election of MATHIAS yield Presidencie to saint JAMES because of the Bishopric of Jerusalem. And the same is confirmed both by this that saint CHRISOSTOME had written upon the twentieth chapter of 
Chrysost. in Matt. ho 66.  saint MATTHEW: Mark (said he) how this same john that lately made, such demands, after wholly yields the Primacy to saint Peter. And by this that he adds presently after the place objected: This man (saith he, speaking of 
Id. in Act. Apost. hom 3.  saint PETER) first constitutes a doctor, and saith not, we are enough to teach, far was he from vain glory. And a little after; he takes the first authority of the affair, 
Id. ibid.  as he that had all other put into his hands, for to him Christ had said: And thou being once converted confirm thy brethren. And by this that he protests in the beginning of his discourse: Peter, (saith he) both as full of 〈◊〉, & as having received from Christ the flock into his keeping, and as the first of the College, always first begins to speak.  
To the thirteenth objection which is, that saint CHRISOSTOME writes upon the fifteenth of the Acts, that the principality was committed to james; It is true, but he speaks there only of the Principality of the Hierosolomitan Church; if indeed the greek word do in that place intent principality and not beginning, and that the sense be not, that JAMES had been established from the beginning; that is to say, that he was of the ancient Apostles, and not of the new, as saint PAUL; and nevertheless, that he took no exceptions to S. PAUL, for speaking between S. PETER and him. For what soever that Greek word signifies, it is certain it can signify nothing but the principality of the particular Church of Jerusalem, and not the principality of the universal Church; which S. CHRISOSTOME himself testifies elsewhere to have been granted to saint PETER, in these words: For if any one ask me (said he) how did james 
Chrysost. in joah. 21. hom. 87.  obtain the Sea of Jerusalem? I will answer that Christ hath constituted Peter Master, not of that Sea but of all the world. And again, Christ had foretold Peter great things, and had put the whole world into his hands, and had pronounced martyrdom to him, and she wed him greater love than to the rest. And indeed S. CHRISOSTOME allegeth not this principality, to show the modesty of saint james in this, that he was not offended that saint PETER had spoken before him, but to show the modesty of saint JAMES in this, that he was not offended, that saint PAUL, spoke between saint PETER, and him: A manifest proof, that he treats not of the universal principality, but of the principality of the particular Church of Jerusalem, of which he makes mention in this place because those that had moved the trouble for which the Council was holden, were the jews and Pharisees of Jerusalem converted to Christianity; who were jealous to see that the Gentiles were received into the Church, without obliging themselves to the observation of the law; And because saint JAMES had more especial credit in their behalf, because he was not only their Bishop, but Bishop of the City, which but a while before was Metropolitan of the law, and consequently it seemed he should be touched with a more strict interest to the observation of the law, than any other, and also that he had not gone about with saint PETER and saint PAUL to receive the Gentiles into the Church, and by this means had not lost his 〈◊〉 in the behalf of the legalists: It was (saith saint chrysostom) a profitable providence, that those things were done by those that were not to reside in Jerusalem, and that he that taught the Hierosolomitans was not refusable, and that his opinion might not be departed from. For these causes than saint JAMES had by accident a greater authority in the behalf of the authors of this Scandal, than the other Apostles; to preserve the which he did (saith saint CHRISOSTOME) that which those aught to do, that are constituted in great authority; that is to say, he suffered saint PETER to speak more severely, and himself spoke more gently. But that compared simply with saint PETER, he was either equal or superior in jurisdiction, saint CHRISOSTOME is so far, from having ever thought it, that chose he cries out a loud; Peter was 
Chryso. in joan. hom. 87.  the Prince of the Apostles, and the mouth of the disciples, and the head of the College, and for this occasion Paul went up to visit him, letting the rest alone. And a little after; Christ put into his hands, the Provostship of his brethren, 
Id. ibid.  and upbraids him not with his denial of him, nor reproacheth him with what was passed; but saith to him, if thou lovest me, be precedent of they brethren, and the same love that thou hast in all things showed to me, and whereof thou hast boasted show it now; and that life that thou hast said, thou wouldst lay down for me, lay it down for my sheep. And in the homily thirtith three upon saint MATHEW; The first and the Corypheos of the Apostles, was a man ignorant and without learning. And in the homily fifty fifth, Not only the Apostles were Scandalised, but also the Corypheos, (that is to say, Sovereign) of them all, Peter. 
Chryso. de sacerd. l. 2.  And in the second book of the Priesthood; Christ committed the care of his sheep to Peter, and Peter's Successors. And in this do all the rest of the Fathers agree aswell Greek, as latin. Thou seest (saith saint GREGORY 
Greg. Nazianz. orat. 26.  Nazianzen) amongst the disciples of Christ, all sublime and worthy of election that one of them is called the Rock and that the foundations of the Church are committed to him; and the other is more beloved, and leans upon the bosom of jesus, and the rest suffer the difference. And saint AMBROSE, The Lord (said he) by 
Ambros. in Luc. l. 10. c. 24  these words, lovest thou me more than these, asked the question not to learn but to teach, being ready to be himself exalted into Heaven, which was he whom he would leave to us for the Vicar of his love. And a little after; And because that of them all he only protests, he is preferred before them all. And elsewhere.  

With a full flood of tears the Church's Rock; 
Hoc ipsa petra Ecclesiae canente culpam diluit.   
Did cleanse his Crime, at crowing of the Cock.   
And S. EPIPHANIUS; Christ hath appointed Peter to be the guide, and leader of his Disciples. And Optatus Milevit. In the Roman Chair there is set Peter, the head of all the Apostles. And again; Against the gates of hell, we read that Peter 
Optat Milevit. contra Parm. l. 2. Curill. Alexandr in joan. l. 12. c. 64.  our Prince, hath received the wholesome keys. And S. CYRILL of Alexandria: Peter as the Prince and head of the rest, first cried out, thou art Christ the son of the living God. Even until then, it was a thing so well known unto antiquity, that saint PETER was the visible head of the Church, and of Christian religion, as the very Pagans, and Porphirius amongst the rest, as saint HIEROME reports it, reproached it to Christians, that S. Paul had 
Hiero. August. ep. 〈◊〉.  been so rash, as to reprove. Peter, the Prince of the Apostles, and his master, And they feigned, (as saith saint AUGUSTINE) that the Oracles of their false Gods, having been inquired of, concerning Christian Religion, answered 
August de Civit. Dei c. 53.  this blasphemy: that Chrict was innocent of the imposture of the Christians but that Peter who was a Magician, for the love he bore to his Master, had invented Christian Religion. And this may be said of the comparison between PETER and the other Apostles, for I will not now treat of the other frequent marks of the pre-eminence and authority of S. PETER, which are in the evangelical and Apostolic history: As that our Lord commanded him to pay the tribute for himself, and for him: that he undertook 
Matt. 17.  
Act. 〈◊〉.  the care of the replacing of an other Apostle in judas his 
Act. 2.  steed, all the College of the Apostles suffering themselves to bend 
Act 5.  and to be lead by his words: that he is nominated as for pre-eminence, and ranked a part, Peter and the Eleven: that they bore the sick into the Apostles way, that Peter's shadow might pass over them: that 
Act. 10,  that he alone, judged Ananias and Saphira to death: that to him alone is revealed the introduction of the nations into the Church, and other the like: for as much as it is not my purpose, to examine the other places of scripture; but only those that his majesty hath alleged; and to examine those, not by scripture, but by the Fathers, whose objection me thinks, I have sufficiently satisfied. And as for Origens interpretation which 
Origen in Matt. c 16 Tract. 1.  extends this text to all Christians in general, and saith, that whosoever confesseth that Christ is the Sonn of God, is made a foundation of the Church, it is an interpretation morallized from this passage, to bring it into sense, although strained and wrested, whose fruit may be applied to all the hearers, and not a serious and literal interpretation as the same Origen that makes use of it testifies, when he expounds it expressly and literally of the person of Peter. There remains the third point, which is, that the Church is built upon Christ: now in this point we are all of accord with his Majesty: but yet we grant not that S. PETER leaves to be the visible and ministerial Foundation of the Church; for the Philosophers teach us, that things subordinate combat not one an other, but embrace & presuppose one & other; & therefore to say that Christ is the foundation of the Church, and to say, that S. PETER is the foundation of the Church, are not repugnant propositions, but unanimous and compatible. For we do not pretend, that they are foundations of the Church after one and the same sort; but we hold, that Christ is the foundation of the Church by himself, and by his own authority, and S. PETER only by commission, no more then to say with Moses, that God only was the guide of the people of Israel in their passage from Egypt to the land of Chanaan; and to say with S. STEVEN, that Moses guided the people in 
Exod 〈◊〉.  the Wilderness. This was he (said he) that was with the Church in the desert: 
Act. 17.  Are not things incompatible, for god was the guide of the people of Israel by his proper virtue; and Moses by commission and lievetenancie from God. Likewise to say that the Viceroy of Ireland, is the foundation of the government and policy of Ireland, And to say that the excellent King of Great Britain, is the foundation of the state and policy of the same Ireland, are not things incompatible, for the excellent King of Great Britain, is so by his proper authority; and the Viceroy is so by commission, lievetenancie, and representation. Although notwithstanding that the literal intention of this passage, Upon this Rock I 
Matt. 16.  will build my Church, is no way to design by the word, Rock the person of Christ, but that only of Peter, as it appears by six evident reasons.  
THE first, that our lord having foretold to S. PETER, that he would change his name, not by the attribution of a simple Epithet, as he did to 
Marc. 3.  the Sons of Zebedee, whom he called the Sons of thunder: but by the imposition of a name ordinary and permanent, in saying to him, Thou shalt be called 〈◊〉, puts him no where in possession of this promise, nor explains to him no where, the cause of the imposition of this name, 
joan. 1.  but in this passage; Thou art Peter, & upon this Rock I will build my Church, Now this passage cannot explain the sense of the word Peter, if in the second part of the passage, the word, Rock, be not taken in the same sense, and for the same subject for which it is taken in the first: and by consequence this clause, upon this Rock I will build my Church, cannot there be interpreted of the person of Christ, but on the only person of S. PETER.  
The second that our Lord means in this place, to render an exchange for the words that S. PETER spoke of him, as may appear by this preface; And I tell thee, which for this cause Beza hath translated into these words, And I tell thee reciprocally. Now S. PETER in his proposition had done two things; the one to declare the appellative name of our Lord, which is Christ, & the other to explain the sense and energy of the same name of CHRIST, in saying, Thou art Christ the Son of the living God. And therefore the law of the Antithesis & correspondency wills, that not only our lord should declare the name that he had promised to give him, in saying to him; Thou art Peter, but also should explain the sense & energy of this name in saying to him; and upon this Rock I will build my Church. Which could not be unless by the word Rock in this second clause there were literally understood the person of S. PETER, and not that of CHRIST.  
THE third, that it had been a thing extremely from the purpose, to have made mention of the name of Peter, for the language that our Lord meant to speak to S. PETER, if by this clause, and upon this Rock, he had not intended to speak of the person of Peter. For the word Rock hath no metaphorical relation to the keys, but to the building.  
The fourth, that it had been an inconstant grammatical consequence, and evil knit, to say, And I declare to thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this Rock which is myself, I will build my Church: and I will give to thee the keys of the Kingdom of heaven. The fifth, that the connexion of the pronoun (this) with the repetition of the word (Petra) before expressed, showeth that it is a relative pronoun, and whose relation is determined to the antecedent already expressed; by means whereof this pronoun could not be diverted from the natural use of the relative, that the repetition of the antccedent gives it to an use of a demonstrative pronoun, but by the application of an external gesture of demonstration, either expressed in the text of the history, or by the very explication of the historian. As when our Lord after he had spoken of the jewish Temple, said, Destroy, this temple, and within three days I will build it up again; The Evangelists to hinder the pronoun from being taken for a pronoun relative, as the repetition of the word Temple already before expressed would have informed the auditors, adds: this he spoke of the Temple of his 〈◊〉 a thing which is not in this passage.  
AND the sixth and principal, that it is most certain, that our Lord in these words: thou art Peter, and upon this Peter or Rock intended to allude to the name of S. PETER. Now all allusions which are made to names, are either allusions of confirmation, or allusions of correction. I call allusions of confirmation, those which are made to confirm or approve the imposition of the name which had been first given; As when Uopiscus called the Emperor Probus, truly Probus; that is to say, truly an honest man; and Carus; 
Epist. in Prob. imp.  truly Charus; that is to say, truly dear. And saint ATHANASIUS, called Osius, truly Osius; that is to say, 〈◊〉 holy. And the Council of Constantinople 
Id in Car. imp.  holden under Menas, called Agapet, truly Agapet; that is to say, 〈◊〉 
Athan. ad imperat.  beloved. I call allusions of correction, those which are made to correct and reprehend the imposition of the name first given, to show that the effect 
Constant. apolog  of the name agrees not with him that bears it. And these allusions of correction 
Conc. Const sub Men.  again are of two sorts; the one are made by simple negation 〈◊〉 antithesis, as when Noemi said, Call me no more Noemi that is to say, Agreeable, 
Act. 1.  but call me, mara, that is to say, bitter. And the other are made by translation; as when the name that hath been first imposed upon any one, is transferred to an other: As when saint 〈◊〉, speaking of Absalon, whose name signified, the peace of the Father saith; That the true Absalon is jesus Christ; it is an allusion of translation, and consequently of correction by which he transfers the name of Absalon to jesus Christ, and shows that it had not justly been imposed upon Absalon, From whence it ariseth that if our Lord in saying; Upon this Rock I will build my Church, intended by the word Rock, the person of saint PETER: he meant to make an allusion of approbation, but if he intended his own, he meant to make an allusion of translation, and consequently of correction. Now besides that it must be impertinent, that our Lord should make an allusion; of correction upon a name imposed by himself, it is manifest that in honourable names, allusions of approbation and confirmation are in steed of compliments and gratifications, and allusions of correction are in steed of reprehensions and chasticemets, Then to know whether our Lord did there mean to make an allusion of approbation, and by the word Rock intent the person of S. PETER, or to make an allusion of correction and translation, and by the word Rock intent his own, there needs but to see, whether he meant by these words to cherish, gratify, and recompense S, PETER, or to shake him up and chastise him. For if by the word Rock he understood the person of S. PETER, he meant to cherish, and recompense him, but if there by he understood his own, he meant to be rough with him, and to correct him. Now both the foregoeing confession of S. PETER; Thou art Christ the Sonn of the living God; and the preface of our Lords words; Blessed art thou Simon the Son of jona, and this mark of 
Bez. in Matt. 16.  recompense, and reciprocal vicissitude of title and elegy, translated by Beza himself into these words, I say reciprocally to thee, cannot without sacrilege suffer a doubt, but that he intended not in that place to be harsh 
Hilar. in Matt. c. 16  with him, and to chastise him, but to gratify and recompense him, The blessed confession, (saith S. HILARY) hath received the reward, nor consequently but that our lord intended to make an allusion of confirmation not of correction, that is to say, that he designed by the word Rock not his own person, but the person of S, PETER. And against this ought not to be objected that S. PAUL writes, The Rock was Christ. For metaphorical names, are not taken always in the sams sense, nor for the same things, but vary their significations according to the several relations whereunto they are employed: which hath caused S. THOMAS to say, that in metaphors there is not so much regard to be had from whence they are taken, as to what they are taken: and therefore although the word Rock sometimes signifies, Christ in the scripture, it would nevertheless be a blind 〈◊〉, to will that wheresoever the scriptures useth it, it should be intended of Christ. For sometimes the word Rock is employed according to the relation that the Rock of a quarry hath to the morsels of stone that are drawn out of it. And in this sense, Abraham is called Rock: Look (saith Esaie upon the Rock from whence you have been cut; upon Abraham your Father; sometimes it is employed according to the relation of the dryness & barrenness that rocks 
Esa. 51.  have to the seed that is cast upon them; and in this sense hard and 
Luc. 8.  indocile parts are intended by the word Rock: Part of the seed (said our Lord) fell upon the Rock. Sometimes it is employed according to the relation of the steadfastness and solidity that Rocks have in the buildings which 
Matt. 16.  are founded upon them; And in this sense our lord saith to S. PETER, Vponthis Rock I will build my Church, alluding to the custom of antiquity, who used when they were to build temples, to choose to build them upon Rocks for their firmness, rather than upon other places. From whence it is, that the place where upon the Temple of Delphus was built, was called the Delphian Rocks: and that the men of a certain City of Asia to be preferred in the building of a Temple to the Emperor Tiberius, represented to him, that their city was situate upon a Rock. And therefore our lord intending to build his Church upon S, PETER; said to him according to the Hebrew, and the Syriac; Thou art a Rock, and upon this Rock I will build my Church. Sometimes it is employed, according to the relation that Rocks have to the sources and fountains that spring from them; and in this sense the Apostle saith, They drank of the spiritual Rock which followed them, and that Rock was Christ. By means whereof, to infer from this, that in these words, the Rock was Christ, when it is spoken of the Rock referred to the water 〈◊〉 sprang from it; Christ was intended by the word Rock; that here, where it is spoken of the word Rock referrd to the metaphor of the ministerial building of the Church, it should be necessary to understand it of the person Christ, and not of of that of saint PETER, were an inconsequent consequence. And it is not to be said, that in the parable of the man that built his house upon the rock, by the word Rock; Christ is understood, for the literal sense of the word Rock in this place is no other than to signify a good and firm foundation; and that this is expounded of Christ, it is by allegory. Now there is great difference between the literal sense of places mingled with metaphorical terms, and the allegorical sense. For from the literal sense of places, mingled with metaphorical terms arguments may be made, and consequences may be drawn from one passage to an other; and from the allegorical sense, not. And then if saint PAUL had said even according to the relation, to the ministerial building of the Church, the Rock was Christ, hath not our Lord usually communicated his names to his ministers? And did not jacob anoint the stone in bethel in the figure of Christ, as prefiguring that Christ ought to be the stone whereof God prophesied by the mouth of Esay: Behold, I will set up in Zion a Rock well founded: And nevertheless doth not the same jacob say, that Joseph was the Pastor and the Rock of Israel, making use of the word Even in both of them? That is to say, doth he not communicate by word, the same word Rock of Israel to joseph, that he had communicated by figure to Christ? And if they stagger about the difference which is between the word (Even) & the word (Tsur) or Petra, which signifies Rock, although Beza do not distinguish it, when he translates; Thou shalt be called Cephas. which is interpreted, lapis. Doth not Tertullian write according to the use even of the word, Tsur, or Petra, He hath given to the dearest of his disciples to 
Tertul. adverse. Mareion. 1. 4. c 13.  Peter, the name of one of his figures: And doth not S. HIEROME write upon the same place of S. MATTHEW, As our Lord who is the light, hath given to his Apostles, that they should be the light; so to Peter believing in the Rock-Christ, 
Hieron. in Matt. c. 16.  he hath given to be the Rock. And therefore according to the metaphor of Rock, it 
Basil. hom. de 〈◊〉.  is said to him with good right. I will build my Church upon thee. And elsewhere, Not only Christ was the Rock, but he hath given to Peter, that he should also be the Rock. And saint BASILL: Although Peter be also the Rock, nevertheless he is not the Rock as Christ, but he is the Rock as Peter; for as much as Christ is essentially the unmoveable Rock; and Peter is so by the Rock; for our Lord gives his dignities without despoiling himself of them, etc. He 
E piph, l.  
Anacorat.  is the Rock, he makes the Rock. And saint EPIPHANIUS; He hath made the first of his Apostles the firm Rock, whereupon the Church is built. And again; It is he that hath heard from him, Peter, feed my lambs: and to whom the keeping of the Flock hath been committed, And 
Prosp. de vocat gent. l. 2. c. 〈◊〉.  PROSPER: This most strong Rock, hath received from the principal Rock commmunication both of virtue and name. For whereas saint AUGUSTINE after he had interpreted in many places the Rock of the person of PETER, as in these words of the comentary upon the sixty ninth Psalm. Peter who is in this confession, had been called the Rock upon which the Church should be built. And in these words of the Psalms against Donatus his party, Reckon the Prelates from the Sea of Peter, And in this order of the Fathers, see who have succeeded one an other, this is the Rock, 
Aug. In joa. tract. 11.  that the proud gates of Hell cannot overthrow. And in these words of the comentary upon saint JOHN, Peter this Rock answered in the name of all; and in those words of the Epistle eighty six. Peter the head of the Apostles, the Porter of heaven, the foundation of the Church: remitts it finally in his retractations to the reader's choice, whether of these two interpretations he thinks to be most probable, to wit, either to interpret it of the person of PETER, or to interpret it of the person of CHRIST, moved with this, that the Latin text hath: Tues Petrus, and not, Tues Petra. This is a grammatical error partly proceeding from the defect of knowledge in the Hebrew and the Syriack tongues, in which there is no difference between Petrus and Petra: But the text hath it throughout. Thou art Cephas and upon this Cephas, that is to say in Latin, Tues Petra, & supra hanc Petram, and in French, Tu es rocher, & sur ce rocher, Thou art a rock, and upon this rock: & partly for want of experience in the practice of the greek 
Arsen in Eurip.  tongue, in which the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, signify one selfe-same thing; from whence it is, that many greeks have called the Sun 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, that is to say stone, by allusion to the doctrine of Anaxagoras, who held that the Sun was a stone. By means whereof the Greek interpreter of S. MATTHEW hath pretended to put no difference in sense, but only in kind, between these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and meant to say no other thing 
Basil. ubi supra.  but what we understand in French by these words; Tuesroc, & sur ce rocher, ie bastiray mon Eglise. And therefore alsoe saint BASILL produces the first part of the clause in these words: Thou art the Rock, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 having regard to the words of our Saviour, in which the condition of the Hebrew and Syriake tongues permit not to make the distinction of gender, as S. 
Hieron. in epist. ad Galat. c. 2.  HIEROME notes in these words: Not (saith he) that Petrus, and Petra, signify differing things, but because that which in latin we call Petra, the hebrews and Syrians, because of the affinity of their tongues, call it Cephas, And this Beza; though an enemy to the true sense of this passage, is constrained to confess in these words: The Lord speaking in Syriack, hath not used diversity of 
Beza in Matth. c. 16.  name, but in both places hath said Cephas; as in our vulgar French the word, Pierre, is said as well of the proper, as of the appellative. And for this same cause, he translates the place of the first Chapter of saint john into these terms: Thou shalt be called Cephas, which is interpreted Petra, that 
Tu vocabe 〈◊〉 Cephas quod decla ratur Petra Bez. ibid.  is to say, Rock, or stone. And not so much as the doctors of the Jews but do acknowledge, that our Lord in calling Peter, Cephas, did intend to call him Rock, and to constitute him for the foundation of the Church: as appears by these words of Rabbi Helias in his Tisbi, upon the exposition of the word Cephas: jesus, the Nazarean (saith he) called Simon sonn of Bariona, Cephas, which signifies fortitude: for the interpretation of the Hebrew word sela, is Cepha, which signifies in many places, fortitude, meaning that he was the head and fortitude of his religion, and therefore he called him Cephas. And to this there do agree all the famous editions of scriptures, in what tongue soever, as well printed, as manuscripts. For not only the Hebrew edition of the Gospel of saint MATTHEW published by Munster, saith, Thou art Cepha, and upon this Cepha; Thou art a Rock, and upon this Rock. And the Syriack published by Moses of Merdin in Mesopotamia, and republisht by Tremellius: Thou art Kipho, and upon this Kipho, thou art a Rock, and upon this Rock. But also the Arabic hath it, Thou art Ascara and upon this Ascara: thou art the stone, and upon this stone. And the Persian, Thou art zeng, and upon this zeng: thou art the Rock, and upon this Rock. And the Armenian, thou art Vimi, and upon this Vimi: thou art the stone, and upon this stone. And the Ruthenian, Egyptian, and Ethiopian, even the same. Nevertheless, though the want of the Hebrew and Syriack tongues, suffered S, AUGUSTINE to fall into this mistake, to think that the primitive word Rock, was not there attributed to saint PETER, but only the derivative, and that Petrus signifieth not Rock, but Rockey or Stonie, he hath always acknowledged, be it by virtue of the other places of the scripture, or be it by virtue of the perpetual tradition of the Church the same thing that we conclude out of this passage, to wit, the Primacy of saint PETER. For interpretating a while after these words; And I will give thee the keys of the Kingdom of heaven: of the donation of the keys made to the Church in the person of PETER, he saith the Church did then receive in the person of PETER the keys, because PETER figured the Church. And yielding elsewhere a reason, why the person of PETER figured the Church; he declares that it is because of his Primacy. He bears (saith he) by a figure ative generality, the person of the Church, because of the primacy he had amongst the rest of the disciples. By which word, Primacy, he intends according to the stile of the scripture, the superintendency and principality, as it appears by these words of Wisdom. I have had Primacy 
Eccl. c. 2.  in all nations, And by these words of the same saint AUGUSTINE Peter denominated from the Rock happy, bearing the figure of the Church, holding the principality of the Apostleshipp. And again. who knows not, that this principality 
Epist-162.  of the Apostleship, aught to be preferred before whatsoever other Bishopric. And elsewhere; in the Roman Church hath always flourished; the Principality of the Sea Apostolic.    

Of the indivisibility of the Church. CHAP. IU.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
BUT it hath begun to diminish in lustre, as being divided into many parts, as for external Communion, wholly separate one from an other.   

THE REPLY:  
Two Opuntine brethren divided the inheritance of their Father with such rigour, as they divided even to a cup and to a Coat. It is in a sort, thus with the heretics, they do indeed divide the Chalice that our Father hath left us by Testament, and where of David singeth. The Lord is the portion of my inheritance and of my Chalice; 
Psalm. 15  that is to say, they do indeed divide the Sacraments of Christ; but the coat of Christ, which is his Church, they cannot divide, for it is alone and indivisible. When the reign of Israel, saith S. CYPRIAN, should 
Cypr. de unit. Eccl.  be divided, the Prophet Achias divided his Raiment: But because the people of Christ cannot be divided, his coat woven of a piece, and keeping itself whole, was not divided by those that possessed it. The coat of Christ indivisibly united preserving itself whole, showed the indissoluble Concord of our people, of us, who have put on Christ. By the Sacrament & sign of his coat he hath declared the unity if his Church, Who then is he so impious, so faithless, and so disturbed with the fury of discord, that believes that the unity of God, the Coat of our Lord, the Church of Christ, can be divided, or dare to divide it? Not but that the multitude of the persons whereof the Church is compounded, and which analogicallie is in steed of matter to it, may be divided; but this division is but a material division of the Church, and not a formal division; no more than the division that the false mother would have made of the Child, had been a formal division; for as much as the being, and the form of the whole had not remained in either of the parts, but a material division.  
For the Church as well as natural organical bodies, may be materially divided, but formally it cannot be divided; that is to say, the members and parts may indeed be separated from their whole, but after the separation, they are no more members and parts of the Church, but 〈◊〉, and by abuse of language, even as the members and parts of a Body endued with a life animal and sensitive, when they come to be separated from their whole, are no more members and parts but equivocally; forth as much as they participate no more of the form of the body, which cannot be possessed but in unity, nor reside but in one only mass united and continued. By means whereof the Church after the division of the external communion, resides only in one of the parts; to wit in that from which the others have divided themselves, and not in the others; for the Church is either one or none. My Dove 
Cant. 6.  (saith the Spouse) is an only one. And David: Jerusalem that is builded as 
Psalm 〈◊〉.  a City, whose participation is in unity. And saint PAUL: One body and one 
Ephes. 4.  Spirit as you are called in one hope of your vocation. & Optatus Milevitanus; 
Optat Milevit. 〈◊〉.  There is one Church which can not be at once amongst you and amongst us. It resteth then, that it be in one place. And saint CHRISOSTOME; The 
Parmen. l. 2.  name of the Church, is not a name of division, but a name of union and agreement. 
Chrys. in c. ad Corinth c. 1. hom. 1.  And saint AUGUSTINE; He is one, the Church is unity; nothing answers to one but unity. And elsewhere; Let every other inheritance be deunided amongst 
Aug in ps. 101.  coheires; the inheritance of peace cannot be divided. And therefore when the 
Idem.  Fathers say, that heretics, and Schismatics divide the Church; they intent, either that they divide it as much as lies in them, that is to say, that they endeavour to divide it, or that they divide it materially and not formally, that is to say, that they make thereof many Societies, but not many Churches.    

Of the effect that division brings to the Church. CHAPT. V,  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
AND also which is principally to be lamented, it is happened by this dissipation, that there is less force in the separate parts then there was in the whole to resist the enemy of mankind, who as Christ teacheth us, is a wake and attentive upon 〈◊〉 occasion, to mingle the good seed with darnel and tares.   

THE REPLY,  
AFTER the division of the external communion, all the soul, the form and essence of the Church rests in one only of the societies, which remain after the division, and not in the others which are no more truly parts of the Church, but only equivocallie, even as when a member is separated from a living and sensible Body, all the essence, the Soul, and form of the creature, remains in the Body, from whence that separation hath been made, and not in the part that hath been separated from it, which is no more a part of the Body but equivocallie and inproperlie. And therefore after the separation of heretics, all the same strength, vigour, and virtue, which was in the Body of the Church before the separation, remains in the part from whence the separation is made, as she that inherits the condition of all, and not in the others; in such sort, as she hath no less force to resist the corruption that the enemy of mankind would bring in, but chose oftentimes more, for as much as the constancy of the Charity of those which remain in the Church, is made the more united and the more eminent by the separation of the rest according to this sentence of saint PAUL; There must be heresies that the Good may be manifested. And therefore saint AUGUSTINE writes, That the Church makes use of 〈◊〉 for the approbation of her doctrine; and of schismatics, for the demonstration of her steadfastness. And elsewhere; That those that go forth from the Body of the Church are as evili humours, by whose purgation the Body is eased. By means whereof his Majesty ought not to pretend that the alienations of the parts which are separate from the Body of the Church, have left in her from whom they are separated, the less vigour to resist the enemy of mankind, and to maintain herself uncorrupted, then there was in the whole Body before; but chose to presuppose that the same virtue which resided in the whole Body, is reunited in the part that succeeds it.  

As when one of our eyes hath. lost his former light  
His splendours fair effect, shines in the other sight  
And th'extinguished beam, adds to the cleere-eyes store  
Who sees alone as much, as both could see before.   
Also it cannot be found, that since the separation of the Roman Church and the Greek faction quoted by his Majesty, which is the greatest separation that ever was made, the Roman Church received any doctrine which was not holden by all the Body of the Catholic Church when this division happened; and no more till then, since the separation of the Egyptians and Ethiopian Provinces.    

Of the pretended corruption of the Church, CHAPT. VI,  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
AND what we now see with our eyes to be happened, yea and handle it with our hands; it is a ridiculous thing, and more than absurd to dispute, if heretofore it could be, or now can be done.   

THE REPLY.  
THere was never any age wherein those that separated themselves from the Church, have not believed that they saw clearly and evidently that she was corrupted and full of palpable and Cimmerian darkness, otherwise they had not separated themselves from her. The figure of this preiudication, preceded in the rashness of Oza, who believed that the Ark was about to fall, and upon that belief, put out his hand to lift it up, for which he was punished with death: And followed in the incredulity of the Apostles, who while our Lord slept, thought that the Bark wherein they were with him, was about to perish; in indignation whereof he chidd them for their little faith, and taught them, that he that keeps Israel, doth neither slumber nor sleep: and the history since hath continued in all the pretended Reformers of the Church. For as Pentheus, in seeing his children, thought he had seen Bears, Tigers, Serpents, and other wild beasts, and did not perceive that the evil was not in them, but in his sight: So the heretics in all ages, in seeing their mother; that is to say, the Church, thought they had seen a troop of Dragons, Lions, and wild-beasts; and upon that occasion have put themselves to flight, not discerning that the evil was not in the Church, but in their eyes. And that it is so; did not the Luciferians say, That the Catholic Church had been converted into a brothel, and was 
Hieron. adverse. Luciferian.  become the whore of Antichrist? And did not the Donatists, call the Apostolic chair, the chair of Pestilence? And did they not cry out, that the Catholic 
Aug. contr. litter. Petil. l. 2. c. 51.  Church was become the shield of Romulus? And saith not saint AUGUSTINE of them, I justly persecute him that detracts from his neighbour, wherefore shall I not more justly persecute him that publicly blasphemes the Church etc. when he 
Idem cont. Crescon. c. 13  saith she is a whore? And the Pelagians when there was alleged to them, the number and the multitude of the Catholics, did they not answer, that to find any thing, a multitude of blind men availed nothing? And nevertheless, who knows not at this day, that they were the blind men, and not the Church; And then this pretended corruption of the Church being the theme of the question debated by us, to cause that to pass, as a thing granted, it is to put for a principle, that which his majesty ought, if it please him to reserve to be judged at the end, & not presuppose at the beginning of the disputation. For to say that there is no thing but is altered and corrupted by age, this argument is good for those things that are preserved by ordinary and natural faculties, but not for those that are assisted by extraordinary and supernatural help; and to whom these words of David may be applied, Thy youth shall he renewed as the youth of an 
Psalm. 102  Eagle. Now the Church, is of this number, for our Lord saith of her without exception of time, Thou art wholly fair, and there is no spot in thee, and 
Cantic. x.  
Ibidem.  she sings and will sing to the end of the world. I am black, but I am fair; 
Aug. cont●.  that is to say, I am black in manners, but fair in doctrine. And therefore 
Faust. Manich. l. 22. c 28.  S. AUGUSTINE compares her to Sara, who when she was old, left not to be fair. And for this same cause, saint HIEROME citing these words of Solomon, that the eye that mocks his Father, or despiseth the age of his 
Prou. 30.  mother, the Crows of the valley shall pull it out, interprets them of heretics 
Hieron. in Prou. c. 30.  who despise the age of the Church: as soon (saith he) as the eye of the heretics mocks the creator his father, or despiseth the age of the Church his mother, the cursed and unclean birds shall peck it out.    

Of the exclusion of heretics from the Body of the Catholic Church. CHAPT. VII,  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
THE Roman Church then, the Greek, the Antiochian, the Egyptian, the Abyssine, the Musco vite, and many others, are members more excellent in truth, in doctrine, and sincerity of faith, the one than the other: but yet members of the Catholic Church whereof the Masseand contexture, as for external form, is already long ago dissolved and disassembled.   

THE REPLY:  
AND what shall then become of that his majesty lately said, that the specifical form, and essential mark of the Church is truth of doctrine, and that there is no communion between light and darkness, and between Christ and Belial. And that he that leaves Christ who is truth itself; leaves the Church which is the foundation of truth: if not only the greeks, Antiochians, and Muscovites, 
〈◊〉. Tim. 3. & Hieron. in Zach. l. 〈◊〉. c. 3  who are heretics in the point of the processio of the holy Ghost, which the most excellent King doth with us hold for an article of Faith & which in this quality is inserted into ATHANASIUS his Creed, and into the Creed of the Council of Constantinople, as it is read in the western Church, which his majesty professeth to embrace; but also the Egyptians and, Ethiopians (which follow the sect of Eutyches anathematised and cast out 
Conc. Chalced Act. 1. & in relat. ad Leo.  of the Church by the Council of Chalcedon, near twelve hundred years ag oeand 〈◊〉 in the doctrine of the person of Christ, which is the fundamental doctrine of the Church, and that whereof S. PAUL saith, 
〈◊〉. Corint. 3.  None can lay 〈◊〉 other foundation besides Christ,) are Churches and parts of the Catholic Church? A Lacedaemonian answered an inhabitant of the Isle of Delphos, who told him that the women were not delivered of Child in their Isle, but traveled out of it to be brought to bed, and that their dead, were not buried there, but that they were carried forth of it to their Sepulchre: And how then is it your country, said he, if you be neither borne nor buried there? So, how is it, that the Sect of heretics, and namely those of the Egyptians, and Ethiopians, with whom the Council 
Conc. Chalced. ubi sup 2 joan. v 7 Ibid. v. 12  of Chalcedon forbids us to communicate upon pain of Anathema, and of whom saint john himself tells us; If any one confess not that jesus Christ is come in the flesh, he is a seducer and Antichrist. And again, If any one bring not this Doctrine, receive him not into your houses, and say not to him, well be it with thee; for whosoever saith unto him, well be it with thee, communicates in his wicked works; should obtain the being and title of the Church, that is to faith, of the Spiritual country of the Faithful, if to be borne in the grace of God, and to breathe, their first air of spiritual, life; we must, first go forth of their Society; and if to obtain Salvation, and to rest in peace after death, we must, first renounce their communion. God said to the Church, by the mouth of Solomon; Thou art wholly fair, and there is no spot in thee; that is to say, as for doctrine and conditions of communion. And by the mouth of Esaie; None incircumcised or unclean, shall any more pass through thee; that is to say, None that publicly profess a polluted or impure doctrine. He saith by the mouth of Ezechiell, describing the future state of the christian church: I will establish an alliance of peace 
Ezech. 〈◊〉.  with my sheep, and will cause the evil beasts of the Earth to cease: Which the 
Aug. contr.  Sibilla seems to have expressed in these words, repeated by Virgil; and 
Faust. 〈◊〉. l 13. c. 1.  that saint AUGUSTINE saith, might fitly be applied to the Church.  

Serpent's shall cease swollen up with th'impure blood,  
Of poisonous herbs, in their deceitful bud.   
And how then should the mock Counsels of heretics, which saint 
Hier. in 〈◊〉. l. 8 c. 27 & in Esai l. 7. c. c. 22. & l. 2. in Ose. c. 7.  HIEROME calls, Denens of wilt beasts; & whose doctrine he calls, the wine of 〈◊〉 mingled witd the gall of Asps, be Churches & parts of the Church? or how should the Church to whom God hath spiritually given the same prerogative, that the historians attribute corporally to the Isle of Crete, to wit, that it can suffer no venomous beast in it; that is to say, no 
Hieron in Esai l. 2. c. 5 & l. 〈◊〉. c. 58.  dogmatizing heretic, communicate her name and society with the venomous sects of heteticks? He saith by the mouth of Osea, I will espouse 〈◊〉 in faith: And by that of Saint PAUL; the edification of God is in faith. And the most Excellent King himself protesteth, that the essential form of the Church is faith. And how then can the sects not only of the Egyptians, and Ethiopians, but of all the heretics which makes, as saith S. PAUL, a Shipwreck of faith, be Churches, and in the Church? He saith by his own mouth; the gates of hell shall not have victory over the Church. And S. EPIPHANIUS and S. HIEROME 
Ibid.  
Matth. 16. Epiph. l. Anacor.  interpret those Gates of Hell to be heresies. And how then can it be, that the heretical societies into whose communion we cannot enter without yielding ourselves tributary to the gates of hell, should 
Hieron. in Matt. c. 16.  be Churches, and parts of the Church? For though vices in manners belong also to the powers of hell, nevertheless because the vices are but in the persons of those that commit them, and not in the communion of the Church, for as much as the Church exacts not from any of her members, the condition of being vicious to receive them into her communion, they shall but conquer those particular persons that are spotted therewith, and not the Church, of the which God hath said by the Prophets: Jerusalem shallbe called the city of truth, and the mountain of the Lord of Hosts 
Zach. 〈◊〉.  and the sanctified hill. And by an other, the house of Israel shall no more from 
Ezech. 43.  〈◊〉 forward be foiled, whereas heresy infects the communions of the Society where it remains, none being to enter into any heretical society without obliging themselves to the doctrine where of she makes profession, and under whose condition she receives men into her communion, and by consequent makes the gates of Hell victorious over the congregation wherein she remains. He commands us to hold those that hear not the Church, for Heathens and Publicans, he forbids us then, from accounting the societies of heŕeticks, which hear not the Catholic Church, for Churches and parts of the Church, but for Societies of 〈◊〉 and Heathens. He saith to us, That whosoever gathers not with him, scatters: the heretics then that gather not with him, gather not but scatteŕ, and so their assemblies are no more Churches, but dispertions. He cries out to us by the Organ of saint PAUL, That whosoever declares against what we have received, should be an anathema. He wills then that heretics should be held by the Church for anathema, and consequently excluded from the communion both internal and external of the Church. He teacheth us by the same Oracle, that the Church is our mother, and not our mother as the first Eve was, who engendered her children dead to Salvation, but as the second Eve, who engendered her children living: From whence it is, that saint AMBROSE and saint HIEROME 
Ambiguity l. 2. lucae c. 3.  call the Church the true Eve, mother of the living. And how then is it that heretical sects, who amongst the conditions under 
Hier. in Ezech. l 5. c. 〈◊〉. & in Amos. l. 3 c. 9  which they receive men into their communion, oblige them to hold killing doctrines, should attribute to themselues the title of a Church? He teacheth us that the Fathers of the Earth, will not give their children a Scorpion for an egg, or a Serpent for a Fish. And how then is it, that the Church should give hers poison instead of wholesome food? or that heretical sects, whose wine, saith saint HIEROM, is the fury of Dragons, and the incurable fury of Asps, should be Churches? He teacheth 
Higher l. 2. in Esai. c. 11  us that the Church is the Way, the Gate, and Entry into the Kingdom of Heaven; yea for this cause himself often calls it, the Kingdom of Heaven; it is then of the Essence of the Church, that Salvation might be therein obtained, and the way how to come to the Kingdom of Heaven; and consequently, that amongst the conditions, under whose obligation she receives men into her communion there be none repugnant to Salvation. Now contrariwise it is of the Essence and of the definition of heretical and Schismatical Societies, that amongst the conditions under which they receive men into their communion, there are conditions repugnant to Salvation: otherwise they could not be heretical & Schismatical: And so it is of the Essence and of the definition of the Church, not to be heretical: and it is of the Essence and of the definition of heretical Societies contrariwise, not to be Churches, nor parts of the Church, and they cannot be called Churches, nor members of the Church, but falsely and equivocallie, as a dead member that is cut off from the Body, is no member but equivocallie and by abuse of speech; of as a dead man, or a man either form in picture, or raised in a Sculpture, is no man but equivocally, & by abuse of speech. By means whereof, it is to err against the Essence and definition of the Church, to hold them for Churches, or to reckon them in the totality of the catholic 
Clem. Alexandr. stromat. l. 1 Cypr. ad julian ep. 73.  Church and to this all the Fathers agree. Heresies (saith Clemens Alexandrinus) are equivocallie called Churches. And saint CYPRIAN: Novatianus doth as Apes do, who would seem to be men, though they be not so: so will he seem to have a Church, though he have none. And again; When the Novatians demanded; 
Conc Elibert c. 22.  believest thou the remission of sins by the holy Church? they lie in their Interrogatory, for they have no Church. And the Elibertine Council; If any one pass from the Catholic Church unto heresy and return again to the Church, 
Conc. Sard ep. ad omnes Episc.  etc. And the Council of Sardica: We cast out of the limtts of the Catholic Church those, that affirm Christ to be God, and not very God. And saint HIEROME: Heretic, make in their Church by false appellation, that which they made when they were yet heathen. And again: No heretical congregation can be called 
Id. advers.  the Church os Christ. And elsewhere: In what Church hath he believed? in that 
Luciferian  of the Arrians; but they have none. And in the same work: If thou hearest in 
Id. ibid.  any place of men denominated from any other then from Christ, as Marcionites. Ualentinians, Montagniers, or Campites, know that there is not the Church of Christ. And Optatus Milevitanus: Out of the only Church, which is the true Catholic Church, others amongst heretics, are esteemed to be, and are not. And again. There is one only Church, which cannot be amongst you and amongst us; it remains then, that she must be in one place. And S. AUGUSTINE: you are with us in the creed, and in the other Sacraments of our Lord, &c, but you are not with us in the Catholic Church. And again; There is one Catholic Church, upon which other 〈◊〉 impose other names, although themselves be all called by particular names which they dare not disavow: From whence it appears, in the judgement of judges not preoccupate with favour, to whom the name of Catholic, whereof they are all ambitious, aught to be attributed. And elsewhere: The Church of the saints, 
Id. id Psal. 149.  is the Catholic Church: the Church of the Saints, is not the church of Heretics: She hath been predesigned before she was seen, and hath been exhibited that she might be seen. And in the Book of Faith and of the creed: Neither do; the Heretics belong to the Catholic church because she loves God; nor the schismatics because She loves her neighbour. And in the Book against the Fundamental Epistle: In this Church finally, the name of Catholic detains me, which this Church alone, amongst so many and so great heresies, hath so preserved, as when a stranger asks where they assemble to the Catholic Church; there is no heretic dare she we his Temple or his house. And in his Treatise upon saint JOHN: 
Id. de fid. etc. Symbol. 10. c Contr. Ep. quam &c. Fund. c. 4.  All heretics and Schismatics are gone out from us; that is to say, are gone out from the Church. Faustinus was not Precedent to a Church, but to a faction. The holy Ghost hath not glorified Christ with a true glory, but in the Catholic Church: for elsewhere addeth he; be it amongst heretics, be it amongst Pagans, his true glory upon earth cannot be. And upon saint MATTHEW, 
Ib. tract 〈◊〉. de cap. 16. Id. de verb.  Jews, and all other heretics which do indeed confess that there is a holy Ghost, but deny that he is in the body of Christ, which is his only Church, no other certainly but only the Catholic, are without doubt, like the pharisees, who though they 
Dom. in Euang.  did confess, that there was an holy Ghost, yet denied him to be in Christ. And in 
Matth. serm. 11.  the Book of the method to cathecise the not instructed, We must, saith he, garnish and animate the infirmity of man against temptations and scandals, 
Id. de Catech. ru. c  be it without, or be it within the Church; 〈◊〉, against Gentiles, or 〈◊〉 or heretics, and within against the Straw in the Barn of our Lord. And 
Id. c. 27.  again, Let not the Enemy seduce thee, not only by those that are without the 
Conc.  Church, whether Pagans, or jews, or Heretics; but even by those that thou seest 
Carthag. 4. c 71.  in the Church evil livers. And in the fourth Council of Carthage, where he assisted in person: Let not the Conventicles of Heretics be called Churches, 
Cod. l. 1. tit. 5. de heresi. l. 5. & Cod.  but mock-Councells. And the very law of the Emperors: Heretics rashly presume to call their Conventicles, Churches. Now if this have place in other 
Theod. l. 16. l. 2.  heresies; to wit, that the being and title of a Church, is denied to them, how much more in that of the Eutychians; that is to say, of the Egyptians, and Ethiopians, which destroy not the walls, the roof, and the covering only, but the foundation of the Edifice of Faith, upon the which all the other parts of the doctrine are built; to wit, Christ the corner stone, and maintain that in Christ there is but one Nature; that is to say, confound and steep the Essence of the humanity in that of the divinity? Doth not saint AUGUSTINE cry out. Those that believe 
Aug. deunit. Eccles. c. 4.  not that Christ is come in the flesh, etc. and that he is risen again in the same Body wherein he hath been crucified and buried, although they should be in all the countries over the which the church is spread, are not in the Church. How can then the true Church have communion with this Sect? and how can this Sect, be a member, and a true part of the Church? And how can it be, that of the Roman Church which holds the contrary doctrine, and of this Sect, there should be framed one common Body of the 〈◊〉 Church? and to go about to join them together, in one selfe-same Society of a catholic Church, and more to add unto them all other heretical and schismatical sects; How is it any other thing, then to go about to join like Mezentius dead bodies with living bodies, and to make of the spouse of Christ, & of the dove of Christ which is the only catholic Church, a monster, and a Prodigy compounded of all the impious horrible and contradictory heresies, that have rend the Coat and mystical Body of Christ, and to put communion between Christ and belial, and between light and darkness? The Catholic Church then, is not a Mass and common Society which contains in it, the confusion of all Sects, and of all the multitude of those that are called Christians; but it is a particular Society amongst all those Societies, which bears the name of Catholic or total Church; not because it contains in deed all the rest: You will (saith Optatus Milevitanus to the Donatists) be alone all the whole, 〈◊〉 
Optatus Milevit. cont. Parm l. 2.  are not so much, as in the whole. And saint AUGUSTINE: Whosoever defends a part separate from the whole, cannot usurp the title of a Catholic: but because she contains them in right, and holds habitually the place 
Aug. 〈◊〉 utilit. credent c. 7.  of the whole, in regard of them. For the Church holds the place of the whole habitually in regard of heretical and schismatical Sects, and by her eminency; for as much as none of the other, considered every one a part, equals her in number and in multitude. Howbeit (saith Saint AUGUSTINE,) that there are many heresies of Christians which would be all called Catholics. There is nevertheless one Church, if you cast your Eyes upon the extent of the whole world, more abundant in multitude; and because unto her alone, belongs the prerogative of being successively spread over the whole earth, in beginning from Jerusalem, whereas none of the others hath the privilege; but that the most part of them (like that kind of Ape which the greeks call Callithrix) cannot live but in that climate, and under the same influence, wherein they were bred: And beyond this, because all the rest having gone forth from her, and she having as saint AUGUSTINE saith, still remained in her stock and root, holds the places and right of the whole, in regard of all the rest; no more nor less, than that part of the tree in which the life stood, and root rests; holds the place of the whole habitually in regard of those that have been separated from 
Aug contr.  
〈◊〉. l. 13 c. 1 2.  it: They under st and not (saith he) that amongst the Sects of the Christians there is one true and wholesome, and in sort Germinall and radical Christian society, from whence they have separated themselves. And finally, because all the rest are obliged, if they will obtain salvation, to reinsert and reincorporate themselves into the body of the Catholic Church; Hold most steadfastly (saith FULGENTIUS) that no heretic or schismatik, if he be 
Fulgent. de sid. ad Petr. c. 39  not reconciled to the Catholic Church, before the end of his life, can be saved. Otherwise, if all the heretical and schismatical Societies which profess the name of Christ, might justly enjoy the title of the Church, and were actually parts of the Church, wherefore had the Fathers employed these sentences against heretics and schismatics, That 〈◊〉 
Conc Carthag. 4. c. 1.  of the Church there is no salvation: that out of the Church there may be had the faith and Sacraments and all things else, Salvation excepted: that 
August. de gest. cum Emerit.  who hath not the Church for his Mother, cannot have God for his Father: that he that communicates with the universal Church, is a Catholic, and 
Cypr. de unit. Eccles.  he that communicates not therewith, is an heretic and Antichrist. And how could the excellent King himself have protested, That he believes without colour or fraud, that the is one only Church, in deed and in name Catholic and universal, spread over the whole world, out of which there can be 〈◊〉 Salvation hoped for; and condemneth and detests those, that heretofore or since have separated themselves, either from the Faith of the Catholic Church, and are become heretics, as the Manichees; or from her communion, and are become schismatics, as the Donatists, if the Catholic Church did comprehend all the Heretics and all Schismatics, among, which there was never any more pernicious, than those that destroy the human nature of Christ, the only organ of our Salvation, as the Egyptians and Ethiopians do? For whereas his majesty avows that the frame & contexture of the Church is already long ago dissolved & dissassembled between them & us, but adds, in regard of external form S. JOHN 
2. 〈◊〉.  in saying to us; If any one bring thee not this doctrine, say not so much to him as, well be it with thee; for whosoever shall say to him, well be it with thee, shall communicate in his wiched works; forbids us all communion, as well internal as external with them. And elsewhere, we have already showed, that when external and Sacramental communion is interdicted on both sides; that is to say, where there is a reciprocal excommunication and an erection of Altar against Altar, there cannot be unity either internal or external. If we be in unity (said S. AUGUSTINE) what makes two 
Cypr. ad Pupp.  Altars in the City: And Saint CYPRIAN The Church which being Catholic 
Gellius l. 9 c. 2.  is one, maintains herself whole, and is joined together, with the cement of Prelates adhering to one another-  
But against these decisions of the scripture and Fathers, there do arise four objections: The first that the word Church, doth grammaticallie signify assembly, and consequently that all assemblies are Churches, and so all Christian assemblies, are Christian Churches, Now this objection is good in gramar, and to interpret profane authors, but not in divinity, nor to interpret christian Authors, amongst whom the word Church hath no more this vast and large Grammatical signification as it had before. For as when Hormodius and Aristogiton, had freed the common wealth of Athens from the slavery of the thirty tyrants, the Athenian Senate to consecrate their names and to make them reverenced to Posterity, ordained that from thence forward, they should never be imposed upon, or communicated to any other. So after our Lord had given to his Church, the privilege to conquer Hell, and to deliver mankind from the tyranny and oppression of the devil, that name is become consecrate and affected to her alone, and it hath been forbidden to communicate it, any more to any other Society, either Paga, heretical, or Schismatical. Let not the Conventicles of heretics (saith the fourth Council of Carthage) be called Churches, but Mock-Councells. And the very law of 
Conc. Carthag 4 c. 71.  the Emperors, That the Donations made to heretical Conventicles which they presume rashly to call Churches, be applied to the reverend Catholic Church. 
Codic. l. 1. tit. 5. de haeret c. 5.   
THE second, that S. PAUL writing to the Galatians, and to the Corinthians, calls their Societies, Churches; and nevertheless the Galatians erred in faith embracing the circumcision with the Gospel; and the Corinthians in not believing the Resurrection; but the snare here is manifest. For there is great difference between the doctrine of a Church, and the doctrine of any particular person, which is divided from the doctrine of the same Church. The doctrine of a church is that which is held by the body of that Church, & under the codition whereof either express or tacit, she receives men into her comunion, & not the doctrine which every particular man straying fro the commo doctrine of the same church holds against the opinions of the Body. Now it cannot be found that the Society of the church of the Corinthians did ever hold that the dead did not rise again, nor that she had exacted that belief from those that entered into her communion; but only that amongst the Corinthians there were some that did not believe the resurrection of the dead: If Christ, (saith S. PAUL) be preached to have risen again from the dead, how is it that there are some amongst you that say, there is no resurrection of the dead? And that S. PAUL, made his remonstrance in common, it was to hinder them from being seduced by them which spoke this language; Suffer not yourselves (said he) to be seduced; evil words corrupt good manners. But not that he supposed they believed it; contrariwise he exhorts them to remain firm in that which they believed, And therefore my brethren (said he) be steadfast and unmoveable. And for the Galatians, so far off was it, that that error which saint PAUL cried out against was the doctrine of the Church of the Galatians, as it was the doctrine of those which rebelled against the faith of the Church of the Galatians; which doctrine saint PAUL disputes as if all the Galatians had embraced it, not that they did do so, but to hinder them from doing so; as he testifies to them in these words: I have this confidence of you in our Lord, that 
Ibid. c. 6.  you will have no other belief, but that he that troubles you shall bear his judgement whosoever he be. And again, If a man be found in any crime, do you which are spiritual, instruct him in the spirit of mildness. And that this is 
Aug. ep. 48  the true intent of saint PAUL, saint AUGUSTINE teacheth us when he writes to Vincentius Rogatist: Thou mightst say even as well that many of the Churches of Galatia were not when the Apostle cried out. O foolish Galatians who hath bewitched you: And a while after; The Canonical 
Id. ibid.  scriptures have been wont to make their reprehcnsion in such sort, as it may seem the word is addressed to all and nevertheless it concerns but some few.  
THE third is that saint AUGUSTINE disputing against the Donatists, 
Aug. de baptism. contr  writes, That the Church begets all Christians by Baptism from whence they would infer, that all those then that are baptised, as well catholics 
〈◊〉 l. 1. c 14.  as heretics, are in the Church, but he brings with it expressly this distinction, either in herself, or without herself; to show that the Church begets none but Catholics only in herself, as Sara begat but Isaac only in herself; and that the rest the Church begets without herself: For although Ishmael were not begotten in the Body of Sara but in the body of Agar, yet he was in a sort begotten by Sara, for as much as he was begotten by her that belonged to Sara and was Saras nuptial right; to wit, by the seed of Abraham. So than the heretics be begotten by Baptism out of the Church, nevertheless it is the Church that begets them even out of the Church, for as much, as the baptism whereby they are begotten, and which those that baptise them have carried out of the Church, belongs to the Church, and is of the conjugal rights of the church, and not heresy. By which means, when they return to the church, there is no need that the church should baptise 
Aug. ubi supra.  them again; The Church (saith he) begets all Christians by baptism be it in herself, that is to say, in her bowels or without herself, that is to is to say, of her husband's seed, be it in herself, or in the bond-woeman. Whereby so far is he from teaching, that heretics are in the church, as contrariwise he plainly affirms hereby: that they are out of the church, For the thing wherein catholics and the Donatists were at agreement was, that heretics were out of the church, and the thing where about they disagreed was, that the Donatists held, that Baptism could not be out of the church, and consequently, that heretics could not have it: And catholics chose maintained, that Baptism might to be out of the church: and consequently, that heretics though they were out of the church left not to have it. The Church (saith saint AUGUSTINE) compared to Paradise, teacheth us, that Baptism 
August. de baptism. contr. Donatists l. 4. c. 1.  may be had without her, but the Salvation of the beatitude none can receive or have out of her, for the floods of the fountain of Paradise ran abowdantlie forth of it And in the Book following: What is (saith he) this doctrine that an heretic is pretended to have no baptism, because he hath no Church. And again. It is a wonder that there are some that say, that baptism and the Church cannot be separated and divided, the one from the other, And elsewhere, But of the Church and against the Church they have holden the sacraments of Christ, and as in a civil war they have fought, bearing our own Banners against us. From whence we may discover the impertinency of those that conclude, that because heretical Sects have baptism, therefore they are Churches.  
THE fourth 〈◊〉 is, that saint HIEROME speaking in the person of the Church, saith to Hilary a Luciferian Deacon, I am a harlot, but yet I am thy mother, I commit adultery with Arius, and I did so before with Praxeas, 〈◊〉, Cerinthus. But it shallbe hereafter manifested that this is a ridiculous equivocation; by which they attribute that to S. HIEROME as spoken in his own sense, which he spoke according to the sense of his adversary; that is to say, according to the sense of the heretic against whom he disputeth. For to this that some add, that a lying man, leaves to be truly a man although he be not a true man; that is to say, a veritable man, and then that a Church, leaves not to be truly a Church, although she be not a true Church, it is a Sophism of the truth of the essence to the truth of the word, and of the word verus, to the word Verax, there being none so young a scholar, but knows that to speak univocallie; whosoever is truly a man, is a true man, for as much as being, and truth, are convertible, from whence it is that saint AMBROSE useth these words, true Israelite, and truly Israelite, as terms equivalent. And that saint AUGUSTINE saith; Every soul is by that a soul, by which it is a true soul. And therefore as the Fathers affirm, that there is none but the Catholic Church, that is a true Church. From thence, saith saint AUGUSTINE, it appears, that the true Church is concealed from no body. So they also say, that there is none but the Catholic Church, that is truly a Church. If you did teach (saith saint AUGUSTINE to the Manichees) that marriage were good, but virginity better, as doth the Church, which is truly the Church of Christ, the bolie Ghost had not predesigned you. And whereas it is replied, that a man for being less or more sound, leaves not to be a man: and so that a Church for being less or more pure, leaves not to be a Church, it is an other manifest Sophism, for health is not the essential form of a man, nor sickness the privation of the essential form of a man, but an accident which consequently may receive more and less, whereas purity of faith according to his majesty's own confession, is the essential form of the Church; and the impurity of Faith, the privation of the essential form of the Church. By means whereof no Society can hold among the conditions of her Communion and doctrine impure in Faith, and contrary to salvation, but she looseth at the same time, the being and title of a Church. And therefore the diversity of the communions, whereinto the Church was divided when Luther rose, must not be alleged for a pretence to be ignorant where the true Church than was. For since the Church ought to be perpetually visible and eminent, and that then there were no Christian communions visible in the world but ours, & that of the Grecians, under which are comprehended the Muscovites, & the Antiochians, & that of the Egyptians, & Ethiopians, which is but one, & that of the Armenians, & that of the Nestorians; & that it is of the essence, & of the necessary of the Church, that she should be pure and impolluted in faith; and that all those others by the common confession of us and of the Protestants, are heretics, and corrupt; it is not needful to go to Delphus to learn, that either the Church was perished, which (as we have above showed) could not be, or that it was our communion which was the Church.    

Of the quality wherein the Catholic Church attributes to herself the name of the whole. CHAP. VIII.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
AND therefore the most excellent King is much amazed when he sees the Churches which have been members of the whole Body, draw to themselves, all the right of uniniversalitie,   

THE REPLY:  
IT hath already been above showed, that by the Catholic Church, the Fathers never intended the Mass and total conclusion of the multitude of Christians: but a special society, distinct from the belief, and from the communion of all heretical and schismatical sects, and which in regard of the Mass, and general confusion of all the multitude of Christians, held actually but the place of a part, and held only the place of the whole actually, in regard of the particular Churches which were comprehended in deed in her communion. For there was never any age since the apostles built the church, but there have been some heretics, which have gone forth from the Body of the Church, nevertheless making profession of the name of Christ: They have 
1 joan. 2.  
Epist. jud. vers. 11  gone forth from us (saith S, JOHN) but they were not of us. And S. JUDAS, Cursed be they, for they perish in the contradiction of Chore, people which separated themselves, men, animals haviug not spirit. And S. AUGUSTINE: All heretics and Schismatics are gone forth from us, that 〈◊〉 to say (saith he) are gone forth of the Church. But amongst this difference of societies, making profession of Christian Religion, there was always one more eminent in multitude then the rest, which hath always remained in her stock and root, and from whence all the rest are gone forth, to whom also the name of Catholic nath been preserved, not because she held actually the place of whole in regard of the rest; but only of all habitually as the stock, in regard of the boughs which have been plucked off; for as much as in all the separations. she remained in the same estate wherein all the Body was before the separation, and consequently hath justly inherited the name of total Church, and succeeded only in the right and application of the whole, as being she alone that represents it. The Church. (saith S. AUGUSTINE:) Combating against all heresies, may be resisted, but she cannot be overthrown: 
Aug. de Symb. ad Catech. l. c. 5.  all heresies are gone forth from her, as unprofitable branches cut off from their vine, but she remains in her root, in her vine, in her charity, the gates of hell shall not prevail against her. Which amazeth me, that is majesty should be amazed, that the Churches which have heretofore been members of the whole Body, should draw to themselves all the Right of the universality. For the word Catholic, was never common to all Christians, but only to a part of Christians; to wit, to that wherein there remained the actual totality of that which rested in the just possession of the title of the Church, and which in regard of the parts separated, retained no more the effect, but only the right of the whole, as representing her, that before each separation, was the whole. And therefore, so far was S. AUGUSTINE from extending the totality of the Catholic Church, to the multitude of all the sects of Christians, as chose, after having reported the opinions of the eighty eight heresies, he adds, What the Catholic Church holds against all these things, is a superfluous demand, since it is sufficient for to know, that she holds the contrary to these things. And a while after, There may also be, or be made other heresies, besides these which are reported in this work of ours whereof who shall hold any one, shall be no Catholic Christian. And elsewhere; The Catholic and the heretic, are divided the one against the other. And again. They cannot begin to be Catholic, till they have left to be heretic. And therefore when the heretical Sects separate themselves from the Catholic Church, and divide themselves from the part that consents not to heresy, they hinder not the title os Catholic, nor the Right of universality from being preserved in her alone, and from belonging to her alone, no more than when in a common weal, the factious part, and which separated itself from the state, and revoltes against the true preservers of the Estate, come to be divided from that which remains in the lawful administration of the Estate, this division hinders not the part which rests united with the Estate from preserving the right and title of the universality of the commonwealth, and those things which are done by it alone, from being accounted to be done by the whole Body of the commonwealth; Whose whole being is preserved in this part alone, the other by the desertion thereof, having lost all the part it had in the name and effect of the commonwealth.    

Of the sense wherein the Roman Church is called Catholic. CHAP. IX.  

The continuance of the King's answer,  
TO attribute to themselves the title of Catholic, as proper to themselves alone.   

THE REPLY,  
WHEN we use this train of Epithets, the Catholic, Apostolic, Roman Church, we intent not by the word Roman, the particular Church of Rome, but all the Churches which adhere and are joined in communion with the Roman Church, even as by the jewish Church we intended not the tribe of juda only, but the lines of Levi and Benjamin, and many relics of the lines which were joined therewith. For S, JOHN BAPTIST, was of the tribe of Levy, and saint PAUL of that of Benjamin, & Anna of the tribe of Aser, and nevertheless they were all of the people of the jews, and of the jewish Church; but they were called jews and jewish people because of the adherence and communion that they had with the principal Tribe, which was that of juda. So all the other Churches which communicate with the Roman in what soever part they are constituted, are comprehended under the common word of the Roman Church, when we say the Catholic Apostolic and Roman Church, because they hold the Roman Church for the centre and original of their communion. And in this sense saint AMBROSE saith that his brother inquired if the Bishop of one of the cities of Sardica, where he desired to be baptised, consented with the Catholic Bishops, that is to say, added he, with the Roman Church. And in this sense, saint HIEROME saith, that the Church of Alexandria, glorifies herself, that she participates with the Roman Faith; And in this sense john Patriarch of Constantinople writes to Pope Hormisdas; We promise not to recite amongst the sacred mistiries the names of those which are separate from the communion of the Cathoick Church, that is to say, that consent not in all things with the Sea Apostolic. And in this sense Beda useth these words: Our mother the Roman Church. In this same sense they comprehend under the Greek Church not only the natuaall greeks, but the Russians, and Muscovites, although they be distinct in nation, and in language from the greeks, yea, even have their Service in a tongue quite different, for as much as they adhere to the Creek Church. Not that the particular Roman Church, may not also in a certain regard, be called Catholic. For the word Catholic is taken in three sorts, to wit, either formally, or causallie, or participativelie. Formally the only universal Church, that is to say, the Society of all the true particular churches, united in ourselves- same communion, is called catholic. Causallie, the Roman church is called Catholic for as much as she infuseth universality into all the whole body of the Catholic church. That it is so, to constitute universality, there must be two things, one that may analogicallie be instead of matter thereto, to wit, the multitude; for where there is no multitude there can be no universality: And the other to be instead of form thereto, to wit, unity; for a multitude without unity, makes no universality: Take away (saith saint AUGUSTINE) the unity from the multitude, and it is a tumult, but bring in unity, and it is the people. And therefore 
August. de verb. Domin. secundum Luc. serm. 26.  the Roman Church, which as centre and beginning of the ecclesiastical communion, infuseth unity, which is the form of universality into the Catholic Church; and by consequent, causeth universality in her, may be called catholic causallie, though in her own being, she be particular: no more nor less than the Galley, to which all the other Galleys of a Fleet have relation of dependency and correspondency, is called the General, although she be but one particular Galley, because it is she, that by the relation that all others have to her, gives unity to the total and general body of the Fleet. And finally particular Churches are called Catholic, participatively, because they agree and participate in doctrine and communion with the catholic Church. And in this sense the Church of Smyrna addresseth her Epistle: To the Catholic Church of Philomilion; and to all the Catholic Churches which are throughout the world.    

Of the causes wherefore the Roman Church, hath cut of the rest from her communion. CHAP. X.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
AND to exclude from their communion, all the rest which dissent from them in any thing, or refuse the yoke of slavery.   

THE REPLY.  
THE most excellent King, may be pleased to remember two things, one that ancient authors have written, that oftentimes for one only word contrary to Faith, many heresies have been cast out of the body of the Church: And the other, that the societies of the Egyptians and Ethiopians have not been excluded out of the Church, for refusing that which his majesty call the yoke of slavery; that is to say, the superintendency of the Roman Church, but for having embraced the Sect of Eutyches, who with all his partakers, was cut off from the Church by the Council of Chalcedon; and that even to this day, they are all ready, and have often offerred, to acknowledge the Pope, whom they confess to be the Successor of the Prince of the Apostles, if they might be received into the communion of the Roman Church, without obliging them to anathematise Eutiches and Dioscorus. And as for the division of the Greek Church; the true cause thereof hath been, the Schism fallen out between Ignatius, lawful Patriarch of Constantinople, whom the Pope preserved in his communion; and Photius intruded into the Patriarkship by the favour of the Emperor; to which Schism the greeks added for an obstacle of reunion, as the crabb cast the stone into the oyster, to hinder it from shutting itself again; the difference of the procession of the holy Ghost; and of schismatics became flat heretics. This was the true cause of the separation of the greeks, and not the yoke of slaveries of the Roman Church; of the which neither Jgnatius, nor any of his Catholic Predcessors, had ever complained.    

Of the sense wherein the heretics belong not to the Catholic Church. CHAP. XI.  

The Continuance of the Kings Answer.  
AND so on the sudden to pronounce presumptuously, that they belonged not, in any thing to the Catholic Church.   

THE REPLY.  
This denial is intended in deed, and not in Right; for we do not deny, but that the heretics belong by right to the Church; that is to say, that the Church hath to exercise her authority over them, and to judge, censure, and excommunicate them: but we say that they belong not in deed, to the Catholic church, that is to say, that they are not actually comprehended and contained in the catholic Church, and are not members and parts thereof: And it is not we that say this, but saint AUGUSTINE who writes it in these words: And therefore neither the heretic, belongs to the Catholic Church, because she loves God; nor the Schismatic, because she loves her neighbour.    

Of the proceeding of the other sects. CHAP. XII.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
AND it is not you alone, that attribute to yourselves this right, others also do the same for at this day, a word the king cannot speak without groaning, there are many particular Churches, which believe themselves only to be the particular people that they call the Church, if you give them strength like the Romans, they would already have done, as that hath done, and would judge the rest no less severely.   

THE REPLY.  
WHAT those are, we are not to Answer, let the dead bury their dead; only we may say, their conclusion would be good, if their hypothesis were true, for if they were true churches, every Society which should be excluded out of their communion, should be excluded from the title of the Church, and from the right of being able to call themselues a part of the Catholic Church, for as much as the Church as hath been above said, is either one, or none.    

Of the persuasion, that the other sects pretend to have, of the truth of their Church by scriptures. CHAP. XIII.  

The Continuance of the Kings Answer.  
WHAT shall I say more, that there are at this day, many sects which are celebrated, the sectaries whereof are most steadfastly persuaded, that they alone see some thing into holy writ, and, as sayeth the Poet, that they alone are understanding, and that the rest hunt after a shadow.   

THE REPLY.  
HARPASTE, 〈◊〉 domestical fool, having lost her sight, would not believe it was she that was become blind, but persuaded herself, that it was grown dark: It is just so with all heretics, they think it is the Church that is become dark and full of obscurity, and not themselves which are become blind. To find any thing answered the Pelagians to saint AUGUSTINE, when he alleged the multitude of Authors for the Catholic Church, A multitude 
Hier. contra Lucit.  of blind persons serve to no use. And by that only his majesty may judge, how necessary it is not to abandon nor prostitute the exposition of the scripture to the judgement of every particular person, since there is not that man that when he will make himself judge of it, doth not believe himself only clear sighted, and that the rest as Homer saith; embrace nothing but darkness. For the Scripture consisting, according to saint HIEROME, not in the reading, but in the understanding, and men not being able to assure themselves of the understanding of the Scripture by their particular Spirit, for as much as, saith saint PETER, as the exposition of the 
2. Petr.  Scripture is not made by private interpretation: it is necessary to determine the differences that are bred by the interpretation of the Scripture to have besides the Scripture a judge external, and interposed between that and us, who may secure us of the true sense thereof, and that this judge should have other marks, and be notable by other external means, then by that of the doctrine contested, since it is from that judgement, that we ought to learn the decision of the true sense of Scripture in points disputable; otherwise questions in Religion, could never be determined, no more than differences in civil controversies, if we should leave the deciding of the sense of the words of the law, to the preoccupated understanding of the Advocates and parties, & that there were no judge ordained above them, and set between the law and them, to interpret it.    

Of the sense wherein heretics have disputed the word Catholic. CHAP. XIV.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
IT is very true, that there hath been no age, wherein there hath not been conventicles to raise Sects & parasynaxes, which have bragged of the name of the Catholic Church, and have drawn ignorant persons to them by this allurement.   

THE REPLY,  
THAT the ancient Sects and Parasynaxes of heretics have effected the title of Catholic, it was not to pretend in good earnest, that it belonged to them, nor to draw ignorant persons to them by that allurement, but to dispute it with the catholic Church, and to hinder least by the possession of this name, she should preserve her menbers from being defrauded and seduced by heretics. And even so not to dispute it with her in that sense wherein she attributes it to herself to wit, as an Epethete of communion, but to dispute it in the quality of an Epithet of doctrine. For heretics have always sufficiently known, that this taken in the true sense, could neither be given nor maintained to their Sects. And therefore they spoke not of this word, but either in seeming to mock and scorn at it, as when Sympronion saith to saint PACIAN, that none under 
Pacian. 2d Sympron. 〈◊〉. 1.  the Apostles were called Catholics. And when Fulgentius the Donatist said, that the word Catholic was an human fiction. And that the Donatists according to the report of Vincentius Lirinensis, cried out to the Catholics: Come, come, o you miserable mad people, commonly called Catholics: or in disguising 
Vincent.  the sense of the word, and applying it to signify the quality of doctrine, 
Lirin. cont. heres. c. 26.  and not the communion of the Church, as the Donatists which called themselves Bishops of the Catholic truth; and to whom S. AUGUSTINE said, you are those that hold the Catholic faith not from the communion of 
Aug. ep. 48  the whole world, but from the integrity of the divine Sacraments. For when they suffered it to be admitted in a true sense, they were as speedily as shamefully driven from it. I asked him (saith S. AUGUSTINE, speaking of Fortunatus the Donatist) if he could give letters communicatory, which we called form 
Aug. ep. 163  whither I would, etc. But because the thing was manifestly false, they shifted from it by confusion of language. And elsewhere. We must (saith he) hold the 
Aug de vera Relig. c. 7.  Christian Religion, and the communion of that Church which is called Catholic, not only by themselves, but by their Enemies. For whether the heretics themselves, and the foster children of schisms, will or nil not, when they speak not with those of their Sects, but with others, they call the Catholic Church, Noah otherwise then Catholic. Neither could they be understood if they did not discern it by that name, by which the 
Aug cont. 〈◊〉. fund. c. 4  whole world calls it. And again. This Church alone; amongst so many and so great heresies, hath so maintained this name, as when a stranger asks an heretic, where they assemble to communicate in the Catholic Church, none of them dares to show his Temple or his house. And the reason the title of catholic was not an allurement wherewith heretics drew ignorant persons to them, but the firm bond by which the true Church drew to her, and retained in her communion all the true faithful, called to the hope of life eternal, and amongst other this Eágle of doctors S. AUGUSTINE, who saith, 
Id ibidem.  That I omit this sincere wisdom which you believe not to be in the catholic church. There be many other reasons which do most justly retain me in her lap: the consent of people and nations retains me, the authority begunn by miracles, 〈◊〉 by hope, increased by charity, confirmed by antiquity, retains me, the succession of Prelates, even from the Sea of Peter, to whom our lord committed his sheep to be fed 
Ibidem.  after his resurrection, until the present Bishop, detains me: And finally, the very name of Catholic, retains me. And a little after; these so many and so great most dear bonds of the Christian name, do justly detain faithful men in the Catholic Church, although for the slowness of our understanding, of the defect of merits in our lives, truth doth not yet show her, else with manifest evidence.    

Of the cases wherein the Communion in vow with the Catholic Church, may be imputed as actual. CHAP. XV.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
BUT this notable calamity is particular to the last times, whereto we are arrived, that the Catholic Church which must be communicated with, either really and by effect, or at the least voluntarily and in vow, is 〈◊〉 illustrious at this day then anciently she was, and less exposed to the view of men and more subject to be contested.   

THE REPLY.  
ARISTOTLE, that great Philosopher, which steeped his pen, say the greeks, in sense, in steed of ink; teacheth us, that the city 
Arist. Politic. c. 2.  is before the citizen; to wit, not in priority of time, for a commonweal can not be without a citizen, but in priority of nature; that is to say, that the being of the citizen depends from that of the city, and not the being of the city, from that of the citizen: from whence it appears, that the form that gives being in the first place to the city, and then by participation to the citizen, must reside in the city, in the most perfect manner that it can reside, and not in the most imperfect. And so although it suffice to preserve to a citizen the being of a citizen that in default of being able to participate actually in the communion of the common- wealth; as when he is hindered by any local obstacle, either of being in a strange prison, or remaining in a strange country, he commnicate there habitually, and in desire, which is an imperfect manner of communicating; it sufficeth not that the communion where by the common wealth is framed and preserved in being, should be a simple habitual communion and in vow; but it is necessary that it should be a true and actual communion. For when a Citizen is hindered by any local impossibility from communicating actually with his Common wealth, he leaves not to preserve the being of a citizen, provided that he communicate therewith habitually, that is to say in vow and in desire, and communicate not in a politic communion with any contrary society. But when the communion of the body of a commonwealth comes to be dispersed, and that there is no more any commerce or actual communion in the estate, than the common wealth is extinct and hath no more being; and the communion that is habitual and in desire of the citizens dispersed, and no more communicating one with an other, cannot preserve it. Now even that aught to be said of the Church, whereof the Psalmist singes prophetically; Jerusalem which 
psal. 〈◊〉  is built as a city, whose participation is in unity: to wit, that although the communion habitual and in vow, suffice for a particular person in case of impossibility for the actual, to make him imputativelie a member of the Church, that is to say, to cause this imperfect communion to serve him to salvation, in default of the other: Nevertheless the Church cannot be framed nor preserved, in the being of a Church, by a communion only habitual and in vow, but by a real and actual communion: The which as soon as it comes wholly to cease and to perish in the Church, the Church perisheth, and ceaseth to be. And therefore this distinction of actual communion, and communion in vow, serves well to show, that any one may be imputativelie in the Church without participating actually in the visible communion of the Church; provided, that this defect come from an imposibilitie of participating therein actualie: but not to show, that the body of the Church can subsist, and preserve the being and true title of a Church, without visible and actual communion. For chose, that this imperfect manner of being in the Church, serves to his salvation that is hindered by any local obstacle from being able to be there actually, it is because the true and actual communion which as in the Church, is imputed to him by the desire that he hath to participate thereof, which could not be imputed to him, if it were not really some where; and besides, this desire of participation must be stripped from all other impediments, saving that which proceeds from loand corporal imposibilities, in such sort, as all those which are not withheld by distance of place, or other like obstacle inevitable to them, from participating in the actual communion of the Church cannot be said to communicate there in vow, nor to be there imputatively. For nothing dispenceth with men for communicating with the Catholic Church only in vow and in will, and not really and by effect, if it be not the exclusion of time and place, and besides in the article of death; no more than any thing can excuse a man from being baptised only in vow and in will, and not really and by effect; but the condition of being excluded by the impossibility of time and of place, and also in the Article of death from the means how to be baptised. And because, when the obstacle proceeds from external impediments only; & that if there were local or temporal commodity, he that communicates with the Church in vow, would communicate therewith actually, this desire of communion, may be imputed for true communion, and called a communion in vow. But when the obstacle proceeds from internal impediments from him that pretends to communicate there in vow, as of repugnancy to the belief, and to the discipline, and the laws, under the conditions whereof, the Catholic Church receives into her communion those that she receives thereinto, in such sort, as all corporal obstacles being taken away, and he being in place where he may assist at the Catholic Church, & communicate with her, he will not do it; this conditional desire of communicating with her, in case she would change the conditions of her communion, cannot be called communion in vow, but discommunion; otherwise there would be no heretics that would not communicate with the Catholic Church, for there is no heretic but would offer to communicate with her, provided she would change the clauses and conditions of her communion, and would reform herself to the conditions of his Sect. To communicate then in vow with the Catholic Church, is not to be hindered from communicating really therewith, by any obstacle proceeding from him that communicates therewith in vow; nor by any condition that he reproves in the Catholic Church, nor by being united in communion with any other Sect, whose communion is repugnant to the doctrine of the Catholic Church. For whosoever communicates with another sect, wherewith the catholic Church communicates not, can not be said to communicate in vow with the Catholic Church. And therefore S. AUGUSTINE speaking of some good people, who sometimes are uniustly excommunicated & cast forth of the Church, affirms that they cease not to enjoy the friute of the communion of the Church; that is to say, that they are reputed to communicate with the Church in vow, when there is on their part no obstacle from communicating actually therewith, and that they make no congregation of 〈◊〉 out of the Church: Often times also (saith he) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 permitts that honest people should be cast out of the Christian congregation by some over turbulent sedition of carnal men, which 〈◊〉 to them done, when they 〈◊〉 it patiently, for the peace of the Church, and attempt no innovation of Schisms, nor of 〈◊〉, they teach men with how true affection, and with how great sincerity, and charity, God must be served. Of such men then, the purpose is either to return the tempest being ceased, or if they be not permitted, whether because the same tempest continues; or whether least by their return, there may arise the like, or one more cruel; they yet preserve the will to serve even those to whose motions and perturbations, they have given 〈◊〉, defending without any congregation of Conventicles to the death, and helping by their testimony, the faith which they know to be preached in the Catholic Church: Those the Father which sees them in secret, will crown in secret. From whence it appears, that those which communicate with any other Society separate from the Church, and hold any other doctrine, but that which is held in the Catholic Church & who are hindered from communicating with the Catholic Church by obstacles proceeding on this part, and by repugnancy to the conditions under the obligation whereof people are received into the Catholic Church; cannot be said to communicate in vow with the Catholic Church.    

Of the equivocation of terms diminutive employed for negatives. CHAP. XVI,  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
BOTH less exposed to the view of men, and most subject to 〈◊〉.   

THE REPLY:  
THE Poets fain, that the Cyanian or Simplegade Islands, which are two Isles in the Mediterranean Sea, do sometimes meet together, and join themselves in such sort, as they seem to be 
Theocrit. Concurrentia Saxa. iwenal, Cent. l. c. 4 Vide Staplet, l. x. c. 7  but one; therefore Homer calls them, wand'ring, and Pindar, animated, because they are described so movable and vagabond. The same may be said, of the visible and invisible Church of the Protestants; to wit, that sometimes they propound them as two Churches distinct, & separate & sometimes they draw them together, and make them communicate together, and compound of them one selfe-Bodie and Society. For when the oracles of the Prophetts & Apostles are produced to them, touching the perpetual purity and integrity of the Church; and that they are demanded where all these promises have been fulfilled since so many and so many ages; their 〈◊〉 refuge is to frame two Churches; the one visible, and the other invisible, and to say, that the purity of Religion hath always been preserved in the invisible, which hath remained exempt from the contagion and from the abominations of the visible, but that it hath been extinguished and abolished for a long time in the visible. And then as this eclipse according to them is ceased, and that they come to cast their eyes upon any company which begins to hold visible, that which they believe their invisible Church invisibly to have held, than they constitute no more but one Church and one communion of the visible Church, and of the invisible Church. Now what other Protestants do under the term of invisible Church, his majesty is brought to do it under these words less exposed to man's view, and more subject to contestation: by which no other thing can be seriously understood, but that when Luther came into the world, the true Church was wholly invisible, and not only that she was wholly invisible, but that she was wholly perished. For if when Luther came into the world, amongst many Societies that contested for the title of the Church, there had been one less illustrious and eminent than she had anciently been, but yet visible, which ought to be discerned from the rest, by this essential mark, that in the points wherein she differed from them, she hath for her the word of God. Where did that Church reside? Let them give it to us, that we may give ourselves to it. But if she, were invisible, and that before the coming of Luther there were a flock unknown in the eyes of men, but known to God, which held the same doctrine that Luther brought; besides that I will ask how the members of that Church could be saved, not making any profession of their Faith; since our Lord saith, who shall deny me before men, I will deny him before God my Father: And saint PAUL; We believe with our hearts to justice, but we confess 
Matt. 10.  with our mouths to Salvation. This Church then when Luther, 
Rom. 10.  rose up had no need to receive any change in the points which are at this day in controversy, nor to take any instruction from Luther or his disciples, but only to declare herself, and with her Gyges' Ring, to make herself from invisible, visible. And to cry out, this is my belief, this was the doctrine that I held before Luther spoke. Now this is so far from benig so, as Luther, protests, that none before him ever discovered the truth 〈◊〉 the doctrine that he hath declared: And all those that came thither persuaded by the preaching of him and of his disciples, and without ever bragging of the precedent possession of the same doctrine; neither had this sufficed, for the same Church must have said, Luther hath not yet passed forward enough he is not yet arrived to the whole sum of my doctrine. For we know how much 〈◊〉, and Zuinglius, have added to the doctrine of Luther. And so there not being, when Luther, came into the world, a Society, neither visible, nor invisible, which held Luther's doctrine, and much less Caluins, in the 〈◊〉 controverted between them and us, it must necessarily follow, that the Church was then perished, for since the excellent King, will have it that the only assured mark to discern which, either of the Church which he calls, English, or of ours, is the true Church, be it that which is the essential form of the Church, and that he pretends to be doctrine; it is necessary that he suppose that the difference, which are between the Church that he calls, English, and ours, be questions which take away the essential form of the Church, and destroy the being of a Church: And by consequence, that that of the one or other Society, which errs in these points, shall be deprived of the essential 〈◊〉 of a Church, and destitute from the being of a Church. And then if when Luther came into the world, there were no Society neither visible nor invisible, which held that that the English Church holds at this day in the points disputed between her and us, it follows there was then no Church.    

Of the authority of the work entitled imperfect. CHAP. XVII.  

The Continuance of the Kings Answer.  
AND therefore the excellent King thinks, that he ought with so much the more Care in 
Aug. in psal. 124  so great a flood of different opinions, withdraw himself into the mountains of the holy Scripture.   

THE REPLY.  
WHEN Nauplius King of the Island of Euboea now called Negrepont, would at the return from the Siege of Troy, cause the fleet of the greeks to be shipwrecked, to revenge the death of his Sonn Palamedes, he set by night, torches in form of a beacon upon one of the mountains of his Island, at the foot whereof, the Sea was full of banks, cliffs, and rocks, so to draw their ships by the hope of a safe haven, to run, hazard and perish in those shores. So whenantient heretics, whom saint AUGUSTINE calls, mountains for Shipwreck, would cause the Catholics to make shipwreck in Faith, the more their doctrines have been pernicious and mortal, the more they have adorned and illustrated them, with texts and lamps of the scripture: This appears in the heresy of the Arrians, who painted and coloured their error with more than forty passages of the Bible, and by this art attempted to call men back from the external and sensible marks of the Church, which could not be pretended by false ensigns, by those who had them not, to reduce them to the only mark of the scripture, the interpretation whereof, by their subtlety they made subject to as many deceits as there were words. But above all this is verified in the writer, from whom his Majesty borrows this language, who was one of the most passionate Champions of the Arrians, For though he cities these words without naming the Father, nevertheless, both the terms wherein they are couched, and the track of those who have alleged them before him; to wit, Calvin in some of the prefaces to his institution, & the author of the Book of the Eucharist, in the preface to his work, cannot suffer us to doubt, but that they were taken from the author of the work entitled Imperfect; falsely attributed to Saint chrysostom. Now that this Author was not only an open Arrian, but one of the most eager and violent Champions of the Arrians; it appears by this, that he calls the Trinity; triangular impiety and the doctrine of the homousians (that is to say, 
Author oper imperf in Matth. hom. 19  of those that held the Consubstantiality of the Father and the son) Heresy. Not but that I knew well, that he is sometimes alleged even by Catholics, with the title of saint CHRISOSTOME, under whose name he had been first printed at Basle. But because it is one thing to allege him in places where he disputes not against the Church, wherein he is excellent, and above all in the discourse of manners, and an other to allege him in the places, where he combats with deliberate purpose against the doctrine of the Catholic Church of his age, as he doth in that, from whence the words are taken which his majesty produceth. For behold the express terms of the passage; When you shall 
Author. oper. imperf in Matth. hom. 49.  see the impious heresy, which is the army of Antichrist set in the holy places of the Church; then let them which are in judea, fly into the Mountains; that is to say, let them that are in the christian Society; have recourse to the scriptures. And a little after; The Lord then knowing, that so great a confusion of things should arrive in the last days; for this cause commands that the Christians, who are in the Christian Society, being willing to receive the steadfastness of the true faith, should have recourse to no other thing but to the Scriptures; otherwise, if they cast their eyes elsewhere, they shall be scandalised and perish, not discerning which is the true Church. Now that by this impious heresy, and by this Army of Antichrist, he intends the Catholic Church, and the communion of them, which believe the equality of the Father and the son, he plainly shows when he saith in the same Homily; that the great spiritual evils which have come upon the Church have happened in the time of Constantine and Theodosius, and that the army of Antichrist is the heresy and the abomination of desolation, which hath since them possessed the holy places of the Church; that is to say, the Basilickes that Theodosius commanded to be delivered up to the Catholics; And when he saith in the former Homily, that the heresy of the Homousians (that is to say, of those that hold Christ to be consubstantial which his Father) Fights not only against the Church of Christ, but even against the other heresies which hold not the like. And in the nineteneth Homily, when he calls the worshippers 
Enseb. de vit. Const. l. 3.  the Trinity; Those that honour the triangular impiety. Whereby it appears, that this passage if so far from giving favour to his Majesty's 
Author oper. imperf hom. 48.  intention, as chose it manifestes how dangerous a thing it is to seek to reduce the marks of the Church, to the only doctrine drawn from the scripture by the interpretation of every particular person, since the Arrians in the point which of all others should be most express in the scriptures for the catholics; to wit, in the point of the divinity of Christ; for if there be any thing cleree in a Testament, it should be the quality of the testator; refused all the other marks of the Church, and all the other ways of disputation, and burnt with desire to fight by the only texts of the Scripture, disarmed from the traditions of the Church.    

Of the understanding of these words of S. Augustine to seek the Church in the words of Christ. CHAP. XVIII,  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
AND to seek (according to the Council that S, AUGUSTINE heretofore gave to the Devatists) the Church in the Words of Christ.   

THE REPLY:  
WHEN S. AUGUSTINE said in the book, of the unity of the 
Aug. deunit. Eccles. c. 21.  Church, there is a question between the Donatists and us, where the Church is; what shall we them do: shall we seek her in our own words, or in the words of her head, our Lord jesus Christ: I think we ought rather to seek her in his word, from him that is truth, and well knows his own Body: And a while after: I would not have the Church demonstrated by humane instructions, but by divine or acles. And again: Let us then seek her in the canonical scriptures. He did not intend, that to seek the Church in the scriptures, 
〈◊〉 c. 3  between the Catholics and the Donatists, was to seek the doctrine of 
Ibidem  the Church in the scriptures; that is to say, to examine by the scriptures the point of doctrine, which was contested between the Church and the Donatists; but to seek the marks, and external and visible characters of the Church in the scriptures; to the end, that the Church being discerned by those marks, the truth of the doctrine contested, might be after known by the disposition of the Church. For the understanding whereof it must be noted, that there were two questions between the Catholics and the Donatists; the one, of the Body of the Church, to know on what party either of the Catholics, or of them, the true society of the Church resided: The other, of the doctrine of the Church; to wit, the which they, or the Catholics held the true doctrine, concerning the Baptism of heretics. The first question then, which is, of the Body of the Church, saint AUGUSTINE wills it should be judged by the scripture alone for as much as in the precise controversy, wherein the question was, which of the two societies was the Church, the voice of the true Church cannot be discerned. But the second question, which is that of the doctrine contested between the Catholics and the Donatists, he would have it decided by the only deposition of the Church, as a faith full guardian and depositary of the Apostolic tradition. To seek then according to saint AUGUSTINE between the Catholics and the Donatists the Church in the Scriptures, was not to search the doctrine of the Church in the contentious points of Faith in the Scripture, but to seek the visible marks and notes by which the Church ought to be exteriorly discerned in the Scripture. For the Donatists to prove that their Church was the true Church, and not the Catholic Church, alleged human acts, and human proofs, to wit, that the Catholic Church had received into her communion, without any expiation, and purgation of preceding penance, those that had delivered the holy Books to be burnt, and had sacrificed to the false Gods in the time of persecution; and therefore that she was polluted with their contagion, and was perished: And then that the only faction of Donatus which had remained pure from this contagion, was the true Church. And saint AUGUSTINE chose saith, that against all these words, which were human proofs and words; for if he that ordained Cecilianus, had delivered up the holy Books in persecution time, it was a thing to be proved by human testimonies, that is to say, by acts of notaries and clerks even profane; the Catholics had the words of Christ, wherein the works of the Church were described, to wit, that she ought to be visible, eminent, universal, perpetual, and that to examine the Church according to these marks it was to seek her in the words of Christ: and to examine her according to the production of the Donatists, it was 
Aug. de unit 〈◊〉 c. 2.  to seek her in humane words, What are, saith he, our words wherein we must not seek her; etc. All that we object one against an other of the delivery 
Ibid. c. 3.  of the holy Books, of the sacrificing to Jdolls, and of the persecutions; those are our words. And a while after; I would not, that the Church should be demonstrated by human instructions; but by divine oracles: for if the holse Scriptures have designed the Church to be in Africa, alone, and in a small number of Roman inhabitants, making their conventicles in Rocks and mount 〈◊〉, and in the house and territory of a certain Spanish Lady; than whatsoever records can be produced, there are none but the Donatists that have the Church. If the Scripture assign it to a little number of Mauritanians, in the 〈◊〉 province; you must go to the Rogatists. If in a small troop of Bizacenians and Tripolitans & provincials, the Maximinianists have met with her. If those of the East alone, we must seek her amongst the Arrians, Macedonians, Eunomians, and others, if there be others; for who can number the heresies, as proper and particular of every particular Province? But if by the divine and most certain testimonies of the Canonical scriptures, she be designed in all nations, whatsoever they produce, and whensoever it be produced by those that say, there is Christ, if we be 〈◊〉, let us 〈◊〉 hear the voice of our Shepherd saying, believe them not. For every one of those is not to be found, but this which is over all, is to be found in the self same places, where the others are. And therefore let us seek her in the holy Canonical scriptures. The places the of the scripture, where S. AUGUSTINE would have the Donatists to seek the Church, are these. In thy seed, all the nations upon the earth shallbe blessed, The children of the forsaken 
Ibid. c. 7. & 19 & ep. 165.  shallbe in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 number, than those of her, that hath a husband. This Gospel must be declared over the whole world, and then the end shall be. I am with you to 
〈◊〉.  the consummation of ages: And other such like. And the arguments that he 
Ibid. c. 15. & ep. 165. & ep. 48.  brings to manifest the Church by the Scriptures are these: The city of God, saith he, hath this for a certain mark, that she cannot be hidden: she is then 
Idem in 〈◊〉 tract. 102. & contra litter. Petil. l 3. c 50  known to all nations; the sect of Donatus is unknown to many nations, then that is not she. Item. You have the Church which ought to be spread over all, and to grow till the harvest. You have the City, whereof he that built it hath said, the City built upon the mountain cannot be hid. It is she then that is most evident, 
Aug. contr. litt Petil l. 2 c 104.  not in any one part of the world, but over all. And other the like. But as for the point of doctrine; I say again, and I say it boldly, 
Idem de unit. Eccl. c. 26.  that saint AUGUSTINE never intended, either that the question of the Church between the Catholics and the Donatists, should be tried by the doctrine, nor that the article of the doctrine contested between them should be decided by scripture, but that the point of the Church, should be examined by the external and visible marks, that of the external and visible marks, by the Scripture, and the difference of doctrine, by the report of the Church, that is to say, by the tradition of the Apostles is to deny, that in disputations against other heresies, when points are handled which are here esteemed to be expressly treated of by the canonical Scriptures, but that he often called upon their judgement. For who doubts but that where the Scripture is clear & express, we must have recourse thereto? But we said that he never thought, neither in general that all things belonging to Religion, were treated off in scripture, nor in particular, that the contention between the Catholics and the Donatists; concerning Baptism, was of that quality. And we maintain, that for so many years, wherein he combated with them about this article when there was quenstion of Searching the cause to the bottom, he never produced one proof out of Canonical scripture. Indeed, he hath often alleged places of Scripture, to make some approaches to it, and to beat down certain defences, to solve by scripture the arguments that the Donatists brought out of Scripture, to maintain that the custom of the Church in the point contested was according to Scripture, in as much as (According) signifies not against the Scripture, to establie general theses and preparatives, to prove the propositions that had some sympathy and affinity with that which he disputed. As for example, he doth indeed prove by scripture, that what is sound 
Aug. de Bapt. contr Donat. l. 2. 7.  and entire amongst heretics, must not be repeated again, when they return to the Church; but that Baptism is sound and entire amongst them, he doth no were prove by Scripture. He proves indeed by Scripture, 
Augu. de gust. cum 〈◊〉. & cont. Cresc l. 1. c. 30.  that there may be ecclesiastical things out of the Church, but that Baptism is of that number, he nether doth nor can prove by Scripture. He proves indeed by scripture, that it is against the command dement 
Id. de Bapt. contra Do nat. l. 4. c, 6. & alibi  of God, if heretics have received the Baptism of Christ in their own party, to rebaptise them; for we also read that our Lord answered Saint PETER. He that is wholly washed, need wash but his feet: But that heretics receive the Baptism of Christ in their Sects, and not 〈◊〉 polluted and profane washing, which is all the knot of the question, he no were proves by scripture. For as 
Aug. contr. Cresc. l. 1. c 31.  he notes elsewhere, Peter of whom this is written, had not been baptised by heretics, he proves indeed by scripture, that they 
Idem de unit. Eccl. c. 18.  who are out of the interior and Spiritual unity of the Church as Judas and wicked Catholics, do not for that leave to confer true Baptism, but that they who are neither inwardly nor outwardly in the Church, who are out of the unity of the profession of Faith, and of the communion of the Sacraments of the ecclesiastical body, can confer it, he proves no where by scripture. And in Sum, the things which belong to the Solutions of arguments to probable and conjectural preparatives, to shows of possibility and non repugnancy, to soften and dispose the spirit of the Readers, he doth indeed prove by scripture, but the impression of the last form, the assumption and hypothesis of the syllogism, the proof of this precise and special point, that Baptism whereof Saint JOHN cries, None may receive any thing except it be given him from heaven; That Saint PETER saith to be administered into remission 
Act. 2.  
Ad tit. 〈◊〉  of Sins, That Saint PAUL calls the washing of regeneration, and the renewing 
Ephes. 4.  of the holy Ghost, and whereof he writes, One faith, and one 
Galat. 3.  Baptism, And again; All they that are baptised have put on Christ, That this Sacrament I say, may be conferred out of the Church, which is the fullness of Christ, which is the sealed Fountain, which is the only dwelling of the holy Ghost, which is she alone that hath received the keys, and the authority, to remit sins, that this can subsist amongst heretics, who have neither faith nor gift from heaven, nor the holy Ghost: you can never find that in so main years as saint AUGUSTINE the principal opposite and overthrow of this heresy hath contested her, he hath never manifested, nor could he, nor he hath not pretended to prove by any passage of Scripture, but by the only unwritten traditions of the Apostles, and the general practice and universal attestation of the Church. We must (saith he) observe in these things what the Church of God observes; The question now between you and us is, which of yours or ours, is the Church of God. And again; Wherefore, although in truth there be no example to be produced of this out of the 〈◊〉 Scripture, yet we leave not to maintain even in this case, the truth of the Scriptures, when we observe what hath been approved by all that Church, that the authority of the canonical Scripture recommendeth. And in an other place; This is neither openly nor evidently 
Idem de unit. Eccl. c. 19  read neither by you nor by me etc. But if any one endued with wisdom and recommended by the testimony of our Lord jesus Christ, were to be found in the world and that he had been consulted by us upon this question, we ought no way to doubt to do what he should tell us, for fear of being judged repugnant, not so much to him, as to our Lord Jesus Christ by whose testimony he had been recommended; Now he gives testimony to his Church. And in the work of Baptism against the same Donatists: The Apostles (saith he) have prescribed nothing in this matter, but 
Idem de Bapt. contr Donat. l. 5. c. 23.  this custom ought to be believed to have taken the original there of, from their tradition, as there are many things which the universal Church observes, and which are therefore, not without cause believed to have been commanded by the Apostles, although they be not written. From whence, the contrary appears to what his majesty pretends to infer from this passage; to wit, that the scripture only destitute of the unwritten Apostolic tradition, cannot decidè all points of Faith, nor refute all heresies. For the point in agitation between the Catholics and the Donatists concerning the truth & reality of the baptism given by heretics, was a point of faith, and wherein obstinate error would make an heresy. The proof of this is, first that the doctrine of Baptism imports so much to the faith, as where there is no true baptism, there is no true Church: S, PAUL teaching us, that 
Ephes. 5.  God cleanseth his Church through the washing of water in the word. Now there where the Church is destroyed, there is destroyed this article of the Faith of the Creed; I believe the bolie Catholic Church. And secondly, that the unity of Baptism belongs so to faith, as S. PAUL saith; there is one faith, and one Baptism. And that the creed of Constantinople sets amongst the 
Ephes. 4.  Articles of the Confession of the Faith: We 〈◊〉 one baptism in the remission of sins: in such sort as if the Donatists erred in disannulling the baptism 
Conc. Const 1.  of heretics, and rebaptising them, they destroyed the faith of the unity of baptism, and anathematised the character of Christ, which had already been imprinted in the baptised by baptism. And if the Catholics err in approving the baptism of heretics, and in not rebaptisinge them when they came to them, they sinned against the Faith of the necessity of Baptism for the constitution of the Church, and consequently had no Church. And nevertheless, neither could this point of Faith be proved, nor the contrary heresy confuted by Scripture, only destitute of the help of tradition. And although Optatus Milevitus in the beginning had attempted it; nevertheless, the success hath made saint AUGUSTINE (who hath gone further in this question) see and confess, 
Aug. contrlit. Petil. l. 3 c. 6.  that to compose it, there was a necessity of having recourse to the unwritten Apostolic tradition. And what saint AUGUSTINE allegeth in generáll against Petilianus must not be objected against this, If any one of Christ, or of the Church, or of aught belonging to the faith or to life, declare 〈◊〉 then this that you have received in the legal and Euange licall scriptures, let him be anathema. For himself declares elsewhere, as it shall appear hereafter that this word of S. PAUL further, signifies against, or to the prejudice of: The Apostle (faith he) hath not said, more then, but, further, for if he had said, more then, he had condemned himself, He that desired to come to the Thessalonians to supply what was wanting in their Faith. Now he that supplies, adds that which was not in the thing, but takes not away what was therein before.    

Of the understanding of the words of S. chrysostom in the thirty third homily upon the Acts. CHAP. XIX.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
EVEN so S. CHRISOSTOME, as well elsewhere as of deliberate purpose in the thirty third homily upon the Acts, handling this question, how the true Church may be discerned amongst many Societies, which attribute this name to themselves, doth teach that there are two instruments to judge and decide this question: First the word of God, and afterward the antiquity of the doctrine, not invented by any late body, but always known since the beginning of the Church, when she was but breeding.   

THE REPLY.  
THERE are four 〈◊〉 to be made upon this Article; the first, that saint CRYSOSTOME gives not this Rule to discern the true Church from all societies that differ from her in what point soever; but only to discern her from those, that differ from her, in the point of Christ's divinity; wherein it is no wonder if the scripture be more clear and express then in any other. The second, that this mark to discern the Church, he gives not to those, that are already preoccupated with the opinion of any of the Christian sects but to the Pagans which were not anticipated with passion, for any of the parties that combated about the points of Christ's divinity, and for this reason might seem to judge the more impartially. The third, that saint CHRYSOSTOM'S aim is not to treat seriously there, of the marks of the Church with the Pagans, but to stop their mouths; and to show, that whereas they said, that they would turn Christians, but that they knew not on which part to range themselves: these were but pretences, and not true language. The fourth, that he stopps not there, but acknowledging that this means, because of the subtlety and shifts of heretics, is not sufficient, requires and exacts an other, that is to say, that he reduceth in the last instance, all the sum of the question, to this point; that, that is the true Church which hath remained steadfast and immutable in her communion, and from whence all the others are gone forth, and that came forth from none. A Pagan (saith he) comes and saith, I would turn Christian, 
Chrysost. in Act. ho 33.  but I know not to whom I ought to adhere; for there are amongst you many strifes, seditions, and tumults, I know not which opinion I should choose, nor which I ought to prefer; every one saith, I follow the truth; whom shall I (that am utterly ignorant in the Scriptures) believe, seeing both sides, (as well the Catholics, as the Sects of the Arrians, as it shall appear hereafter) protest the same thing? That certainly answereth he, makes much for us; for if we say we must believe reasons, thou shalt not without cause be troubled; but if we say, we must believe the Scriptures, and they be simple and true, it is easy for thee to judge thereof; if any one conform himself to them, he is a Christian; if any strive against them, he is far from this rule. But what will become of it, saith the Gentile, if the other coming also, say the scripture affirms this thing, and thou sayest it affirms an other thing, and that you wrest the scripture into diverse parts each drawing the understanding of the words thereof to his own side? etc. Then, saith S. CHRISOSTOME, we will inquire of the Pagan, if what he saith, be pretences and excuses, and ask him, ifhe condemn the Gentiles? He must say some thing, for he will not desire to come to us, till first he condemn them; we will ask him then for what cause 〈◊〉 condemns them; for he will not condemn them without cause. It is manifest that he will say, because their Gods are Creatures, and are not the uncreated God. This 〈◊〉 well answer we, for if this 〈◊〉 found in other heresies (a clause which evidently shows, that he spoke only of those heresies which opposed, the 〈◊〉 of Christ, which were those where with the East was afflicted) and we affirm the contrary, what need more words? We all confess that Christ is God, but see who combats against it, and who combats not against it; we call him God, and pronounce of him things worthy of God; that he hath power, that he is not servile, that he is sree, that he doth all things of himself; and they the contrary. And then finally, seeing that this attempt succeeded not sufficiently; It is not possible, saith he, but he that hears without preoccupation, should be persuaded; For as if there were a Rule according to which all things should be squared, there were no need of great consideration, but it would be easy to discern him that should make wry lines; Even so is it now: But wheresore then, would he say, do they not see it? Preiudication and human causes do many things: that replies 〈◊〉, they say also of us. And how can they say it? for we have not separated ourselves, nor have made no schism, nor division 
Chrysost.  in the Church; We have no heresiarches, we name not ourselves after the 
ibidem. 〈◊〉  name of any man, we have no leaders as to one Martion, to another Manicheus, to an other Arius, to an other, an other heresi-founder. But if we take the appellation of any particular, it is not from those that began any heresy, but of those that preside over us and govern the Church: We have no doctors upon earth, God forbid, we have one alone in heaven. This also will he say, the others likewise affirm it, but the name that they bear (answereth he to wit, of Marcionites, or of Manichees or of Arrians) convinceth them and stopps their mouths. By which words it appears, that the last analysis and resolution of the question, is all determined in this point; that, that is the true Church, which hath remained unmovable and steadfast in her communion, & from whom all the others have gone forth, and is gone forth from none; which is also the mark that S. AUGUSTINE 〈◊〉 it when he saith. The Catholic Church 
August. de Symbol ad Cathec. l. 1 c 5.  combating against all heresies, may be opposed but she cannot be overthrown, all 〈◊〉 are come forth from her, as unprofitable branches cut off from their Vine, but she remains in her vine, in her root in her Charity. And S. PACIAN Bishop 
Pacian. ad Sympron. ep. 3.  of Barcelona before him, when he writes. Now to know whether she hath been principally built upon the foundation of the prophetts, and of the Apostles in jesus Christ the corner stone: Consider whether she began before thee, whither she hath grown before thee: if she be not withdrawn from her first foundation: whether in separating herself from the rest of the Body, she have not constituted to herself her Masters and her particular instructions: if she have argued any thing unaccustomedlie: if she have form any point of new right, if she have declared to her Body the divorce of peace, then let her be esteemed to be departed from Christ, and to be constituted forth of the prophetts and Apostles. And therefore, although the point of the assential deity of Christ, deserve to be more clearly expressed in Scripture, than any other, as the quality of the Testator, aught to be more clearly expressed in the Testament, than any other; nevertheless, for as much as the heretics by their malice and subtlety, shift off the places of Scripture alleged to this purpose; the Fathers after they had tried all their strength to bring them back to reason by Scripture, were constrained (seeing they could not make them yield up their weapons by that way) to changetheir battery, & have recourse to the authority of the Church. Behold (saith saint ATHANASUS) we have showed the succession of our doctrine from father to son; you new caiphass 
Athan. in Decret.  what Progenitors of your phrases and your terms, will you bring us? And saint 
Synod. Nicen. contr. Arian.  HILARY: Let us consider so many holy fathers; what will become of us if we anathematise them? for we bring things to this point, that if they have not 〈◊〉 Bishops, we are none, since we have been ordained by them. And the same 
Hilar. de Synod.  saint ATHANASIUS: It is sufficient that these things are not of the Catholic Church, and that the Fathers were not of that belief. From whence it 
Athan. ep. ad epitect. contra haeret.  appeareth, that if the point of Christ's divinity had never been expressed in Scripture, they held the light of the perpetual testimony of the Church for a sufficient proof of this article. For whereas saint CHRISOSTOME compares the Scripture to a Rule, according whereto all things should be squared; besides this that, according signifies there not against, he intéds that Scriptures rule all things either mediately, or immediately; that is to say, either by itself, or by the means whereto it remitts us, as he testifies himself in these words; From whence it appears, 
Chrysost. in 2 ad Thessaly. c. 2.  that the Apostles delivered not all things in uriting, but also many things unwritten: Now either of these are worthy of equal credit,    

Of the Rules to judge admitted by saint chrysostom and S. Augustine. CHAP. XX.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
THese two Rules to judge, the King with the English Church embracing them with an earnest desire. pronounceth that he acknowledgeth that doctrine final ie both to be true, and also necessary to salvation, that running from the Spring of the holy Scripture by the consent of the ancient Church, as by a channel hath been derived down to this time.   

THE REPLY.  
NEither do saint CHRISOSTOME and saint AUGUSTINE restrain the means to judge of all the doctrine of the Church to these two only means by exclusion of the third, to wit, of Apostolic Tradition, since saint AUGUSTINE saith, this 
Augu. de unit. Eccl. c. 19  is plainly read neither by thee nor by me. And again, The Apostles have prescribed nothing in this, yet the custom opposite to Cyprian ought to be believed to 
Idem d: de baptism contr. Donat. l. 5. c. 23.  have taken original out of their tradition, as it is in many things that the universal Church, doth observe: And for this cause indeed well believed to have been commanded by the Apostles though they have not been written; And that saint chrysostom saith that from thence it appears, that the 〈◊〉 have not given all things in writing, but some also without writing; whereof both sorts, are in like manner worthy of credit. And elsewhere; It is not in vain, that the Apostles have given it by tradition, to offer sacrifice for the dead; they know how much advantage and profit increaseth to them thereby. Neither is the question in the disputation which is now handled between his majesty and us, of the examination of the right, but of the examination of the fact, that is to say, we are not to inquire by conferring the conclusions of Faith with their principles, which of the English doctrine or ours, is the truth, which is a question of right, whose trial, besides that it must be long, goes out of the lists, & from the state of the question that we treat of. But to inquire by the continuance & comformity with the ancient Catholic Church, whether our Church be the same Church as was in the time of S. AUGUSTINE and of the four first Counsels, which is a question of fact; in which must be handled, not what ought to be believed, but what hath been believed. For his majesty being of agreement, that there was an obligation of communication with the ancient Catholic Church, which flourished in the time of the four first Counsels, and that whosoever was separate from the communion of that Church, was an heretic or a Schismatic: And the question is whether I might except from the praises of his majesty the title of Catholic, which is the first cause of this comparison consisting in the knowing not whether the Church of those ages, had believed well or evil, which is a question of right; but whether the Church of the last ages, from which his majesty, or those that have been before him, have separated themselves be the same Church by an uninterrupted succession both of persons and of doctrine, as that was in the time of S. AUGUSTINE, which is a question of fact, and capable of being proved by history alone, so as the subtlety of spirits can find no shift for it now, to leapefrom the question of fact, to the question of right; And in steed of examining, whether the Catholic Church of this time, had the same belief in the points controverted between us and our adversaries, as the Church in the time of the four first Counsels had: to dispute whether the Church of those ages hath believed well, and with what reservations and mollifications her belief must 〈◊〉 received, it is to go forth from the state of the question, and to change the order and means of the disputation.    

Of the application of the Thesis of this observation to his Hipothesis. CHAP. XXI.  

The continuance of the Kings answer  
THen to make an end of this discourse, the king answers to the first observation, that it can not be applied to the Hipothesis proposed, without many defects. For so far is this English Church from having departed from the faith of the ancient Catholic Church, which she honours and reverences, as she is not so much as departed from the Faith of the Roman, Church, in as much as she consents with the Catholic Church.   

THE REPLY:  
I Appeal from Philip to Philip; that is to say, from the most excellent King, to himself: for what doth my first observation import; yea, according to the abridgement that this majesty hath made of it, but that the name of Catholic doth not only denote faith, but also communion with the Catholic Church; and therefore, that the ancient writers, would not suffer those to be called Catholics, who had separated themselves from the communion of the Church, although they retained the Faith thereof: Now, how then is it, that the most excellent King allegeth to show, that this observation cannot be applied to his Hypothesis, without many errors, that he is not departed, neither he nor his Church, from the faith of the ancient Church? For the observation wherein it is handled being, that to be Catholic, it is not sufficient not to be separate from the Church of the Catholic faith; but also not to be separated from the communion of the Catholic Church: is it not fussicient to apply it to the Hipothesis, and to except the most excellent King from the title of Catholic, that his Majesty hath separated himself, not from the Faith, if so be he had not done so but from the only communion of the Catholic Church? And if the most excellent King saith, that she from whom he hath separated himself, is not the same Catholic Church as she was in the time of the Fathers, and of whom the Fathers said, that out of her communion the title of Catholic, nor the reward of salvation could not be obtained must he not show that there is an alteration happened in things which are of the essence of the Church, and without which the very being of the Church cannot be preserved: and besides this, that he must find out and cause to appear, an other society wherein the succession of the doctrine and of the ministry, both of the communion and of the prerogatives of the ancient Catholieke Church hath continued, and whereto he hath ranged himself; to the end that adhering thereto, he may say, that he hath not separated himself from the communion of the ancient Catholic Church, but is returned into it?    

Of the personal suceession of the Bishops. CHAP. XXII.  

The Continuance of the Kings Answer.  
IF we seek for the succession of persons, we have in being the name of Bishops, and the succession uninterrupted from the first.   

THE REPLY.  
IT sufficeth not to constitute the personal succession of Bishops that some are entered, in the steed of others; but they must be entered with the same form, and with the same conditions essential to a Bishopric, that their predecessors entered withal. No more than it sufficeth to make the Priests of jeroboa Successors to the true levitical Priests that he had driven away that they came into their places, not being come in with conditions necessary to succeed them. And therefore whether the mission of the Bishops which are at this day in England, be a true ecclesiastical mission, & made by ecclesiastical authority, and with the just ecclesiastical forms, or rather a politic mission, I forbear to dispute. Only I will say, that there are two kinds of successions in the personal continuance of a Bishop's Sea, the one, the succession of authority; and the other, the succession of the character. Whereof it is 〈◊〉, that the English according to the principles common to them and us, have not the one; and it is evident, that according to their own particular principles, they cannot have the other. For there do meet together or concur according to us, two conditions in Episcopal mission; the one concerning the collation of authority, the other concerning the impression of the character, which comes from the part of the sacrament of order, which we conceive to imprint a Seal, which cannot be blotted out. Now the condition which concerns the character, which we will here call sacramental mission, may well be preserved out of the Church, for as much as the character cannot be blotted out, and consequently may be given, though unlawfully, yet really out of the Church, by them that have carried it out of the Church. But that which concerns authority, which we will call, notwithstanding the barbarism of the word, authoritative mission, although it cannot be given in the Church without the other, yet it cannot be carried away nor given with the other out of the Church, and may be taken away by the Church from them, to whom she hath given it, when she shall judge it necessary to depose or degrade them. As the Council of Sardica deposed Narcissus, Menophantus, and others, who notwithstanding, left not to preserve the character of the sacrament even as the officers of a prince, when they join themselves with a faction of rebels, may carry with them the Seal and the character of the Patent of their offices, and preserve it out of the state, and out of the common wealth; but they cannot carry 〈◊〉 the authority of their office with them. And therefore, when they that have been degraded by the Church, or ordained out of the Church return to the Church, the lawful authority to exercise their function must be restored to them, either by a particular rehabilitation, or by a public declaration that the Churches makes to receive them into her communion with the exercise of their charges, which serves them for a general rehabilitation: As when the Arrians returned to the Catholic faith, the Church restored to their Bishops, the lawful authority to administer the Bishop ricks whereof the ecclesiastical laws had deprived them, and rehabilitated them all at once, by the public declaration that she made to admit them with the function of their charges. From whence it appears, that they that are ordained out of the Church, and by an other society then by the true Church, although they be indeed Bishops as for the Character of the Sacrament, nevertheless, they are not Bishops, as for the function of authority; and as many times as they shall pretend to use their authority without being rehabilitated by the Church, so often they commit sin and sacrilege. Let us consider, (saith S. HILARY, speaking of the Fathers of the Council of Nicaea) what we do do, we that anathematise them, &c, For if they have not been Bishops 
Hilar. de Synod.  we can be none. And S. ATHANASIUS; It is impossible that the ordination of Secundus as made by the Arrians, should have any force in the Catholic Church. And 
Athan. Apol. 2.  S. HIEROME; There are at this day no Bishops in the world saving those that 
Hier. contr Lucifor.  were ordained by the Synod. And the law of the Emperors, speaking of the Bishops of the heretics '; It is unlawful that they should make ministers, who are none themselves. Whereby they do not intend, that the Bishops of heretics who have drawn their character from the Church, be not Bishops, as for the impression of the character, but that they are none as for the imposition of the authority. By means whereof, the English Bishops can pretend no Episcopal succession from the Church of the ancient Fathers, as for the succession of authority, for as much as if the Catholic Church which was in England and in other places, when king Henry the vl came to the crown, were not the true Catholic Church, the Bishops of the Catholic communion, were not true and lawful Bishops, as concerning authority, but only as concerning the character; and by consequence neither had themselves the succession of Episcopal authority, nor could transmitt it to those that have taken it from them. By what right (saith saint ATHANASIUS speaking of the Arrians) can they be Bishops, if they have been ordained by those men, which themselves do slander with heresy? And chose if the Church that was at the beginning of King Henry the vl throughout Europe, and in many other parts of the world, were the true Church, this selfsame Church, having disannulled the episcopal authority in those from whom the English at this day pretend to have had their mission, and having deposed and anathematised them, they had no more lawful episcopal authority & by consequence could not confer it to others. And besides, if that Church were the true Church, the English Church at this day which is gone out from her communion, can not be so, nor preserve in her the succession of Episcopal authority, which cannot be transferred out of the Church. And for the succession of the character, the English, according to their doctrine, can in no sect pretend to it; for they hold not (& if they would hold, they cannot do it; for as much as they make profession to agree in the faith & in the sacraments with the Protestants of France) that order conferrs any other thing than authority, nor that it imprints any sacramental character, which is that only, which in mission can be transferred & given out of the Church. And so if by their doctrine they could have the succession of the character, they are fallen from the right of making use thereof. For they communicate with the Puritans of France, & hold their sheep for true sheep, and so their pastors for true pastors, and for their colleagues and fellow brethren. Now the ministers of France, are not ordained by any Bishops, and so are no Bishops, For he (saith saint 
Cypr. ad Magn. ep. 76  CYPRIAN) cannot be a Bishop, who succeeding no body, hath been ordained of himself: And not being Bishops have no Church, since as saith the same saint CYPRIAN, The Church is in the Bishop, and the Bishop in the 
Id. ad Florent. Pupp. ep. 69.  Church, and who is not with the Bishop is not in the Church. By means whereof the English which communicate with them, and hold them for their colleagues and fellow brethren, involve themselves into the crime and contagion of all their ecclesiastical defects: and consequently fall from all the rights whereof those with whom they communicate, are deprived. I add to that, that to show a Church to be successively and representatively the ancient Catholic Church, it sufficeth not to show that a part of that Church deriveth the personal succession of her Bishops from the mission of the antien Catholic Church but all the Church that will pretend the inheritance & succession of the tittle of catholic, must have the successio of her Bishops derived from the 〈◊〉 of the ancient catholic Church, For the Bishop's Sea is one, as saith S, CYPRIAN, whereof every one holds his portion undividedly: And elsewhere: The Church is one, bound together by 
Id. de unit. Eccl.  the cement of Bishops, adhering the one to the other. Now the English do not 
Id. ad Pupp ep 69  pretend alone, to constitute all the communion of their Church, nor to be all the true and pure visible Catholic Church, but do comprehend into their communion the Protestants of France, as parts of the Body of their Church. And therefore they cannot say, that the Catholic Church to which they adhere, and wherewith they communicate, to be by succession and personal representation, the same visible Catholic Church which was in the time of the four first Counsels. Contrariwise from this that the other parts of the communion to which the English Church adheres, communicate not by succession of persons with the mission of the ancient Catholic Church, and consequently are at the least schismatics; it issues that the English which communicate with them, cannot communicate with the ancient Catholic Church for none, except in error of fact, can communicate with the Catholic Church and with schismatics together. And finally I say, that since in all questions of Schisms we must mount up to the original, following these words of saint AUGUSTINE to the Donatists: The question between you and us is, where the Church of God should be; we must then begin at the original, why have you made a schism: The account that the English Church will yield of the succession of her Bishops, aught to be brought to the original of the Schism. Now thereupon I will ask his Majesty, where the first, after the rising up of Luther and Calvin began in England to separate themselves from the Catholic Church, to embrace other form of Religion which they now hold, where was this Society, wherein there was together to be found, both the succession of Bishop's uninterrupted from the first, and the succession of doctrine? For to go out from the Church, then entitled Catholic, they must range themselves to an other Church, which must have true doctrine, and true ministry by adherence ad communion, to the which they might preserve the title of Catholic, and transmitt it to those that should come after them. Now where was then this Society endued with the true doctrine, and the true succession of Bishops, when the English first separated themselves from the Church entitled Catholic? For I will not inquire who is the first, from whom she saith that the English Bishops can show their uninterrupted succession, if it be not S, AUGUSTIN Bishop of Canterbury, whom S. GREGORY sent thither: Nor will I demand for the preaching of what doctrine S. GREGORY sent him thither, if it were not for the preaching of the same doctrine that was there before the last separation,    

Of the succession of doctrine. CHAP. XXIII.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
IF the succession of doctrine be demanded, let us mako trial of it.   

THE REPLY:  
THERE is great difference between similitude of doctrine, and succession of doctrine: Similitude of doctrine is a simple report of agreement between one doctrine & an other; but the succession of doctrine properly taken, is a derivation of doctrine continued by a perpetual unintermitted chine of teachers, and persons taught. And therefore, the Arrians which are at this day in Polonia, or in Transiluania, may well pretend similitude of doctrine without the ancient Arrians, which were in the time of the Council of Nicaea, but not Succession of doctrine; for as much as their doctrine hath not been transmitted by a living perpetual chain of teachers and P●●●●ons taught from the ancient Arrians, to them. For as the fire of the high places, was indeed one in similitude with that which came down from heaven to serve for a beginning to the fire of the mosaicell sacrifices, but not one in unity of Succession, there being but the only fire preserved for this effect in the Altar of Jerusalem, whicb was one in unity of Succession with that: So a subsequent doctrine, may well be one in unity of Similitude with a precedent doctrine without any flux of continuance to have been between them: but a Subsequent doctrine cannot be one in unity of Succession with a preceding doctrine if it have not been derived from it by a perpetual channel of instruction, and by an uninterrupted train of teachers and persons taught, which is that, that the Fathers as we have elsewhere showed; call consanguinity or genealogy of doctrine; to wit a propagation of doctrine, derived without interruption from Father to son, as by a tree of consanguinity; even as children are derived by a perpetual train of generation, from their Fathers, from their Grandfathers, and from their great Grandfather's blood. And in this Sense, S. ATHNASIUS after he had combated the Arrians by the Scrptures, and acknowledged that their obstinancy made them indocill to his arguments made use of the Succession of doctrine: Behold (said he) we have proved the Succession of our doctrine delivered from hand to hand, from Father to 
Athan. in decret.  son, you new Jews, and children of Caiphas, what Predecessors can you show for 
Synod.  your words: And saint PACIAN against the Novatians: I holding myself assured 
Nicen. contra.  upon the succession of the Church contenting myself with the peace of the ancient 
Arian.  congregation, have never studied discord. And so whether she which is at this 
Pacian. contra  day called the English Church, have similitude of doctrine with the Fathers 
Parm. ep. 3.  of the first four Counsels, in the points which are in controversy between her and us, is that which is in question, and which we deny that she can prove; but that she hath succession of doctrine with the Church of the first four Counsels, is a thing which, cannot be so much as Challenged. For there is no man that dare say, that the doctrine that the English Church holds at this day in the points contested between her and us, is come by a perpetual and uninterrupted chain of teachers and persons taught from the Church in the time of the first four Coucells unto her; seeing, that without going higher, in the beginning of the Reign of King Henry the vl she held directly contrary to what she holds now I omit to say that besides the succession of the ministry and the succession of doctrine, there is an other third succession, which is that of communion, by which from age to age the most Ancient in the Society of the Church received into their communion, those that came in after them; and by this continuance and chain of communion, the faithful of subsequent ages communicated with them of preceding ages; a thing which can not be between the members of the ancient Catholic Church, and the members of her which at this day calls herself the English Church, because their Predecessors have excluded, disinherited and excommunicated them. For not only in the more ancient ages, the general Body of the Catholic Church, had excommunicated by retail those which held some one point; other some an other of this rhapsody of doctrines, which the Puritans call reformation, but particularly the English Church excommunicated in the time of Henry the vl those, that held the doctrine, that she which is called the English Church now holdeth.    

Of the holding of a Council. CHAP. XXIV.  

The Continuance of the Kings Answer.  
GIVE us a free Council, and which shall not depend of the will of one 〈◊〉.   

THE REPLY.  
IF by the word (alone) his majesty intends the Pope, what Council was ever more free in this regard, than the second Council of Nicaea, which was celebrated in Bythinia, a Province of Asia, out of the West, and out of the Patriarkshipp of the Roman Church, and in an other Empire, and where there were none of all the Latin Church, but only two Priests, which represented the Pope's person? Or what Council was ever more free in the same regard, than the Council off, Constance, wherein then when the differences of Faith were treated of because the Papacy was in question, not only the Pope did not assist there, but even all the three pretended Popes, where deposed? For what was practised against john Husse & Hierome of Prage, after they had again fallen into the doctrine that they had abjured, was done, the Pope and his competitors in the Papacy, being absent, and while they proceeded in contumacy against him; even when they published the decrees of the Superiority of the Council above the Pope. Or what Council finally was ever more free, than the Council of Florence; whereat there assisted the Emperor of the East, and the Patriarch of the Greek Church, and a great number of Greek bishops, who all had liberty to determine and give their voices; and even those that gave them against the common opinion of the Council, persisted in their obstinancy, as Mark of Ephesus returned safely into their country? And nevertheless, in those three Counsels, there were decided almost all those things, which are at this day questioned in Christian Religion. For if to make a Council free, it must be holden in the state of a Prince which favours neither party of the contestors, what Council can be exempt from calumny? For do not the Arrians put it amongst the reproaches of the Council of Nicaea, and of the first of Const: that they were holden under Constantine and Theodosius, who were abettors of their own party, and whose authority prevailed there? And did not the Eutychians reproach the Council of Chalcedon for the authority of the Emperor Marcian, that had there favoured (say they) their adversaries? From whence, even to this day, they call those that hold the opinion of the Council of Chalcedon Melchites; that is to say, Rogalists or Imperialists? but if his majesty intent by a free Council, a Council where the Pope neither assists personalie nor representatively; how can it be, that in a time wherein there is no Schism in the Papacy, a Council shall perfectly represent the universal Church, if the visible head of the Church, be neither there personally, representatively, or confirmatively? And what will become of those ancient Maxims, That it is not lawful to rule the Churches, or call the Counsels, without the Bishop of Rome? And again; that the ecclesiastical law anulls all decrees made without him in Counsels. And then when the conditions requisite for the liberty of a Council shall be resolved upon, what fruit can be drawn from it if it be not agreed before it be assembled, that all that is decreed there, must be held for infallible? For if after such a Council shall have been celebrated, it rest still in the choice of every particular person to judge, whether the Council shall have judged conformably to the word of God; who knows not, that this is not to submit their judgement to a Council, but to submit a Council to their judgement, and so to 〈◊〉 things no further advanced after the celebration of a Council, than before? Now how is it that those who hold that the universal Church may err, should hold that the authority of a general Council should be infallible, which hath no authority of infallibillitie but in as much as it represents the universal Society of the visible Church, where of it is the voice and organ, and of all the pastors, where of it bears with it the tacit deputation? And how can those hold that the universal Church, should be infallible & cannot err, that hold, that indeed she hath erred, and that after so many ages there was no visible part of the Church, which hath not been plunged in a pit of errors repugnant to salvation, and contrary to faith? But whether his majesty's offers, aught to be examined in a formal Council, or in a verbal conference, we are ready to assist at it, and to show that the English, Church in points contested between us and her, hath neither Succession, nor Similitude of doctrine with the Church of the time of the first Counsels.    

Of the reduction of the Disputation, to the State of the Question. CHAP. XXV  

The continuance of the Kings answer  
THe English Church is ready to yield an account of her Faith, and to prove by effect, that the design of the Authors of the Reformation, undertaken in this Province, hath not been to build any new Church, as the ignorant and malicious have slandered her, but to re-establish her that was fallen, in the best manner that might be.   

THE REPLY.  
IT is not the question in the proceeding that we have framed, to know whether the aim of the Authors of the Reformation of England, hath been to make a new Church; or to restore that, which was fallen, and to set it up again in a better form; although the subsequent words of his majesty where he saith, that the action of the English, Church, hath been a return to the ancient Catholic Faith and a converfion to Christ the only master of the Church: testify that it hath been a new refection and re-edification of the Church. For Noah it hath been a new refection and re-edification of the Church. For no Society in whose faith there is an aversion from Christ, and from the ancient Catholic belief, can possess the being and the name of a Church. But in Sum, howsoever it be, it is not that, that is the question in the proceeding that we have framed; but only to know whether the Catholic Church, when the English portion separated itself from her, had so degenerated from the ancient Carholicke Church, which was in the time of the first four Counsels, in things importing the ruin of Salvation, and the destruction of the being of the Church, as she was no more the same Church as she had been in the time of those ages. And consequently, that it was no more necessary to obtain the title of Catholic, and the participation of Salvation. to communicate with her but chose was necessary to be separated from her and not to commnnicate with her. It is that, that is the question, it is, that whereabout we must combat, and to show some condition, some doctrine, or custom, holden in the Catholic Church at this day; that may be pretended to be repugnant to salvation, and which destroys the being of the true Church, that hath not been in the Catholic Church, in the time of the four first Counsels.    

Of the invention of order, in the justification of the reformation before the proof of the Deformation. CHAP. XXVI.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
NOw they have judged amongst the best that which had bane given by the Apostles to the breeding Church, and which had been in practice in the age nearest them.   

THE REPLY.  
NEither is it the question of what they have judged, but of the change that is happened between the ancient Catholic Church and the morderne, and of the importance of this change; that is to say, whether there be happened any change between the estate of the ancient Church, & the estate of the Church of the last ages, of such importance, as for that people might be permitted to separate themselves from her communion. Which cannot be, if some thing have not been taken away from the form of the ancient Church, which was necessary to salvation, or added thereto which was rèpugnant to salvation. For if the modern Catholic Church, were yet the same Church in matters of Faith and salvation, as it was in the time of the four first Counsels, whatsoever reformation they have pretended to make, having separated themselves from her, they cannot possess the title of 
Iren. adu. haeres. l. 4 c. 62.  Catholic whereof the question is; nor obtain salvation. for as much as saith S. IRENEUS; No reformation can be made that is of such importance, as the crime of schism is 〈◊〉. Besides It must be first determined, whether the Catholic Church were deformed in matters of faith and salvation, before the English Church can be thought to be reform in being separated from her. For the English Church could not separate herself from the Catholic Church whereunto before she was joined in communion, if first it did not appear to her by proofs necessatie and demonstrative, that salvation could not be obtained in the Catholic Church: that is to say she could not proceed to reform herself, in separating herself from her whole, till it must first appear to her: that the whole from whence she separated herself, were deformed and with a deformation incompatible with salvation. Now that could not appear, that between the ancient Catholic Church of the time of the first four counsels (which we on both sides grant to be the true Church, and whereof there remains to us monuments sufficient to instruct us of the integrity of her doctrine, and of her Sacraments and ceremonies) and the Catholic Church of this time, there had happened opposition in matters importing gain or loss of Salvation. And therefore it is to that time, that we must confront the state of the Church of this time, and not leave the ages of the four first Counsels, of whose estate we have more light and monuments, then of the preceding ages, to go up to those of whose estate we 〈◊〉 recourse, not to find therein more conformity but to find therein less instruction. For as for the Church in the time of the Apostles, besides that antiquity affirms, that the Apostles have given many things by tradition unwritten to their disciples, his majesty himself testifies that he is far from their opinion that believe the universal history of the primitive Church to be all contained in the sacred, but only little Book of the Acts of the Apostles.    

Of the indefectibilitie of the Church. CHAP. XXVII.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
THE King Confesseth, that his Church hath separated herself in many points, from the faith and discipline, that the Roman Bishop doth at this day hold and defend with might and main. But the King and the English Church 〈◊〉 not interpret that to be, a defection from the ancient Catholic saith, but rather a return to the ancient Catholic faith, which in the Roman Church had been admirably deformed in many kinds, and a conversion to Christ the only master of the Church.   

THE REPLY.  
AND even this confirms our intention, to know that there is at this day no Catholic Church; a thing directly against God's promises, or that this that we have, is she. For there could be no other Catholic Church, but her that was in the time of the first 〈◊〉 Counsels. Now she, if she have been interrupted (and she hath been so if ours which hath succeeded her, have been wanting in faith and in union with Christ, without which a Society cannot be a Church) the English Church which succeeds her not, by an uninterrupted continuance, cannot be the same Church. For what Aristotle saith of Commonwealths, may also be said of the Church; to wit, that when a commonwealth hath interrupted the successive continuance of her being, it is no more one common wealth in number, but an other commonwealth. So if the ancient Catholic Church hath interrupted the successive continuance of her being, she is no more one, and not being one, she is no more a Church, for the Church is one or none. And therefore the Fathers cry out, that if the Church be once perished, she can no more, be borne again. If in S. CYPRIANS time (saith saint AUGUSTINE) the Church perished; from what Heaven it Donatus fallen? from 
Aug, de bapt. con.  what Sea came he forth? what earth hath sprunge him up? For to say that the English Church accounts not her separation from the faith and from the 
Donat. l. 3. c 2,  discipline of the Pope, a defection from the ancient Catholic faith, but a return to the ancient Catholic faith, and a conversion to Christ, is not the question, viz. whether the English Church be converted to the ancient Catholic Faith. For as it hath been above showed, the name of catholic, is not a name of simple belief, but of communion. By means whereof, the English Church might have all Faith: even to the removing of mountains, yet if she communicated not with the Catholic Church she could neither obtain the title of Catholic, nor the reward of life eternal; but should be schismatical, and excluded from salvation. And therefore the state of the question in this which is presented, is not whether the English Church be returned to the true faith, but whether the Church which possesseth at this day the name of the Catholic Church hath lost the being of the Catholic Church; which she cannot have done if in things important to salvation, and constructive or destructive to the being of a Church, she have not varied from that of the time of the four first Counsels, which we on both sides confess to have been the true Church, that is to say, if she have not taken away from the practice of the Church of those ages some thing necessary to salvation, and without which salvation cannot be obtained; or if she have not added to the practice of that Church something repugnant to salvation, and with which life eternal cannot be obtained. From whence it appears, that the office of the English Church in this question, is to show, not that she hath returned to the ancient Faith, which would always exact the necessity of a preceding dispute, to wit that the Church from whence she went out, hath diverted herself from it; for the proof of the aversion should precede the proof of reversion: but that the Church which we at this day entitle Catholic hath so diverted herself from the faith of the Church of the time of the four first Counsels, which both they and we hold to have been the true Church, as she hath lost being and the just title of a Church, and that salvation can no more be obtained in her. And our office is chose to maintain, that the Church which is at this day, differs not in any thing that can destroy salvation, and make her lose the being and the title of a true Church, from the ancient Catholic Church, and that all the points that our Adversary's object against us, as such, and for which they take occasion to separate themselves from us, under pretence that in our communion Salvation cannot be obtained, have been holden by the ancient Church.    

Of the sense wherein the Fathers have intended that their doctrine had been holden from the beginning. CHAP. XXVIII.  

The continuance of the King's answer  
AND therefore, if any one in consequence of this observation Will infer from thence, that the English Church, because she rejects some of the decrees of the Roman Church, is departed from the ancient Catholic Church, the King Will not grant him that, till he have first proved by solid reasons, that all things that the Roman, teach, have been approved from the beginning, and ordained by the ancient Catholic Church: And that no man can do this, now nor in the time to come, at the least that till now no body hath done it is a thing é as certain to the king, and to the Prelates of the English Church, as that the Sun shines àt noon days:   

THE REPLY.  
NEITHER is it the question, as I have already many times said whether the English Church, have departed from the doctrine of the ancient Catholic Church; but whether our Church be so far strayed from the doctrine of the ancient Church, as she can no more be reputed one self same Church with the ancient Church and that we can no more communicate with her, without loss of Salvation. For if she be still the same Church, and that amongst the conditions. under the obligation whereof, her communion is participated, there be no doctrine nor custom which is opposite to Salvation; it is certain, that out of her Society, though one should have Faith sufficient to remove mountains, yet they can neither possessé the Salvation, nor title of the Catholic Church. Neither is it the question to know whether all things that the Roman Church holds, and principally those which she holds to be necessary for Salvation, have been holden by antiquity, and in this quality, which would be a long and thorny disputation, because of the diversity of the acceptions of the word (necessary) under the ambiguity whereof, there would always remain a thousand cavils and shifts. But whether all things that they object to us as repugnant to salvation, and as occasions sufficient to cause separation from our communion, have been holden by the Catholic Church from the time of the first four Counsels. For in case they have been so, it is clear that it is sacrilege in them, to separate themselves for their occasion from our communion. Not but that if this point were once cleared, it would be easier for us then his majesty conceives, to prove that all things that the modern Catholic Church holds as necessary to salvation, have been holden for such, and in the same rank of necessity by the ancient Catholic Church in the time of the first four Counsels: but because the laws of disputation, do not permit us to engage ourselves to the trial of this point, before the clearing of the other, for fear of going out of the lists of the question, and of confounding the order 〈◊〉 the conference. For whereas his Majesty adds, that they have been approved & ordained from the beginning, it hath been manifested in the third observation of our Epistle, that to convince, that a thing have had place from first ages, it is sufficient, because of the four writings of of that date that persecutions have suffered to come down to us, to prove that it hath been holden by the Church of the first four Counsels, and that the Fathers that then lived testify to have received it, not as a thing of a new institution, but as a thing derived to them by an uninterrupted succession from the age of the Apostles to the Church of their time, and that none of the preceding authors say the contrary: His Majesty's own self being agreed with us in this, as hath often already been repeated, that the only little Book of the Acts of the Apostles, is very far from containing all the history of the primitive Church.    

Of the exceptions that the King produceth to show that he hath not separated himself from the Church. CHAP. XXIX.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
Finally the King adds, that it is a great crime, to separate one's self from the Church but that he hath any thing common with that crime, either he or his Churchh ee 〈◊〉 denes: for saith his majesty we fly not, but we are driven away.   

THE REPLY.  
AND why then do Ministers so earnestly exhort their hearers rather to endure all kinds of death, then to communicate in our Synaxes? And why then when they would dehort those of their party from marrying with Catholics, do they allege those words of saint PAUL: What communion is there of the faithful, with an Infidel. And join also in their prayers, the Turks, Papists 
2. Cor. 6.  and other Infidels? And why then doth his majesty allege for a reason not to communicate with us, these words of the revelation: Go forth of Babylon my people, for fear of communicating with her sins? For to offer 
Apoc. 18.  to communicate with us, when we shall have corrected those things that our Adversaries pretend to have been deformed in our Church; who sees not; that that is not to offer to return to us, but to desire that we should return to them? And what sect hath there been in the world that hath not offered to communicate with the Catholic Church; provided, that the Catholic Church would renounce those points for which they were at difference; that is to say, so she would lose the condition of being the Catholic Church.    

Of the demands made for Reformations since the five last ages; Chapt. XXX.  

The continuance of the Kings Answer.  
AND your illustrious dignity knows, as he that is well informed thereof, how many and, how great personages in piety and doctrine have desired at least for this last five hundred years, the reformation of the Church, in the head and in the members How many grevous complaints of good kings and princes, have there been heard deploring the estate of the Church in their ages? But what hath it availed? For we see not, that hitherto there hath been any one of those things corrected which were esteemed, before all others, to be fit for correction.   

THE REPLY.  
THOSE demands of reformation in the head and in the members propounded before the last deuisions of the Church have been demands of reformation, not in the doctrine of Faith and of the sacraments, or universal ceremonies of the Church, but in manners and in the practice of ecclesiastical discipline, which even these words of reformation both in the head and members, principally used in the time of the Counsels of Constance and of Basile testify. Now as there is great difference between complaining of the personal practice of justice, and of the exercise of the Officers of a Kingdom, and desiring the reformation thereof, and between complaining of the laws, ordinances, and constitutions of the state: so there is great difference between complaining of the conversation and manners of Ecclesiastical persons, & between complaining of the doctrine and institutions of the Church. For when the corruption (to speak by hypothesis) is in the doctrine, or in the sacraments, or universal ceremonies of the Church, none can remain in the communion of the Church, without participating in that contagion; but when it is in the manners and in the practice of discipline, those only that commit the faults are culpable therein, and not the rest who tolerate them as saint AUGUSTINE saith for the good of 
Augu. ep. 162  unity, that which they detest for the good of equity. And to whom the more frequent and fowl such scandals are, by so much the more is the merit of their perseverance in the communion of the Church, and the martyrdom of their patience, as saint AUGUSTINE calls it. For this only Sacrifice of choosing rather to support the remaining in communion with such persons, then to rend the coat of Christ, and to separate themselves from his Church to avoid their Society, is the most pleasing Sacrifice that can be offered up to God. Now the Church hath always, not only since the last ages, but from all antiquity, been filled with such like complaints. For while she shall remain in this world, she shall always sing this verse of the Canticle; I am black, but I am lovely, That is to 
Cantic. 1  say, black in manners, 〈◊〉 lovely in doctrine; our Lord having deferred till his second Coming, the making her glorious and without sport. And not only so, but every one in his time, hath always believed himself to be in the worst age of the Church for manners and for the practice of discipline, because they saw the evils of their own time, and did but hear the history of other times; whereof the relation doth not so lively touch the ears, as the sight touches the eyes. But nevertheless, neither the evil hath always gone on increasing, nor the good always diminishing; but according to the diversity of the ages, the Church hath been either more or less pure in manners. For, as for those, that in the beginning of these last divisions either persuaded in some points by the innovators, or joined to the party of the innovators themselves, have attempted to seek out some accommodation in matter of doctrine, and of the universal Religion of the Church, to come to a reunion, persuading themselves, that as the Poet saith.  

——— all men do Sinn,  
Without the walls of Troy, and 〈◊〉 within.   
It will be always easy for us to show, that the desire of reconciliation rather than the knowledge of antiquity and truth, hath caused them to speak this language.    

Of the agreement or disagreement of the English reformers, with the Donatists. CHAP. XXXI.  

The continuance of the King's answer  
AND therefore the English Church feareth not, that she can seem in the judgement of sincere arbitrators, to have done any thing like to the 〈◊〉 in this separation, They out of a jollity of heart, and without any cause abandoned the Catholic 〈◊〉, approved by the consent of all nations, whereof they could neither blame the faith, nor the discipline.   

THE REPLY.  
NEITHER was the Catholic Church then actually approved by all nations, for these prophecies, In thy seed shall all nations be 〈◊〉; and, This Gospel must be preached over all the world: shall not 
Genes. 28. Matt 24.  be fully accomplisht as S. AUGUSTINE notes till the end of the 
August. ep. 165. de sermon. Dom. in Mont. i. 2.  world: But it might well be said by 〈◊〉, & in regard of other Christian sects, to be spread over all nations, because the extent thereof, was more eminont as it is now, then that of any other Christian Society; Neither was she approved by 〈◊〉 men of all the Christian nations: For who knows not how great the multitude of other heresies was, when the sect of the Donatists sprang up; and how much greater then, when the passages of the Fathers, cited in the beginning of this observation, were pronounced against them? Of one side the Arrians possessed almost all the East: of the other side the number of the Donatists was such in Africa, as they held all at a time Counsels of three hundred Bishops: yea even in the time of S. AUGUSTINE, there where whole nations that professed christianity, which did not acknowledge 〈◊〉 Catholic Church; as that of the Goths & Vandals. And in brief elghtie or an hundred other sects of Christians; which were then in the world, divided like Sampsons' Foxes by the heads, but tied together by the tails, did all agree to reprove the Catholic Church. And whereas the excellent king addeth, that the Donatists could blame neither the faith nor discipline of the Catholic Church; if by blaming, his majesty intent to blame with reason, that is not particular to the Donatists, for never any Sect, either Schismatical or heretical could blame with reason the faith or discipline of the Church. But if by blaming he intent, accusing and slandering her, and believing that they had just occasion to do so, who ever blamed the faith and discipline of the Catholic Church, more than the donatists? who called themselves the Bishops of them Catholic truth; and objected to the Catholics, that they erred in faith, in believing that the holy Ghost, resided out of the Church; and in holding that Baptism, which cannot be administered but by the operation of the holy Ghost, might be conferred out of the Church, and in the Society of heretics; who reproached it to them, thant they violated these oracles; One 
Ephes. 4.  faith, one Baptism. It is lawful to be baptised, if thou dost believe; be ye every 
Act. 8.  one of you baptised in the remission of Sins. Christ purgeth his Church, by the 
Act. 2.  
Ephes. 5.  washing of water in the word. Who hears not the Church, let him be as a publican 
Matth 18.  and as a heathen. Baptism is the washing of the regeneration of the Ghost. The 
Ad Tit. 3.  Church is the close Garden, and the sealed Fountain. Who gathers not with Christ 
Canti c. 4.  
Luc. 11.  scatters. And other such like alleged by them in so great number, as 
Vincent.  Vincentius Lyrinensis cries out; But perchance this new invention (that 
Lirin. in commonit  is to say, the heresy of the Donatists) will want defences; nay she was assisted with so great strength of spirit; with so many floods of Eloquence, with so great a number of protectors; with so much likelihood, with so many oracles of divine law, but expounded in a new and naughty manner, that it seems to me, that such a conspir aice could never have benen destroyed, if this same embraced this same defended, this same extolled profession of novelty, had not in the end, left the cause of so great a motion alone and abandoned. And as for the discipline of the Church; did not they blame it, who taxed, the discipline of the Church, to have received without expiation of preceding penance, those that in the persecution time, had denied Christ, and communicated in the sacrifices of the Pagans, and consequently to have been polluted with the contagion of the Pagans; who accused her, for having received converted heretics into her communion, without giving them true Baptism, which could not be given, according to them, but in the Church; and consequently, to have polluted her communion with the contagion of unbaptised, or uncircumcised spiritually? and so to have lost the being of the true Church which could not subsist without the true use of the sacraments? Who made profession in manners of a conversation of life much better ruled, & more reform, then that of the Catholics; from whence it is that S. AUGUSTINE forbids the catholics, to reproach the Donatists with any other 
Idem cont. lit. Petilian l. 2. c. 99  thing, but that they were not Catholics. Who called themselves, the little flock of the lord, the two tribes of the Kingdom of juda; who said; we having nothing, and possessing all things, we account our soul to he our riches, and by our pains and our blood, we purchase the treasure of heaven, And in breeze, who supposed themselves to have such reason for their separation, as they reputed the Catholics not to be worthy of so much as the name of Christians, as having lost the true use of Baptism, whereby men are made Christians & when they spoke to them they said, Caius Seius: Caia Seia (O man 〈◊〉 thou be a Christian? O woman wilt thou be a Christian? And cried to them. 
Idem.  Come o ye ignorant and wretched people, who are commonly called Catholics 
Vincent.  
Lyrin. contr haeres. c. 26  And called the Chair of Rome the Chair of pestilence: and called the Catholic Church, an Harlott, and an Adulteress: and chose rather to suffer all kinds of persecutions and false Martirdomes, then to communicate with her. If I persecute (saith Saint AUGUSTINE) justly him that 
Augu. contion. sup. gest. cum Emerit, Idem ibid.  detracts from his neighbour, why should I not persecute him, that detracts from the Church of Christ? and saith, this is not she, but this is an hatlott. And again, If the punishment and not the cause made Martyrdom, heaven should be full of your martyrs; And against whom chose, the Catholics in matter of doctrine, had not one passage of scripture for them, but only the Apostolical unwritten tradition, as S. AUGUSTINE himself confessed in these words: The Apostles (saith he) in truth have prescribed nothing of this, but this Custom ought to be believed to have taken original from their tradition; 
August. de Bapt. contr Donat. l. 5. c. 23.  as there are many things that the universal Church observeth, which art with good reason believed to have been given by the Apostles, although they be not in writing. Was this to pretend to separate themselves from the Church, out of jollity of hart and without any cause, and neither to blame the faith nor discipline of the Church.    

Of the authority of the rest of the Christian people, which denied to the Church the title of Catholic. Chapt. XXXII.  

The continuance of the Kings Answer.  
THE English have separated themselves by a cruel necessity from that Church, that infinite Christian people (that I may speak as modestly as I possibly can) do not 〈◊〉 to be the true universal Church.   

THE REPLY.  
THat the English Church hath been justly forced by a cruel necessity, to depart from the Catholic Church (wherein alone the stock of unity doth reside, as our very adversaries dare not say, that the body of Catholic unity was to be found in any other Society, when the English nation divided themselves from her) saint AGUSTINE will not avow, who saith, that there is no just necessity to divide unity: And less S. DIONYSIUS of Alexandria, 
Aug. contr. ep. Parm. l. 2. c. 11  who was much ancienter than saint AUGUSTINE, who writes; Thou oughtest rather to suffer all kinds of death, then to divide the Church of Christ. 
Dionys. Alexand. ep. ad Novat. apùd Euseb hist. Eccl. 6 c. 45,  For whereas his majesty adds, that an infinite number of Christian people do not grant her to be the true & universal Catholic Church if these people can show that there was an other, to whom this title belonged when Luther came into the world, we will confess her not to be so, but if it be not in their power, not only to show, but to feign an other, than this must be she. For the Catholic Church is perpetual, and their contradiction that are departed from her, can not raise any doubt of her title, more than the contradiction of the ancient Arrians, and other heretics, could cause the ancient Catholic Church, to lose this title. For in that only that they have departed from her, and cannot show that she hath departed from any of all the other Societies which are in being, they testify that she only is the true Catholic Church, that is to say, the true stock and original root of the Church, from whom all others by their Schisms and divisions, are departed and gone forth.    

Of the testimonies of our writers. CHAP. XXXIII.  

The continuance of the King answer.  
AND that manien of your writers themselves, have a long while ago, ingeniouslien confessed, to have much varied from the ancient in the dogm'as, and in the form of discipline and to have patched and tacked together many new things to the old, many evil things to the good.   

THE REPLY.  
THOSE writers have been such as I have above described, as Erasmus, Cassander, and others, who partly in presumption, and partly in ignorance of antiquity, and partly to gratify those Princes, in whose favour they have taken pen in hand, have written things which would confound their faces if they were to maintain them before any that were versed of purpose in the study of Antiquity.    

Of the begging of the principle contained in this hypothesis. CHAPT. XXXIV.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
WHICH is already so known to all the world, as it is no longer in the power of any to deny it, or to be ignorant of it.   

THE REPLY.  
THIS is to take for a principle of disputation, that which is the subject of the controversy: for not only all Catholics, but also all the Christian Societies in the world, more ancient than the authors of this division, and who have no interest, neither for the one part nor for the other, and if they had any, would have it rather against the Church from which they are separated, then for her, do maintain that all the principal points that the pretended reformers calumniate in the Roman Church, are of the true faith, and of the true discipline of the ancient Catholic Church.    

Of the temporal causes of the separation of England. CHAP. XXXV.  

The Continuance of the Kings Answer.  
ADD to this, that the Church of England had found the yoke of the Roman Bondage so hard upon her for some ages past, being incredibly tormented from day to day with new vexations, oppressions, and unheard of exactions, as 〈◊〉 only cause before just judges, may seem to be able to free her from suspicion of Schism, and (as S. AUGUSTINE saith, speaking of the Donatists) wicked dismembering. For sur ely the English have not separarated themselves for jollity of heart, from brotherly charity as the 〈◊〉 did.   

THE REPLY:  
IF it may please your majesty to call again to memory the history of the Schism of England, you will find, that all those things which were alleged for pretence of the Church's division, have no way been the cause thereof: contrariwlse that the English Church was more flourishing when this separation happened, and the King of England and his clergy more affectionate to maintain the Faith and communion of the Roman Church, than ever they had been before, as appears by the Book that he made in defence of the Church against Luther; the original whereof he sent to Rome with these verses, such as they are, addressed to Pape Leo written with his own hand; 
Henry 〈◊〉. King of England, sent this work to Leo the tenth as a witness both of his faith and friendship.   

Harrie the English King, at once doth recommend,  
This work Leo to thee, which public proof shall lend,  
To show which way his faith, and friendship both do bend:   
But that it was the amorous passion of that King, who to satisfy the appetite which transported him, would cause a just marriage to be broken, and marry her that he loved, his first lawful wife, and by whom he had issue being yet living; to which the Pope conceived, that he could not with a safe conscience, give consent: This was the true and only cause of all this Iliad of evils. 
Hincillae lachrymae.   From hence gushed all these tears.   

Of the comparison of the English Church, with the judaical. CHAP. XXXVI.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
NOT for fear of the 〈◊〉 which was eminent, but did not yet press them like the ten tribes of the people of the jews, but after having suffered many ages after the 〈◊〉 of unspeakable greevances, they have finally shaken from their shoulders, that insupportable burden which neither their strength was longer able to bear, nor would their conscience permit them to do it.   

THE REPLY:  
HERE I might content myself with saying, that what was ordained and approved by God, in the separation of the ten tribes of Israel from the Kingdom of juda, was the only di vision of State, and not that of Religion. For God (as saint AUGFSTINE saith (commands neither Schism nor heresy. And by consequence, what pretence soever is added of present and not future evil, there can be no consequence drawn from this example for the desertion of the Catholic Church, God (saith saint AUGUSTINE) bade that these tribes should be separated, not to divide the Religion, but the Kingdom, and that 〈◊〉 this means, vengeance might be taken upon the Kingdom, of juda. But for as much as the ordinary refuge of those that separate themselves from us, is to have recourse to the Symptoms of the jewish people, and to infer from thence, the same conclusions of possibility of error, and licence of separation for the Christian Church, and that to contradict this, we have not only promised to show that there never happened any accident to the visible jewish Church, wherefore they either ought or could separate themselves from her communion, but also that if any such thing had happened, the consequence thereof could not be applied to the Christian Church, which is grounded upon other contracts, and upon other prerogatives. It is best for us here to quit us of our promise, and to search the question to the bottom, both concerning the Thesis, and the Hypothesis. In regard then of the Thesis, the adversary's 〈◊〉 Catholic religion set this foundation, that the Church in all times is subject to the same Symptoms, and to the same accidents, & there upon argue thus: The visible Church hath had three periods, the first under nature: the second under the law, and the third under Grace. Now under the two first she hath been corrupted, and consequently under the third she may be so. Which is as if one should say, there are three periods in the progress of the generation of man. The first during the which man lives only the life of plants, and is yet touched with no other instinct then simple appetite, which the Philosophers call natural, common to herbs and trees, which seems to correspond to the condition of the first period of the Church, wherein she had yet no law or rule, but the simple law of nature. The second, during which he lives an animated and sensitive life, which is proportioned to the state of the people of the Jews; because as man in this second progress, harh no other knowing faculty but that of the sense, which is common to him with beasts; so all the objects which were manifestly propounded to the jews, and all the promises which were literally made to them, were of sensible things. And the last, wherein man takes possession of the life truly human and reasonable, and is adorned and ennobled with intellectual knowledge, which hath analogy with the state of the Christian Church, where the faithful are consecrated to God by a perfect & lawful form of religion, and stick no longer in terrestrial and material objects; but exalting their thoughts and their hopes, do nourish & entertain themselves with spiritual and incorruptible promises. Now under the first and second of those periods, the imperfect soul of man, which we call an Embricn, is subject to perish, corruptible and mortal; the soul of man therefore under the third period, is not incorruptible & immortal. For to preduce for a reason of exception and dissimilitude, that the form of a man during all the three periods of this progress, is not oneself, same form, the reason of the 〈◊〉 is void, for as much as the diversity of God's promises, where it so falls out, hath no less power to vary the Symptoms of the Church during the three periods of her being, than the diversity of forms, to vary the conditions which accompany the three periods of the generation of man. Now that 
Rom. 4.  the promises made to the Church under the last period, which hath been established, as S. PAUL saith, upon better promises then the former, be wholly different both in eminency & perpetuity from those that have been made to her under the two first, what Christian can call it in question? God first in regard of eminency and multitude, did he not say to Abraham; in thy 
Genes. 22.  
Galat 3.  seed; that is to say, as S. PAUL expounds it, in Christ, shall all generations 
Genes. 22.  be blessed: And again, thy seed shallbe as the stars of heaven, and as the sands of the Sea? And Aggeus describing the future estate of the Church under the Enigma of the re-edification of the temple, doth he not say: The glory of 
Agg. 2.  
Cantic. 8.  this last house, shall be much greater than that of the first? And the Spouse in the canticles, speaking of the Jewish Church; doth she not sing: our Sister is little, and she hath yet no breasts; that 〈◊〉 to say, is not yet in state to bring forth, and nurse up children? And doth not 〈◊〉 cry out: Rejoice thou barren 
Esai. 54. vers. 1.  woman, that bearest not children, and thou that art no mother, cast forth 
Ibidem. v. 2  cries of joy. For the children of the forsaken, shall be much more in number then hers that hath a husband? And a while after: Lengthen the cords of thy pavilions, and settle their posts, for thou shalt penetrate on the right band, and on the left, and thy 
Esai. 49 v. 18.  seed shall inheritt the nations. And again; Cast thine eyes about thee, and behold all these are assembled for thee, they are come for thee: thy sons shall come from far, 
Aug. Vinc. ep. 48.  and thy daughters shall be borne upon shoulders. And doth not S. AUGUSTINE, disputing against the Donatists, cry out, Fear you 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Jews should ask you, where is that accomplished that your Paul hath 〈◊〉 of your Church; rejoice thou barren woman that thou bearest not, and cast out cries of joy that thou hast no children; for, the children of the forsaken are more in number, than hers that hath a husband? Preferring the multitude of the Christians before that of 
Hieron. advers.  jews; if your little number be the Church of Christ. And S. HIEROME against the Luciferians, Where are these too Religious, or rather too profane persons, that 
Luciferian  affirm there are more Synagogues than Churches? And therefore doth not the same S. AUGUSTINE elegantly compare the history of the different times of the Church, to that of the birth of jacob, for as much that as Jacob in his Birth, thrust forth first one arm, and then his head, and then all his Body, so the Church before she was borne, first thrust forth one arm that is to say, a little part of her society, which was the Synagogue, and then her head, which is Christ, and then all her Body, which is the Christian Church? But against that, the adversaries of the multitude of the Church allege, that our Lord calls his Church A little flock; & commands 
Luc. 12. v. 32. Matth. 7. v. 14.  to enter into the strait gate it is true. but it makes nothing for them, for that our Lord calls his Church a little Flock, it is in regard of her birth, at the time where of she was the least, the basest, and most contemptible of all societies, and not in regard of her progress which himself compareth to that of a grain of mustardseed; which being at the beginning the least of all seeds, becomes in the increase, the greatest of all plants. We are 
Aug. in Psalm. 68  borne in that age (saith S. AUGUSTINE) and associated with the people of God in that time, wherein this plant, bred from the grain of mustarde-seede, hath already 
Matth. 22. v. 14.  stretched forth her branches. And that he saith: Enter in at the strait 
Ibidem. v. 10.  gate: it is in respect of the conversation of manners, and not of the profession of doctrine, as appears by these words, Many called and few chosen, And by these: and the marriage chamber was full of invited persons; that is to say, of those that were called. For though the number of the chosen be little, in regard of the 〈◊〉; nevertheless, considered in itself, it is 
Aug. ep. 48.  〈◊〉 great. It is this Church (saith saint AUGUSTINE) of the little number whereof in comparison of the multitude of the wicked, it is said, that the way that leads to life, is strait and close, and that those that walk it, are few in number. And yet it is she again, of whose multitude it is said: Thy seed shallbe as the stars of heaven, and 〈◊〉 the sands of the sea. For the same faithful, holy and good, in comparison of the great multitude of the wicked, are a little number, and considered in themselves, are many; for it is said, that of the children of the forsaken, are in greater number, than hers that 
August. 〈◊〉 unit. 〈◊〉; c. 8.  hath a husband. And elsewhere: Wherefore is it, o ye heretics, that you glory in your small number; if Christ died to the end to possess the multitude for his inheritance? But if the prerogatives of the Christian Church be much other as for eminency and multitude, then that of the Church of the jews, how much more in regard of lasting and perpetuity, which are as often promised to the Christian Church, as denied to the Church of the jews; for who is ignorant that the jewish Church had not received the same promises of lasting and perpetuity, as have been made to the Christian Church? contrariwise, if any promises of lasting and perpetuity, have seemed to be literally addressed to the Jewish Church, they were made to her conditionally, and not absolutely; 〈◊〉 if any have been made to her absolutely, they were made to her only in shadow and in figure; but the truth, like the truth of the promises of eternity made to the Reign of Solomon, belonged to him of whose Reign Salomon's was the 
Hier. c. 31.  figure. Hieremie saith and saint PAUL after him. that the days would come, wherein God would knit up a new alliance with the family of juda, and with the family of Israel; not according to the alliance that he contracted with their Fathers, when he took them by the hands and drew them out of the land of Egypt: 
Ibidem, v. 36. & 37.  Hec adds, that if this contract once perished from before the eyes of the Lord then all the seed of Israel should fail for ever; and there should be no more people before him 〈◊〉 any age, but that the heavens on high should 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 measured, and the foundations of the earth below be sooner sounded: Then finally he concludes 
Ibidem v. 4.  with these words; the sanctuary of the eternal, shall no more be plucked up, and shall never more be destroyed and desolate in any time to come. EZECHIEL saith, 
Ezec. c 37. v. 26. 27. & 28.  I will make a treaty of peace with them; I will have an eternal confederacy with them, I will build them and multiply them, and establish my sanctification in the midst of them for ever: my tabernacle shall be amongst them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people, and the Nations shall know that I sanctify Israel, when they shall see my sanctification in the midst of them for perpetuity. ESAY cries out. As in the days of No I swore, that I would no more pour down the waters upon the earth, so I have protested, that I will no more 〈◊〉 
Esai. c. 54. v. 9  angry with thee, and that I will no more look upon thee in my wrath. The mountains shall be moved, and the hills shall shake, but my mercy 
Ibidem v. 10  shall not estrange itself from thee, and the peace of my alliance, shall never 
Idem c. 59 v. 19 20.  be transported from thee. And in an other place; When he that is driven with the spirit of our Lord, shall become as an impetuous flood, and that the Saviour shall arrive at Zion, to turn away the iniquities of jacob; behold the alliance that shall be between them and me saith our Lord; my Spirit which is thy mouth and the words which I have put in thy mouth, shall never depart from thy mouth nor from the mouth of they posterity; nor from the posterity of thy posterity, saith our Lord, from this time forth, for ever more. And a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, I will contract a perpetual confederacy with them, and the people shall know their posterity and their lineage shall be manifest in the midst of the Nations; and all that shall see it shall know, that this shall be the seed cherished and favoured by our Lord. Now to what purpose were all these 〈◊〉 of contracts and alliances, all these mentions of preeminencies and prerogatives, if the Sincops and interruptions of the Church of the jews ought to make the law, and precedent for the Christian Church? To what purpose are all these 
Esa. 45. Idem c. 60  clauses; that the Gates of the Church should be continually open; that they shall be shut neither day nor night, that the multitude of nations may be brought in? That whereas she hath been abandoned and odious, and that none frequented her, she shall be made the glory of the wourld, and shall become the delight of generations? That she shall no more be called the forsaken, and that her land shall no more be called the desolate, but her name shall be the favoritie of our Lord, and her land shall be peopled and inhabited? If the Christian Church should be exposed 
Esai 62  to the same ruins and desolations as the jewish, which never received any promises of perpetuity; or if any promises of perpetuity may seem to have been made to her literally, they have been made to her only in shadow and in figure, but their truth belonged to the Christian Church? To what purpose were all these promises of our Lord? Both by the mouth of Esaie: As in the days of No I swore, I would no more bring the waters of the flood again upon the earth; so I have sworn that I will no more be angry 
Esai. 54.  with thee. And by that of Zachary. I will no more do to this people, as I 
Zachar. 11.  have done in times past. And by his own: The city built upon a mountain can 
Matth 5.  not be hidden: the gates of hell shall never prevail against her; This Gospel of the 
Matth 16.  
Matth. 24  Kingdom must first be preached over all the world, and then the end shall come. I 
Matth. 28.  am with you to the consummation of ages, and other the like, if the Christian Church have not quite other prerogatives than the jewish Church not only in eminency and multitude, but also in lasting and perpetuity? Philosophers teach that passion is a way tending and leading to corruption, and that what is incorruptible, is also reciprocally impassable and inalterable, what wonder is it then, that the wayfarring preparation of the Religion of the jews, which was corruptible and subject to perish, before it came to the term of corruption, have tried many passions, many accidents, many changes? that before it perished, it have undergone many weaknesses, Sincopes, and faintings: that this ancient & decrepit house which was one day to be ruined (as the Apostle speaking of the old law teacheth us that that which wears and grows old, approacheth to ruin.) have sums times been amazed and shaken? that this light, that was finally to be extinguished & buried under a profound night and in perpetual darkness, have sometimes been obscured and dimmed, and have suffered defects and eclipses? And chose, that the state of the Christian Church that the scriptures declare and prophesy to be incorruptible, and not subject to perish, should be freed from all the passions, preserved from all these accidens, and dispensed withal and warranted from all these interruptions?  
But we have insisted too long upon the thesis, let us now come to the hypothesis, which is of the estate of the Church under the two first periods: and principally, under that of the jewish law. For in regard of the defects of the jewish Church, the adversaries to Christianity, make nine notable objections, which we will confute in order one after an other. The first is taken from the history of Aaron. Aaron, say they, founded the Idol, after which the people Idolatrized. It is true Aaron, not yet invested with the high Priesthood, founded the golden calf, after which the people, that 〈◊〉 to say, by Synecdoche, a part of the people, Idolatrized, for Philo the jew doth particularly say, that the malady had not seized them 
Exod. 32.  
Phil. Ibid.  all: But neither Moses, who was the visible head of the Israelites Church, and in whose only person resided till then the high Priesthood; nor the whole body of the levitical tribe, destined to the future guard of the Temple, and to the ordinary ministry of the law were touched with 
Exod. 32  this crime. For as soon as Moses cried; If any one belong to our Lord, let him join with me: All the tribe of Levi gathered to him, to root out the Idolaters. From whence it is, that Moses gives these praises to Levi; 
〈◊〉  It is he that hath said of his Father, and of his mother, I have not seen them: And who hath not acknowledged his Brothers, and hath no more known his children; for they have kept thy words; And that God himself saith by the ministry of Malachy; The law of truth hath been in the mouth of Levi, and 
〈◊〉. 2  in his lips there was no forwardness; he hath walked with me in peace and equity: And that Philo the jew, searching wherefore the Towns of refuge had been taken of the tribe of the Levites, saith, that one reason was, because the 
Phil. jud.  levitical tribe destined to guard the temple, had slain the worshippers of the 
l. de Profug.  golden calf. And therefore saint PAUL citing the same history, reduceth it to the number of some; To the end, saith he, that you become not Idolaters, 
1. Cor. 10.  as some amongst them were; to show that this act was not universal. For that the sin was imputed in general to all the people; it was not because they had all participated in it, but because they had not endeavoured to revenge and punish it in the act. And yet this action was not a judiciary action of the Church, or a ritual custom of the Synagogue, but a tumultuary sedition of the people, which was extinguished the same day, & consequently could not be reckoned for an interruption of the jewish Church for as 〈◊〉 as the brute of the tumult of the Idolators was raised, Moses came down from the mountain to remedy it. Now what proportion is there between the tumult of a day, and such like clouds of the jewish Church (whose longest lasted, but the twentieth part of an age, & by consequence, gave no occasion to say of the jewish Church that, that Cornelius Tacitus saith of the commonwealth of Rome under Tiberius, Who is he that hath seen the commonwealth) & the pretended ieterruption of the Catholic Church, which according to the computation of her Adversaries, hath been eclipsed in faith, & erred in salvation above four hundred then years, & as they say of Epimenides, that he fell into a sleep young, & awaked old; so she fell a sleep young, to wit, immediately after the death of the apostl, & awaked old, that is to say, upon the end, & in the last wave of the world.  
The second objection is taken from the history of the symptoms, which happened to the jewish church, between the time of Moses, & that of David where it is said, one while that Micheas mâde an Idol, & that six hundred 
judic. 8. v. 27  men of the tribe of Dan, having taken it; placed it in Lais, a city of the Sydonians, possessed by them; an other while, that Gedeon made an Ephod in 
joshua 1. v. 11.  Ephra, and that all Israel went a whoring after it: An other while, that Israel transgressed, and abandoned the Lord. An other while, that in the time of Hely the word of God was precious: that is to say, rare: An other while, that in the 
1. Reg. 3. v. 1.  time of Saul, the ark had not been required, that is to say, according to the innovators gloss, God had not been consulted in his word. But for the 
1. Paral. 13. v. 3.  history of Micheas so far is it off, that from the act of Micheas, which was but a particular act, no more than that of the six hundred Israelites of the tribe of Dan, there can be any inference drawn, that the visible service of God, was the extinguished in all the people of Israel; as Luther affirms, that this history fell out, either at the latter end of josua; or under the government of Othoniel, an excellent servant of God, wherein none can pretend; that the true service was extinguished in Israel. And the historian noting that this idol remained in the city of Lais, as long as the house of our Lord remained in Silo, testifies that the house of God, and the seat of the true service of God, was then in Silo. And whereas the people of Israel took occasion to go a whoring after the Ephod of Gedeon; and that the history of judges saith; All Israel went a whoriug after it, it must be understood of the Israelites of the city of Ephra, native place of Gedeon, and others near to it; and that it is written in diverse places of the same history, that Israel prevaricated and served false Gods; it is to be understood by Synecdoche, of a part for the whole, following this sentence of S. AUGUSTINE. The scripture hath this fashion of reproof, that the 
Aug. ep. 〈◊〉 joshua. 1. v. 11  word seems to be addressed to all, yet concerns but some of them. And indeed in the history of Josua, not only the scripture saith; The children of Israel violated the commandment, and took of the Anathema: But God himself pronounceth; 
Ibidem.  Israel hath sinned, and hath transgressed against my alliance they have taken of the anathema; and have, stolen it and have lied and have hidden it amongst their stuff, and Israel cannot subsist before his enemies, but shall fly before them, for he is polluted with the anathema. And notwithstanding there was but one only man in all Israel, and he yet unkowne, that had committed this crime to wit, Acham. And whereas it is said in the first of Samuel, that in the time of Eli, the word of God was precious, that is to say, rare; the author speaks not there in any sort of the law, or of the written word, but of the oracles and visible predictions, that God had accustomed to give by the prophets, as by these words, And there was no manifest vision, may appear. And whereas it is said in the first to the chronicles, that in the time of Saul the Ark was not required, that is to say, according to the innovators gloss, that God was not consulted with, in this word. This is a wrong interpretation of the word, requisivimus, which intends not there, inquired of, but required, and hath not reference to the word of God, but to the Ark and signifies no other thing, but that in the time of Saul, they had not yet required the Ark from the city of Kiriath Jearim.  
The third objection is taken from the complaint of Elias. Elias (said the Adversaries of the Church) complained to God, that his Altars were beaten down, and his prophetts slain with the sword, and that he was left alone, and they likewise sought him, to put him to death; And God answered him, that he had reserved to 〈◊〉 seven thousand. Whereof Elias conceived he had known none. And this when God could not be served visible, but in judea, the Church as they conclude, was then invisible. But how long will they stumble at one 〈◊〉 stone, and not learn to distinguish between the kingdom of Israel, were was the seat of schism and heresy, & the kingdom of juda, where was the seat of the true Church? It is written that the herb called Eringus, hath this hidden property, that if amongst a company of Goats there be any one that takes a leaf of it between his teeth, that Goat will immediately stop, and with him all the Flock; so as it is not possible to make any one of them go forward, till first the leaf be plucked out of his mouth. So after one of the adversaries of the Church hath apprehended any falsehood or absurdity, all the rest as by a certain charm, do so stop and stumble at it, as it is not possible to make them go forward, unless you call back the first author, yea out of his grave to contradict himself and to recant publicly. Melancton being inquired off 〈◊〉 the Church was twelve or thirteen hundred year ago, since from that time by his account our communion was corrupted with Idolatry and impiety, had recourse to the history of Elias, to whom said he for a while, the true Church was unknown and iwisible. After this all those that have handled the same question, without enquiring whether this solution were true or false, without taking care to examine the place, have so tied themselves to it, as at this day, it is their only and common refuge in this extremity. It doth not import us answer they to know where the residence of the Church was in the ages whereof you inquire. Elias who was a prophet, was also ignorant for a time, where she subsisted; we then may well be ignorant of it, who are neither Prophets, nor the children of Prophets; For he complained, that he was left alone: but of whom did Elias speak when he said, They have 〈◊〉 thy Prophets with the sword? Was it not of Achab and of 
3. Reg. 19  jesabel? and where was it that he said he was left alone? was it not in the Kingdom of Israel? Now if saint AUGUSTINE speaking of the Christian Church it self, hath had reason to say, what an absurdity is it 
Aug. de civet. Dei, l. 18. c. 52.  not to consider, that the Church, increasing and multiplying over all the world, might suffer persecution by the kings of some Nations, when she did not suffer it by the rest? wherefore may not we cry out, What an absurdity is it to transferr what belongs to the Kingdom of Israel, where the true Church was persecuted, to the Kingdom of juda where she was visible, flourishing, and eminent? For so fart of was the Church then from being tied and restrained to the Kingdom of Israel, as chose, the true Seat, the only seat, the sovereign seat of the service of God, and of the visible exercise of Religion, wherein only sacrifices might be lawfully celebrated, the centre of union and ecclesiastical communion, the heart, if I may say so, and root of the Church, was Situate out of the jurisdiction of Israel. Nay more than so, all the sacerdotal order, all the 〈◊〉 of Levi, all the high-priests, priests and ministers, to whom only belonged the dispensation of the mysteries and ceremonies, all the magistrates and officers of the Church, all the Pastors and ordinary Doctors, without which she could not be visible, nor retain her just marks and Sacraments, than made their residence out of the Kingdom of Israel. And to prove this, threescore years and more before Elias began to prophesy, the Kingdom of Israel had been divided into two Kingdoms, the one containing the tribe of juda, which was without comparison the greatest and most principal, & that of Benjamin, to which was also joined the lineage of Levi all entire, with infinite particulars of the other Tribes, who desired to serve God purely, holding the title of the Kingdom of juda, under the dominion of Roboam, the true and natural heir; the other comprehending the rest of the tribes possessed by Jeroboam, a rebel & an usurper, & possessed under the restrained name of the Kingdom of Israel. By means whereof, these two peoples have always had their estates and their kings apart; yea, their religions also for the more part divided. For to Jeroboam succeeded Nadab; to Nadab Baasa; to Baasa, Ela, to Ela, Zambri; to Zambri, Amri; to Amri Achab; All not only schismatics, but Idolators and infidels. Elias then as subject to Achab complained, that these Relics of the Church, which remained in Israel, these few of the faithful which were left in the territory of Achab, and which were wont every year to go up to profess and to exercise their Religion in the Kingdom of juda, where the Temple and Priesthood was, had been rooted out by the tyranny of Queen jesabel. And from the departing from thence there are men which conclude without scruple of this fear, there was then no visible Church, in the world. But hear the history of the separation of these two kingdoms: He reigned (saith the history of the chronicles, speaking 
Chronic. 11.  of Roboan) over juda, & over Benjamin. The Priests also & the Levites which were under the jurisdiction of Israel, came to him out of all the cities which had been given to him for their habitation, leaving their possession and their inheritance, and passing and inhabiting in juda and in Jerusalem; because jeroboam had driven them out he & his Successors, lest they should attend to the service of our Lord, having appointed priests of the high places to sacrifice to the devils and to the calves that he had caused to be set up. from other places also of all the tribes of Israel, those that set their hearts to seek the God of Israel, went up to Jerusalem to offer their sacrifices before the Lord God of their Fathers. Whereto Josephus adds these words, as 
joseph.  pronounced by Hieroboam in form of an oration to the people of Israel: 
Antiquitat.  
judaic. l. 8.  I think, said he, none of you are ignorant, that there is no place where God is not and that he reserves not to himself, any appointed seat, but that every where he hears those that pray to him, and casts his eyes upon all that serve him. For this reason I have not thought fit, to suffer you to go so far to worship, and with so much pains, and also in an enemy city, as Jerusalem is. The temple that is there was built by a mortal man, neither more nor less than myself. Therefore I have consecraced for you, two Calves of Gold, the one in Bethel, and the other in Dan, that going thither, according to the ease and opportunity of the neighbourhood, you may there worship God more commodiously. Besides, you shall want no priests and Levites, whom I will establish from amongst you, that you may have no more need of the tribe of Levi, nor of the family of Aaron. Behold then, that the Church was then so far from being confined to the Kingdom of Israel as the Metropolitan Seat of the religion & service of God, which was Jerusalem, the place where sacrifices ought to be celebrated, which was the temple, the sovereign tribunal of the adoration which was the Altar, the succession of David from whom the Messias was to come, the high priest, and all the sacerdotal and levitical Estate, which administered and represented the universal Body of the Church, did remain following the election and institution of God, in the parts of the Kingdom of juda, and out of that of the Kingdom of Israel. Which the holy Ghost had long before declared by the mouth of the Psalmist in these terms not only historical but also prophetical: He 
Psalm. 77. v. 60. ct. 61.  hath, (saith he) rejected the tabernacle of joseph, and hath not chosen the tribe of 
Hieron. in Hierem. c. 31.  Ephraim; (that is to say, the kingdom of Israel, which was called Ephraim for as much as jeroboam as saith S. HIEROME who first reigned there was of the tribe of Ephraim;) but hath chosen the tribe of juda, and the mountain of 
Ezech. 27.  Zion, which he loved. And after by that of Ezechiel in these, Sonn of man (saith the Lord) take a piece of wood and write upon it, juda and the children of Israel which are united to him and of his fellowship: and take an other and write upon it; The word of joseph which is in the hand of Ephraim, and all the families of Israel, and of all those which are united to him. And therefore the history of Toby saith, that when all those of the tribe of Nephthali went to the golden calves that jeroboam king of Israel had made, Toby only fled the company of all the rest, and went into jerusalem to the temple of the lord, and there worshipped the Lord God of Israel, offering all his first fruits and his tithes. And therefore our Lord, when the Samaritan said to him, our Fathers worshipped in this mountain; (that is to say, in the mountain of Samaria and of Gerassim) and ye affirm that in Jerusalem is the place where we ought to worship, answered, that Salvation was on the jews side. And for this same cause, S. PAUL alleging his extraction from Abraham according to the flesh, notes particularly that he was issued from the family of Benjamin, as signifiing that he was extracted from the society of those, in whose communion resided the true Body of the Church. The tribe of juda (saith S. AUGUSTINE) and the line of Benjamin, had remained in the society of the Temple, the Tribe of Levi which 
Tob. 1.  
August in Psalm. 75.  was that of the Priests, the tribe of juda which was the royal line, and the line of Benjamin. Those only stayed on Hierusalems' party, and in the communion of the Temple of God, when the separation had been made by the revolt of Salomon's servant. Do not then imagine, that it is of little weight, that the Apostle adds, issued from the tribe of Benjamin, For it is as if he should have said, communicating with juda, and not being deprived of, and separated from, the temple. But behold yet more; which is, that the complaint of Elias, is so far from verifying this pretended interruption, and this general eclipse of the jewish Church, as contrariwise it appears, that at the same time at the same hour at the same moment, that Elias lamented the persecution of Achab, the true Religion flourished in judea with more glory, purity, and splendour, than ever she had done since the first Solomon, which was the figure of her true spouse, and the author of the material Temple, till the other that was declared to be greater than Solomon; that is to say, until our Lord who built the spiritual Temple of the Catholic Church. For in the same time, that Achab and jesabel, persecuted Elias, josaphat sonn and Successor to Asa, reigned in juda. And to prove it so the history bears; that Josaphat came to the crown of juda, the fourth year of the Reign of Achab King of Israel. Now thete were six years and more of Achab's government expired, when Elias, made his lamentation. For the great drought whereof, the hebrews assign the beginning to be in the third year of Achab, and which lasted three years and six months, according to the report of S. JAMES was then precisely finished; so as the complaint of 
jacob. 5.  Elias, not only falls out in the time of josaphat, but meets exactly with the revolution of the third year of his Empire, which was just the same 〈◊〉, wherein he celebrated that famous circuit, and if I dare so style it, that walking Parliament, and those great days of Religion, where the most notable Princes of his estate and the principal priests and Levites, were appointed to travel, through all the cities of his Kingdom. Behold the 〈◊〉 wherein Elias complaint happened. Now what josaphat was from the beginning to the end of his life, how he walked entirely in the way of Asa his Father, without turning from it in any thing, but doing what was pleasing to the Lord; how the Service of God was holily celebrated and administered under his authority, how the Almighty was with him, because he trod in the steps of David his Predecessor, and trusted not in Idols, but in the God of his Father, walking in his precepts, and not according to the sins of Israel; how the priests and Levites visited all the cities of his Kingdom, having the law of God in their hands, and instructing the people: and how there were judges of the Sacerdotal order established in Jerusalem for ecclesiastical causes; that when any controversy should be presented concerning religion, the commandments the ceremonies, the iustifications, the people might be instructed not to sin before the Lord; both histories aswell of the kings, as of the chronicles, do testify. For the rest, with what temporal 〈◊〉 God favoured 
Chron. 16  him, how much he abounded in glory and in treasure, how much he exceeded Israel, how dreadful he was to the neighbouring nations, how the terror of the lord, said the scripture, was spread over all the Kingdoms 
Ibidem  of the 〈◊〉, which were round about juda, so as they durst not make war upon josaphat how the Philistines paid him tribute, how he received pension & homage from the Arabians, how Idumea acknowledged him, what ordinary forces he entertained for war: to wit three hundred thousand chosen men under the charge of Edna, two hundred and four score thousand chosen soldiers under that of johanna, two hundred & fourscore thousand men of war under the conduct of Amazia, two hundred & fourscore thousand Archers with Eliada, & an hundred & fourscore thousand light horsemen who followed 〈◊〉, the history & collection of the chronicles exactly declares. Yet this fearful number which amounted unto eleven 
Ibidem.  hundred & threescore thousand men of war, did not comprehend (saith the scripture) the garrisons that he had in walled cities throughout his kingdom, neither were reckoned, an inestimable number of people unable to bear arms, as of old men women, & children, nor the tribe of Levi which exempt from the military state, which nevertheless was accustomed to people and possess forty eight cities. Now thereupon I demand, if there be any appearance to conclude, that the jewish Church was then invisible and if it be not flatly to mock the readers, to allege Elias to that purpose? For I will not say, that in Israel itself, if not the image, yet at least the memory of piety, was not so blotted out and extinguished, but that the examples thereof were still fresh. And that this is so, the history 
3. Reg. 18.  recites, that when jesabel put the prophets to death, Abdias governor of Achab's house, saved one hundred in two several caves, as the same Abdias had a while before reported to Elias: And that the very 
Ibidem  day before Elias flight, the general states of Israel, (called by Achab, at the instance of Elias upon mount Carmel, to see the conclusion of Baal's priests) after they had kneeled down, and cried out, the Lord is God, the Lord is God, had fallen upon the four hundred & fifty false prophets, and had cut them in pieces, Achab seeing it, and consenting to it: As little will I tell you, that Elias. when he pronounced this lamentation, was not in the Kingdom of Israel, nor amidest the light and communication of men, but retired into a cave, in the mountain of Oreb forty day's journey from Samaria, the Metropolitan of Israel, where he spoke not according to the exact knowledge of what was happened since his departure, but by a form of indulgence to humane fear & frailty, imagining, what the wrath of jesabel, new kindled by his occasion, might have effected against his brethren in his absence: By means whereof, this multitude of faithful Israelites, expressed by the number of seventy hundred a finite number for an infinite, was not unknown to those, that inhabited in Israel. Only I will say, that the general extirpation of true godliness in the territories subject to king Achab, did not conclude therefore, that it was rooted out from all the tribes comprehended under the first division of Israel, since there were an infinity of Israelites as hath above appeared, withdrawn in the form of a voluntary exile into Jerusalem and into juda. For besides those that removed thither in Roboams reign, the scripture testifies, that Asa father to josaphat, near twenty year before this persecution, had gathered together the people of juda and of Benjamin, and all the strangers of the tribes of Ephraim, of 
Paralip. 15.  Manasses, and of Simeon, because many of them, saith the same scripture, had come to him for refuge, seeing that the Lord their God was with him Moreover, the cities of the mountain of Ephraim, conquered by the same Asa, upon the Kingdom of Israel; those of Bethel, jesana, Ephron and others recovered by Abia his Father, after the battle that he won against jeroboam, communicated in the true Religion with the people of juda, and the remnant of this medley of Israelites, either subdued or sheltered, and dwelling amongst the jews, and communicating with them, 
Luke 2. v. 36.  lasted even until the Birth of our Lord. In whose time saint LUKE still notes, that the Prophetess Anna, who also was perpetually in the Temple, was of the line of Aser. But whatsoever the Kingdom of Israel were, it sufficeth that when Elias made this complaint, the jewish Church flourished with so much purity and splendour in that of juda, as 〈◊〉 was never more pure, nor more visible. Which Elias could not be ignorant of, since he was not only obliged with an express obligation he and all the rest of God's servants which remained in Israel, to go up every year to certain Feasts in Jerusalem, to communicate in the Temple, and in the sacrifices; but also had but then, newly passed by Berscha, that bounded upon the Kingdom of juda, as he fled from the tyranny of jesabel.  
The fourth objection is taken from the history of Vria, who by the commandment of Achaz King of juda, set up a profane Altar before the Temple. But besides this, that neither Ezechias Sonn & heir to the Kingdom of juda; nor Esai prince of the blood of juda, & Prophet, who by his extraordinary Mission, and prophetical authority, a Succour promised in the old Testament, did supply no less truly the defect of the duty of the ordinary Mission in the person of Vria, than the Poets feigned fabulously that in the games of 〈◊〉, the Grasshopper had supplied the defect of Eunomius string; neither the Body of the sacerdotal and levitical order, did participate in this sacrilege, but that all the Sacerdotal college, rather chose to suffer exile, then to consent to it. From whence it is, that when Ezechias, the first month of his reign, caused the Delphic oblations to be made in the behalf of the people, he was constrained to make use of the Levites, to help to slay the beasts, because of the small number of Priests which were then about him, for as much saith S. HIEROME & the Hebrew gloss, as they had beme dispersed in the time of King 
Hieron. ad Vital. ep. 132.  Achaz and were not yet returned: And secondly so far were the people of juda from approving it, as chose they did for this cause so abhor Achaz, as being dead, although his own son succeeded him, they did not 〈◊〉 him in the sepulchre of his Fathers.  
THE fifth objection is taken, from the four hundred Prophetts that Achab caused to come and prophesy before Josaphat, who were all found false prophetts, and Micheas alone, a true Prophet. But neither did this 
3. Reg. 22.  fall out in the kingdom of juda, where was the seat of the Church, but in the kingdom of Israel, neither were those Prophets, of the college of the Prophetts of Baal, and of the quality of those of whom before Elias had said: Take all the Prophetts of Baal, and let not one man escape. And of whom afterward Elias said to joram sonn of the same Achab; What is there 
3. Reg. 18. 4. Reg. 3. 3. Reg. 22  between me and thee? Go to the Prophets of thy Father and of thy mother. And therefore when josaphat would cause Micheas to come; he asked him, is there not here one Prophet of the Lord; to distinguish him from the Prophetts of Baal, by this word, of the Lord; which is the same difference, which jehu afterwards used, when being desirous to put Baal's Priests to death, he said. Take beede lest there be any of the servants of the Lord amongst you, but let the servant of Baal be only here. 
4. Reg. 10.   
The sixth objection is taken from the history of Manasses an Idolatrous Prince, and who caused all manner of abominations and false worship to be practised in Jerusalem and juda. But besides this, that he came afterward to repentance, and then drove away all the Idols and all the false Gods from Jerusalem, and commanded the people of juda to serve God even then when he exercised his greatest impieties, the church and the multitude of God's true servants, were not for all that invisible. chose the scripture saith, that he shed so much innocent blood, as Jerusalem 
4. Reg. 21.  was filled there with even up to the throat. By means whereof, although there had then been no solemn assemblies in the Synagogues of juda, and that all public exercise had been suspended there, yet the slaughter of the faithful yet warm & still breathing, and the voice of their blood which smoked and cried for vengeance, as that of Abel before heaven and earth, permitied not that the true Religion should be unknown and invisible there. For as many executions and martirdomes as there were so many sacrifices of praise and sweet smell were they, so many professions of Faith, so many sermons, so many seals and sacraments of the true belief, which refreshed and confirmed the memory of the doctrine of salvation, even in the spirits of those, that persecuted it: for as much as all men knew, and themselves protested, the cause wherefore they were banished, pursued and martyred. For the Church is not only illustrated by her Lilies, but also by her roses; that is to say, she is not only evident by her quiet and peaceable exercises, which are the congregations to hear and adore the word of God, and to communicate in the sacraments: but also by her military exercises died in blood, which are the martyrdoms and the executions suffered for the defence of the Faith which do often no less increase her fame and renown in the times wherein she is oppressed, then in the seasons wherein she enjoys more calm quiet, and fulfils without hindrance her ordinary and accustomed works. So as S. AUGUSTINE saith, she is then eminent in her most steadfast 
Aug. ep. 48  champions.  
THE seaventh objection is taken from the transmigration of Babylon, during with time, they pretend that the visible communion of the jewish Church, was interrupted. But who knows not, that the jews during this exile, had the true external exercise of their religion, wherein they wrought their Salvation, & performed the visible observation of all their worships, services, and ceremonies, except of the Sacrifice alone, which could not be offered but in the Temple, and were evidently distinguished from other nations; witness these words of Aman to Assuerus: There is a 
〈◊〉. 3.  people 〈◊〉 over all the Provinces of thy Kingdom, and divided into many parts, that practices new laws and ceremonies, And these of the historian, Many other nations and sects joined themselves to their religion, and to their ceremonies. For that this history fell out in the time of the transmigration, it appears by this, that it is said, that Mardocheus was one of those that had been transported from Jerusalem in the time of Nabuchodonosor, and of jechonias. And it is not contradictory to this that Assuerus writes: that Aman was a Macedonian, and would have betrayed the Empire to the Macedonians: For the copy of the same epistle reported by josephus sixteen hundred years 
joseph antiquit judaic. l. 11. c 6.  a gone, hath it Allophilus; that is to say, a stranger: And that the Greek & Latin Edition saith; a Macedonian, it proceeds from the Syriac translation of the same Epistle, made after the death of Alexander: after which all strangers in Asia, were called Macedonians: as at this day all those of the west, are called Frankes there: From whence it is, that the Syriac edition saith: that Assicerus was clothed in a Macedonian habit: that is to say, in the habit of a stranger.  
THE eight objection is taken from the writings of the Prophetts, who often deplored the desolation of the service of God in their people. But either they spoke of the portion of the Kingdom of Israel divided from that of juda: and of the faction of the schismatical Israelites, who were no more the Church, and to whom God protested by the mouth of jeremy, that he had given the libel of divorce: Or if they spoke of that of the 
jerem. 3. v. 8.  Kingdom of juda, S. AUGUSTINE teacheth us, that they spoke prophetically, and by an analogy of time, of the future Estate of the jewish people, such as they should be after the death of our Lord: Or if they spoke by Synecdoche and according to the stile of preachers, who censure the vices of particular persons in general terms to the end to reprove, as S. AUGUSTINE saith of S. HILARY, the more severely that which they reprove more universally: that is to say, that they spoke of certain particular persons, who either abandoned the Religion of their Fathers, some to follow, that of the Pagans that sacrificed to Idols, some to follow that of the schismatics who sacrificed in the high places: or if they remained in the true religion and communion, lived wickedly there as concerning manners. They collect (saith S. AUGUSTINE speaking of the Donatists he might have added the Caluinists to them) either ignor antlie or fraudulently the places of Scripture, which are spoken either of the wicked, which are nimgled with the good, until the end, or of the destruction of the first people of the jews; and would wrest them against the Church of God; that she may seem to have failed, and to be perished from the whole earth.  
The ninth and final objection, is taken from the comdemnation that the jewish Church, made of the Saviour of the world. But who sees not, that this was in the time wherein 〈◊〉 contract was expired, and that of the Christian Church, did begin? The law and the prophetts, saith 
Luc. 16. v. 16.  our Saviour, Until john; And saint PAUL, Blindness is partly 
Rom. 11. v. 25.  fallen upon Israel, that the fullness of the Gentiles might be introduced. Now the lease that God had made of his vine to the jewish Church, having been but for a time; what wonder is it, that when this lease is come to expire, the prerogative that she had, by virtue of her contract, should cease; and that the master of the vineyard should let forth his Vineyard to other 〈◊〉? and this fufficeth for the comparison of the Christian Church with the jewish. For to ascend to the time before the law of Moses, and to allege the little mention that is made there of the continuance of the Church, it is clear, that it had been a thing superfluous for the Scripture, to have represented particularly, the estate of the Church of those ages, the knowledge of the succession of the Church, not having been necessary, but after the last institution of the law, for the service whereof she is established as to the jews after the institution of the law of Moses; and to the Christians after the institution of the evangelical law. Although both before and 
Gen. 〈◊〉.  after the flood, there are many monuments of it. For both before the flood this, that the sons of God knew the daughters of men, shows that there was an especial people, which boar the title of the children of God: which title the interpreters would have to be taken by the posterity of Seth, to distinguish themselves from the posterity of Cain, when Seth had begotten Enos; and that they began, saith the Scripture, to all chemselues 
Gen. 4.  by the name of the Lord: And the universal corruption which fell out in the end; upon all the other families, descended from Seth, except that of No, was a corruption of manners, and for which if we believe saint HIEROME, all those that perish with a temporal death in the flood, 
Gen. 9  perished not with an eternal death; And after the flood, that No lived 
Gen. 〈◊〉.  almost to the sixtith year of Abraham, And Sem the Sonn of No, whom Luther calls the Pope of his Age, till after the death of jacob: And that 
Gen. 14.  Melchisedech king of Salem was priest of the most high, and in his quality 
Gen. 25.  blessed Abraham: & that Rebecca wife of Isaad, went to inquire of God upon the mystery of her children, shows, that even them the true worship & visible service of God had place both before, & elsewhere, them in the family of Abraham. Butto conclude, grant all the hypothesis to be such as the protestāns pretend & that the Church had been interrupted, both before the law & under thelawe: what would that make against the christian church, to whom 
Esai. 54.  Christ held this language: As in the days of No I swore, that I would never again bring the waters of the Flood upon the Earth, so I have sworn, that I will 
Esa. 26.  no more be angry against thee: Thou shalt no more be called the forsaken. I will no 
Zach. 8.  more do to this people as in former days. I will contract a new alliance with them, 
Agg. 2. v. 10.  not according to the alliance I contracted with their Fathers, when I brought them out of the land of Egypt: The city of the Lord, shall no more be pulled up, nor destroyed: The glory of this second house shall be much greater, then that of the first: 
Matth 5.  
Matth 16.  The city built upon the mountain cannot be hidden: The gates of Hell shall not 
Matth. 28.  prevail against my Church. I am with you to the consummation of ages. This Gospel 
Matt. 24.  of the Kingdom must be preached through the whole world, and then the end shall come. He hath placed in his Church, the Apostles, Prophetts, Pastors, and Doctors; &c: till we all shall meet in the unity of faith. The Church is the firmament of truth: and other such like.    

Of the comparison of the Charity of the ancient African Church and the modern Roman Church. CHAP. XXXVII.  

The continuance of the King's answer  
AND surely, the ancient Church to recall the Donatists, that were refractory, to her communion had accustomed by an admirable Charity to provide, even for the te mporall commodities of the Bishops that should be converted and of others also. And the Roman Church, to knit again the love and good will, between her and the English Church, hath first employed the thunderbolts of Bulls, and afterward of force, sometimes openly, and sometimes underhand.   

THE REPLY.  
THE ancient Catholic Church of Africa, offered for the good of Charity, and of the Ecclesiastical communion, to yield up the Bishoprickes of Africa; not to those Donatist Bishops, which still remained on Donatus his party, but to those that would return to the communion of the Catholic Church. And the Roman Church hath excommunicated by her Bulls, not those that will return from the English division to the Catholic communion, but those that after many admonitions, are obstinate still to remain in the separation, And therefore there is in this, no Antithesis between the proceedings of the ancient Catholic Church, and those of the modern. For as concerning this word, the thunderbolts of Bulls by which some think to make the Pope's censures the more odious, his majesty may remember if 〈◊〉 please, that it is an ancient phrase of speech that the Grecians use, who called the condemnations, even of secular judgements, thunderbolts and to express, that one was condemned in judgement, they would say, he was Thunder-stricken.    

Of the innocence of the Church in the matter of conspiracies against his majesty, CHAP. XXXVIII.  

The continuance of the King's answer.  
TRAITORS manifestly culpable of the parricide undertaken in this province, she hath received into her lap, and still wholly protects them: those that have suffered judgement for the same cause, she Inrolles in the Catalogue of martyrs, and propugneth from day to day their innocence, against all laws, divine and humane.   

THE REPLY.  
IF any of those that were partakers of the abominable conspiracy, projected against his majesty be received at Rome it is an error of fact, and not of Right, founded upon a false information, that is to say, upon the belief, that they have imprinted there, that they are not culpable of that attempt, as Princes are accustomed to receive in the quality of innocent persons, those that have recourse to them out of other Provinces, if the verbal process of the crime be not sent to them, that they may inform themselves of the truth or falsehood of the imputation. And this law is a law of resuge and freedom common to the Estates of all Princes. But to believe that the Pope protects them in the quality of being culpable of this conspiracy. I know to well how much I have heard him detest it with his own mouth. For as touching those that have been excluded in England, that that is (for whose innocence not with standing diverse write) is always grounded upon the fact, and not upon the right; that is to say, pretending they were not complices nor consenting thereto, and not maintaining the action to be other then damnable and detestable. Contrariwise that they are justified by this way, be it true be it false (for it is hard in such a case to impose a law upon the suspicion of absent persons) it is a manifest testimony, that the action is abhorred, and condemned. And when as his majesty adds, that the Roman Church, enrolls them in the catalogue of martyrs, if any pariicular men defend their supposed innocence hyperbolically, it is always upon this supposition whether true or false, that they were not complices in the fact. But as for the Roman Church, I never yet heard tell, that she hath canonised any martyr of the seaventeenth age.    

Of the writings of the illustrious Cardinal Bellarmin. CHAP. XXXIX.  

The continuance of the King answer.  
THe Cardinal Bellarmine himself, I will say it against my will, but I say truth, amongst the protectors of the Parricides, holds the rank of the head of a faction who newly again to the end to allure the excellent King hath employed this argument of wondrous efficacy, to persuade that the Kingdom of England belongs to the Pope, and that the king of England is subject to the Pope, even in temporal things, and in his Feodary. I omit the other complaints of the king, and the English Church, as well old as new, which now have no need of commemoration.   

THE REPLY.  
THE protestation that I have made, none to handle any thing in this work, but what is purely spiritual, obligeth me not to undertake the defence of the Illustrious and most learned cardinal Bellarmine, but in cases of this quality. It sufficeth me for the rest to say, that himself advertises the Readers that what he propounds os the indirect authority of the Pope in temporals, he propounds it not as a doctrine of faith, and whereof either side must be held under the pain of excommunication or anathema by means where of this question should not hinder the reunion of those who desire to return to the Church. For as for the annual present that it is written, England waswont to make to the Sea Apostolic, if his majesty's Predecessors would by any mark of public acknowledgement testify their particular devotion towards saint PETER'S Sea that could bring no more dimunition to their temporal glory, than the submission of Alexander the great brought to him when he prostrated himself before the high Priest of the 〈◊〉 law; or that of the Emperor justinian the second, when he prostrated himself in Asia before Pope Constantine, making this acknowledgement not to men but to God, who saith by the mouth of Esay to his Church, whereof saint PETER in his Successors, is the head and visible figure: Kings shall worship thee with their face on the ground. Contrariwise it will be found, that the kings of England, have been more esteemed and feared since then, then ever they were before, jointly, that whensoever it shall please this great king to make so fair a present to the Church, as to give her his heart and person, I assure myself, the Pope will show (if these temporal acknowledgements be displeasing to his Majesty) that it is himself as S. PAUL saith, that he desires, and not the things that belong to him.  
The end of the first Part.