ae te sae a . ee abla f ae Batt g Py " M 4 ; 5 ? | > e re ' a : f' . . . 5 ( ey f Wty ns" ‘ 4 g $ is ees pal one +5 a ae ed ane iy re, es AS 7 Cote, nade alt ‘ re: er *. A Pa eee] } ve 5 ae AS ¥ & i is es ee ue Pe oy y } iv i ‘io “- “a, i . #3, a he as ay > ‘+ Deh ‘i ary t St Wee + <A J nee Aafia hey ae a ae Ai ae. ' ips _ http iwww.archive. org/details/brutu mfulmenorbu0Obar , it rs + J \ ‘ ‘ Tyo ty oh bt ; 4 ; r FP Z A ri < = ! ay ‘ nngelate aa 7 7 : eer a ag a Gn : \ a ahh" ? aw § =F af” yo 7 ee i > ¢ OE, a ets A ha Bs - d [ “BROTUM FUL MEN: OR THE ee : ts? ts rae "Pope. Pius V, Concerning the Damnation , Pena id Depofition Q. ELIZABETH: As alfo the Abfolution of her Subjects of their Oath of AL- legiauce, with a Peremptory Injunction, upon Pain of an Anathema, never to Obey any of her | Laws or Commands. With fome Obfervatia sand Animadverfions upon it, @ BY ‘Z AO M AS. Lord Bifhop of Lincoln. Whereunto is Maen the Bull of Pope Pau/the Third, Containing the Damnation, Excommunication, Ge. of King Heury the Eighth, BS ee ae The Second Edition. Come ‘ied her my People, that ye partake not of he Sins and Plagues, Rev. XVIII. 4: oe : LO NDON, Printed byS. S, Royeroft + for. Robert: Clavel at the Peacock! ja St. Paul’s Church-yard. MDCEXXX@, ice L- Tape” : a 4 ee Ei Pb Pete ireiel re bs f re . toe < FGA at td TO THE READER Reader , PES Hoever thou art ( Protefant or Papitft, 9 Courteous or Cenforious ) having made thefe Papers publick, thou baft ali- berty to read, and a right to judge; a and that thou maift do it impartially, , (not out of bate or kindne{s to me, but. upon a [eri~ ous and juft Confider ation of the Caufe) I foal neé- ther importune thy ve nor deprecate ( wher | ; ae 2 t Zip ee Oa ae a a eee ST Lee ee eee, eae pee ¢ > a ioe The Epiftletothe Reader, (2) The reafon why F cannot ex- peat the favour or affenr of my Ad- verfaries,(efpecial- ly of the Jefuirs) is, becaufe Maldo- nate tellsus, Thar Luther and Calvin ¢€ Arch-Herexicks ) are not to be fol- lowed though they fpeak things con- fonant to Scripture Cum facris literts confentanta docent , quendi. Non St- é Nay Calvinifis'and*Lutherans, Even When They Speak Truth,, are n> more to be tus juft) thy feverest Cenfure. For, 1. Tu truth, Thave impartially defired , and not indiligently fought ; and if (bythe bleffing of God) Ihave found st, Magna eft veritas & praevalebit, 2t wil prevazl, in de[pight of all Enemies and epeltian GMOrds. iédys@, nat fuper, non immerfalibis undis. Truth we know (efpectally Divine Truth, which concerns our Souls and their Salvation) ever had, and, fo Jong as there are Devils and wicked Men, will have inthis World many Enemies ; who will indeas wour (what they cannot do)to fuppre{s it ; premi poteft veritas, oppriminon poreft. They may dipp, and (for [ome time) keep it under water, but they . cannot drown it. If thefe Papers contaimtruth, (as I hope they do) then I am {ure that every Intelligent Reader,and pious lover of Truth will be its Patron; and (though in this Epiftle I do not follicite him) ready to vindicate st from the Objettzons of its Ad- verfaries. But (on the other fide) if my Reader re- late to Rome, and be poffe[s’d with flrong delufion to believe(againft Realow and Divine Revelation)his Catholieck Caufe,the Papal Monarchy and Infaliibi- lity, it will be invain for me, inthis Epiftle, to de- fire ( what [believe I (a) cannot have) 4is Favoar. — However, he fball have.my Pity and Prayers, That God Almighty would be gracioufly pleafed to open his Eyes, and blefs him with the Knowledge and Love of the Truth. sS we ee ee DS eee PENS Fs eet, P| = ote = noel hearken'd to, Then To. The Devil. Lutherani & Calvinifie & Deo, e& Ecclefia tanquam pera niciofifimi Hereticé declarati, non magisy. Etiam Cum Vera Dicunt, audiendi: (unt, Quam Dia= abelus. Maldonat Comment. in Matth. 16. verf. 6.p,336-C. Nor is this Ma/donat’s peculiar Opinion; for the Cenfor Librorum, who approves his Commentaries on Matth. tells us, That Om- niainillis juxta Orthodoxam Apoftolice ac Romane-Ecclefiea Dott, inam Summa Chm Ernditione ex~ Poni. Ira Joh. Clavius Oe yillo Libr. Ceavor. i 2. We ~ 2, We know’ tis true, what the great Roman gc- rator ne fince fai. Humanum eft errare, labi, decipi, Sc. The wu feft men have their miftakes; Ber- nardus non videt Omnia, & quandoque bonus dor- mitat Homerus. Stace Adam fell,the beft men have their Infirmities,and fometimes err ,even when they defire and {eek Truth, Since the Prophets.our blefjed Saviour and bis Apoftles, left the World, I know no man Inf allible; nor veo de the Pope,who (againft evident Reafon, and the fenfe of Chriftendom ) tre- tends to it. Lor my own part, Ido humbly acknow- ledge my many and great Infirmities ; and for thefe Papers——Hominem pagina noftra fapit,there may be miftakes and errors in them; yet it is my hope and (not ungrounded ) belief, that there are none [uch as may prove pernicious, or (in the main) dangerous ---- Non hic Centauros,non Gorgonas, Harpiafve in- venies. No [uch 46a eg and pernicious errors, as our Popifo Adverfaries maintain, and (fo far as they are able vindicate: {uch I mean as their flupid Doctrine of Tranfubftantiation ( contrad:éfory to Natural Reafon, Divine Revelation, and all our Senfes) their Idolatrous Adoration of apiece of Bread, with Divine (4) worfhip due to God only ) their Sacrilegious robbing the Laity of half the Sa- crament in the Eucharift,contrary to our blefjed S.1- viour’s ti. Command,and the prattice of the Chriftian(d) World (even of the Church of Rome her {elf for above athouland years (as their own great and learned Writers confe[s §9c. I [ay,fach er- rors a5 thefe, I do( and have reafon to) believe, the Reader will not find inthefe Papers. Thoughit be certain and confe(s'd, that every one, even the beft and moft learned Writers are fallible ; yet fo ws (b) Nallus dubi=- tandi Locus, quin Cultus Latrie qué’ Vero Deo debetar, fic-buic Sacraments exhibendus. Concil.. Trid. Seff. 12. De Eucharifta cap 5. (¢ ) Match. 29, 27- And they o- bey’d, and‘did aif drink. And Marc. 14.23. (4): Cardinal Bona,De Rebus Li- turgicis,l.2.c. 1 8.ps 491, 492- Parif.. 1692. Lindanus Panopliz,|.4.c.56- p-342-Colon.157 $9- ‘ ? = fo, The Epiftle to Reader. Te) Vid. Hiero- nym.adverfus Lucl- ferianos, in fine. Tom Operum.1.p. 230:C6).2,G. ( f ) Cyprian E- pift.71.adQuintum fratrem, p. 140. in Editione R igalts), Parif.1648. ( g ) Extant di- &z Regulz Indici Tridentino prafi- xz,in Calce Con- cilij Tridertini. Antv. 1633. (h) Libri Valga- vi Jdiomate deCon- troverfiis inter Ca- tholicos G Hereti- cos, nofirs temporis differentes, non paf- fim permittantur, fed dciis.idem fervetar quod de Biblits Vul- £ari-Lingud (eriptis Stat utumeft. bi- dem Reg.6. they rationally build their Conclufions upon the clear Principles of Nature,Scripiure,or C/niver{al Trae dition, They may be {ure enough, (and fo may their, Reader too) that they are not actually falfe, nor what they fo write erroneous. However tf the Rea- der find any errors of what nature foever, and cam sake it appear, that they areindeed errors, Ifhalt not (as Laid before.) deprecate his fevereft Cenfure,, éut concur with bim, and Cenfure them my felf, as much as he; and do hereby promife publickly to re- tr 2éi them, and heartily. thank him for the di{cove- *y. For inthis Cafe my Reader and Lfhall both be Gainers, and (in a feveral way) Conquerors--=-(e) Vicimus utérque noftrum,palmam Tu refers mei, E- go erroris;my Reader basovercome me, by manifefi- sng my miftakes, and I (by bis help) have overcome thofe errors ; otherwife, in Cyprian’s Opinson and. Janguage, (f.) Non vincimur cum offerantur nobis, meliora,fed inftruimur. He, who dy his Adverfarses. help and concluding Arguments, £ains the knowledg of Truth, is (in that good Father's Opinion) not con= guered,but inftructed, But tf the Intelligent Reader di{cover any error in thefe Papers,and can,and will really make it appear.tobefo, lethim callit what he will, Victory or Inftruction,] foall.thankfully fub-- mit, and both love. that truth, and him for the.di{- covery of it. ! | | 3. Lknow that this Traét of mine Cas. every one of the like nature.) is already prohibited and. damned at Rome; for the Rules (g) prefix’d tothe Index Librorum Prohibitorum, coutrived by the Authori-- ty of the Trent Council, declare all. Books of (4) Controverfies Getween. Catholicks. and Hereticks»: (Proteftants avd Papitts) 2 any Vulgar Tongue pre sbite The Epiftle to the Reader. hibited and damued ; neither to be (i) bad nor read by any Papift,under pain of Excommunication, and many other Penalties contained in iheir Canons, Papal Conftitutions,and their Expirgatory Indices. So that although our bleffed Saviour, by his holy x) Spirit,in the Go[pel,command all (even the Common people, for tothofe be writes) to Lxamin-and try all things,to ufe that tinderftanding and difcretion God has given us,to diftinguifh truth from error (for that ss evidently the meaning of thofe words, mivre domuadle- a prove all things, as (I) fober and learned P apifts confe[s) GS when we have done fo, then we muft hold faft that which is good. fay, énthisCafe,in the woe of our Souls is concerned;though Chriftian pru- (i) Legentés, ant habentes,-panas in Sacris Canonibus, Conftitutiontbus A- poftolicis, & Inditi- bis Librorum pr oki bi- toram content as, in- - currere volamus. Ita - Bulla Greg.15. da- ta Rom. 30. De- © cemb. 1622. ( &).4 Theff. 5.- 21. & Joh.4. 6. (1) Omnia proba- +4 tee. Fer Difcritie- nem dijadicate. Dr. Hen. Holden in Lo- cums choice of our Religton,wherein the eternal weal or - dence require it,and our bléfled Saviour, by his A~ - poftle) command, that we {hould not believe every Spirit, dat try before we truff, and diligently exa- min et till we be affured of truth:yet bis pre- tendéd Vi He forbids all Examination;thofe under bis Tyran- ny (at leaf the unlearnéd and common people) must — believe as thé Church believes. that is, all that he propofeth, though it be Tranfubftantintion,. or any thing evidently repugnant to their Reafon and Sen- fes too: They muft (m) renounce their own Reafon, and if he fay that is white, which they fee black, they (7) are to believe what he fays, and not their own Senfes.. All means forthe People to examin, whether it be truth or error, which the Pope and bis Church propofes,is probibited,and deny d them; stor ts it only the Books of Proteffants which write of Religion tut the Bible and Sacred Scripture too. even. car,with an Antichriftian Pride and Im- piety, contradiéts this,and commands the contrary. (m)Sublato Oms ni Proprio Jadécio, paratus femper fit de nimus, aa Obeditn-- dum Ecclefie. Vide Exercitia -{piritua- lia Ign.Loyolz. To. - lof, 1593-p. 172. Rég.1. (n) Si quod Orne lis noftris apparet’ Album, Ecclefia Ni« grum definitrit, des bemus quod nigrum: fet pronunciare. I+- bid Reg-13»p.176. ee PC Ae eee : The Epittle to the Reader. (a) Hane Catho- licam fidem, extra quam nemo falvus effepote(t, quaim in prafenti Profiteor, cm urraciter Teneo, tandemgue Inte- gram, ufzue ad eX- tremum vite {piri- rum,conflantifiime retinere,c™ confite- ri, & ameis fubdip tis, vel iis quorum cara ad me [pectat, Tinsri, & Predica-. Wb, quantum im me. evit cur aturum. Ego sdem NSpondco,Vo- veo,ac ure. Irain Bulla bij. Papz 4. fuper forma Jura-. menti. Profeflionis fadel, in Concil.. Trident. Sefi. 24. De Refor’.c. #2, pe 4§2-Editionis An-- verp, 1633. (b). Recentio es. Hreticé. Catholicos hamines Papeftas vee cant;.& certo nulla fablimiore. Gloria. Titulo Exornaré po- tyiffents Sintideo nobis. viventibus, becfemper Preconia Laudum,2> poft mor- tem, Titulé Sepul- chr aes ut fie Semper Dicawinr Papifte. Barooius Notat. ad Martyrologium fiom O@ 16;:B.p. 707+ Col. Agvipp, i6io, and promote the Papal Greatse[s and Intereft, (ow which their own depends) will give licence to none toread {uch Proteftant biritings, fave to.thofe, who- (for fidelity to their Cathelick Caufe and Learning) they judge atle and willing to Anfwer and Confute them : That is,None fhall have Licence toread fuch (to them) dangerousand:damned Books, fave fuch as have (2) folemnly Promifed, Vow’d, and Sworn firmly to believe and conftantly to-hold and profefs to their laft breath (and,to the utmoft of their Pow- er,indeavour that others,under them do fo too)their new Trent-Creed,and fo. the whole Mafs of their Po- pith Errors and Idolatries contained and command. ed in it. The Cafe being evidently this; that (af their Papal Conftetutions be obligatory and obey'd) none are to read or have thefe Papers, fave fuch as have promifed, vow'd, and (wormnever to believe them; a8 I have little reajon to defire or hope for thetr favour, {o (be it known untothem)] do as little fear their Confutation, or (what Iam like enough tohave) their Calumutes. 4, Alihough I well know(to fay nothing of othérs) that all our Englifo Papifis (both in their Words’ and Writings) do conftntly callthemfelves Cathos. licks,azd Roman Catholicks ; yet they muff pardon: me, if intlefe Papers, I neither do, nor juftly can call them fo: Papitts I do call them,and (I hope)they: will not be offended, or take it ill, that I do [o. For (0) Baronius (their great Cardinal und Annaliff) having faid,, That the Hereticks (cwe kxow-w hom: he means) call'd them Papifts; be adds, That we could not honour them with a more glorious Title than that of Papifts, and therefore he defires that: they may have the honour-of that Title while they live,, Ad pS 2 ifs as * The Epittle to the Reiter, | live,and that (after death) it may be writ upon thcir Tombs and Sepulchral Monuments. For my part, fo tong as they believe and profels their new Trent- Crecd,and the Popes Monarchical Supremacy ,T/ball (according to the Cardinal's defire) call them Pa- pifts,and if 1t be fo honourable a Title (as he [ays it w) let them have it, I foall novenvy them that ho- nour ,but pity their error,who glory zn that which ws indeed their fin aud foame : For the other Title of Catholick which our Adverfaries, (without and a- gainft reajon) appropriate to themfelves ; we grant, and know,that ancrently 1t was, and (when rightly ufed) # aword of agood found and figuification, when it was applied to perjons, (as aCatholick Bi- fhop,or Catholick Doctor, Sc.) #t fignified [uch per- fons as were, 1, Inrefpect of their Faith,Orthodox ; cuho intirely believed and profe(s'’d the trueChriftt- an Faith, rejecting all pernicious and dangerous er- vors,and fo were no Hereticks. 2. In ref{pect of their Charity ,fuch as were in Communion with the Church of Ghriff, without any uncharitable Separation from st,and fonoSchifmaticks. Now that our Adver{a- ries of Rome are (as they pretend) [uch Catholicks, % abfolutely deny’'d ; not only by Proteftants but (ex- cept them{elves) by all Chriftians inthe World,and that upon evident and great reafon; Confidering, 1. Their many and monftrous (c) Errors (contradi- Etory to Sacred Scripture,and the [enfe and belief of the Chriftian World for a thoufand years after Chrift our blefSed Saviour) which they approve and publickly receive as Articles of thesr Faith,in their new Creed, the Trent-Council, aad Roman Cate- thofe learned perfons 1 have named) to fay that which might (though may tisfie my Adverfaries. | B 2 chilm ; (c) Concerning the Errors, Super- ftition and Idola= try of the Church af Rome, ( with which I charges them ) I do nor here name the Par- ticulars, much lefs the proofs of them, Itis not the bufi- nef, of tis Epifile. But many of our learned Writers have long fince ef- fe&tually done it. Such I mean,as Fie fhop Ferwvel, Bifhop Morton, Davenant, Fobn white». Chil- lingworth and Dr. Crakanthorp, and (to omit many more) lately, my learned Friend Dr; Stillingfleet Dean of Pauls, The Rea- der (ifhe pleafe) may confult thefe and find fatisfacti- on. Something also is faid to that pur- pofe,in the follow- ing Papers. But if my Popifh Adver- faries( who are noc eafily,ifat all to be fatisfy’d ) require me particularly to make good my Charge; ! fhall un- dertake it; & hope (by the bleffing of God, and the help of the Writings of be it will not ) fa- The Epittle to the Reader. chi{m; Confidering alfo their many Superfiitionsand — Rupid Idolatry, profeffed and prattifed by themin their facred Offices (their Miflal, Breviary, Hore Be Virginis,their Ritual and Pontifical,&ec.) I fay, thefe things impartially confidered,they may be(and real- _ by are) Idolatrous Hereticks; but tu smpolfible they foould be, (what they againft greateft evidence pre- tend to) true Catholicks. 2. Confidering the unchri- flianCindeed Antichriftian) Pride and Tyranny of the Pope and bis Party, Excommunicating,Curfing and Damuing all Chriftians fave themfelves,(with- — out and againft that Charity which the Gofpel ree quires and fo Schifmatically cutting off from the Boe | dy of Chrift whole Kingdoms at a Clap (a Pius the (a) declaramus Fifth does, (d)in the following Bull) which are predittam Elizabt- things inconfiftent with the Chriftian Temper and hey Tou g, Clarity of atrue Catholick ; I fay thefe things confirm natbematis Senten- ered, and that the ‘Pope and his Party are really tiam incwrriffesee guilty of [uch uncharitable Attions, dividing and op phat a 9 violating the Union of the Church;it evidently fol- In di&a Pij s.Bul- Jows,that they are fo far from being true Catholicks la $+ 3e that they are great and formal Schifmaticks; And therefore they mult pardon me, if inthefe Papers, I donot call them (what really they are not) Catho- licks;and for the [ame reafon, I do not call them Ro- man Catholicks. For, as it # neither reafou nor fenfe toca him an Englifob Gentleman, whouno Gentle. man at all; or him a Sorbon Doctor, who never faw Paris, or ever had or defired that Degrees fo it ts am like trrational to call him a Roman Catholick, who yeh és an Erring Schifmatiek, and no Catholick at aul. | 5. I know fome (othercvife learned and pious) Writers, who fay that thofe words Roman Catho- ) | Nick The Epittle to the Reader. lick are inconfiftent, and imply aContradittion, as figuifying aparticular Univerial. But thisC] confe/s) ts amanifelt miftake. For not only particular Perfons, (of which before) but particular Churches, 22 this or that City be tt great or little have anciently and afually been call'd Catholick Churches,without any Contradi tion or Impropriety. In an Epiftle of a(e) great Council at Antioch, we find the(f) Bifbop of that City calldaCatholick, and that particular Church a(g) Catholick Church, Soin the Subfcrip- tions to Nazianzen’s laff W1ll and Teflament, Opti- mus Bp. of Antioch,{ub/cribes thus; Optimus Bp. of the Catholick (4) Church at Antioch; and the reft of the Bos: who fubfcribe that Teftament,( and they are fix or feven) ufethe (ame Form. So Nazianzen [ud- {cribes himfelf Bp. of the Catholick Church in Con- ftantinople; Amphilochius B.fhop of the Catholick Church in Iconiam;and fo all the reft.In the Appen- dix to the Fheodofian Code, Pope Vigilius degéns his Encyclical Epifile thus ———Vig)lius (2) Epifco- pus Ecclefie Catholice Urbis Rome : Bp, of the Ca- tholick Church of the City of Rome. So Pope (Ix) Leo the great (and (\) many more Bifbops of Rome) ules the very {ame form.The Popes filed themfelves Catholicz Ecclefie — Orbis, fed) Urbis Rom2 E- pifcopos.The Antichriftian flile of Univerfal Bp. (as Pope (m) Gregory the Great calls it) was not_yet ufurped at Rome. The Bifbops of Rome then, and _ their Church,were Catholick,and fo was every Or- thodox Bp. and his Church, as well and as much as they.Conftantinople,[conium, Antioch,©c.and their (eySynodusinnus merabilinm fere E- pifcoparum (as Vale- fius renders it) a- pud Evfeb.Hift.|.7- c.29.p.278.D.- (f)besunee xg- Soarnov $y ov] asho- mo pro ‘Pho Ca- tholice. Even Par- lus Samofatenzs, iil he was difcovered tobe an Heretick, wa3call’da Catho- lick. Ibid. c. 30. p. 282.B. (g) KaSoaixne "Exxanolas "Exio- nor, {peaking of the Church of An- tioch.Eufeb.Ibid.p 282,5- (h) “Orne "EmommrG@- = Tis: yee ° Ay] by oerny Kasonnins "Ex- xanotas: Teftams, Nazian cum{nvert, contra Julian.Gre- cé Aitonz r61e.p. 126.& apud Leun- claviurn; furis Gra- co-Rom. Ton. 2.p, 203:vide Epiphan: Edit. D: Petav. Parif. 1622. Fom, 2.P. 20. (i) Vid. App. Cod. Theod. per Sirmondum p. 218. (Rk) Leo Papa Ecclefiz Catholi- ce Urbis Romez. Cone. Chalcedon. part. r.num.10.12:8 A&8. (1) Fhe Reader may havea very large Catalogue of fuch Subfcriptions,by Jobn Launoy. Epift.part.1. In Epift. ad Francif, Bonum. (m) Pope Gre- gory damns that proud Title, twelve feveral times, the places are particularly cited by ob. Lau- uoy ( and he no Lutheran, in the Epiftle ad Bonwm before-named. Bifbops, ee ee m The Epiftle to the Reader. (n) Vide Augu- ftinum - Breviculi Collat. cum Dona- tiftis, Collar 3.Diei ‘Tom:7. p- 568. E- dit. Bafil. 1569. 8 Epift.67.ad Alipi- ‘um. T0m.2 p.323- (0) 2 Theff-2. 3, 4 See Bp. jewel on this Chapter, and this Fourth Werfe.Sir Chriftoph. Sibthorp’s Adver- tifement to the Ca- tholicks in Ireland. Dublin 1622.part. 3:C.2.P. 280, 281, 282. &c. Andr.Ri- vet.contra Silve- ftrum Petrafanétam C. 28. P- $375 538. fxc. vid. Georg. Dounamum, Diatr. de Antichrifto,!.3. & 4. Lond.1620. Bifhops, were as truly Catholick as St. Peter’s Sac- ceffor, or Rome tt felf: The truth is evidently this ; the Pope and bis Party arein this, nec Chritti, nec Petri,f{cd Donati Succeflores; they do not follow Pe- ter or our bleffed Saviour,(as they vainly bragg)but that impious Heretick Donatus, whofe damnable Schifm and Herefie they have efpoufed, St. Auguttin (who well knew it) tells us, in(n) feveral places, That the Donatifts aflumed tothemfel ves the Name of Catholick, faid that their Sect was the only true Church,and fodamn’d all other Chriftians ; and up- on this Heretical Opinion,they Schifmatically fepa- rated from the whole Catholick Church. The Pope and bis Party (with as little reafon and charity) do the very fame thing ; they (as the Donatifts anc7- ently) Heretically affirm, That they, andthey only, are truly Catholicks, andtheonly Members of the true ‘Chriftian and Catholick Church: and ther Schifmatically Separate from, Excommunicate and ‘damn al! other Chriftians. 6. And further(that I may freely [peak what Tre. ally believe) Lam fo far from beleving the Pope and his Party to de (what they vainly pretend) the only true Chriftian and Catholick Church; that I do believe them (and fo did thoufands before Luther, and many whole Kingdoms and Provinces fince) to be Ecclefia Malignantium:an Antichriftian Sect and Synagogue (in fide) bighly erroneous, and (in fatto) as highly impious. And the Pope fofar from being Peter’s Succeffor, and our B. Savious’s Vicar-Gene- ral,that be zs (o) that man of Sin, 6 ’Aymeiver@,That Adverfary of our B. Saviour, andthe great Anti chrift, the Apostle [peaks of, who exalts himfelf CUmp amdvre acyouevoy Ocor 7 oe Bee jue ) above all Kings and Emperors. ~ The Epiftle to the Reader. Emperors, This (I hope) will in part appear b suis is {aidin tbe Fallen salient 4 At pears! Joall defirethe Impartial Reader (who poffibly may vyead this foort Epiftie, and trouble himfelf no furs ther, toread what follows) to confider, Thatthe Pope really and profeiledly does exalt himfelt above all Kings and Emperors, and fo has this Mark of the Beaft,and Indelible Character of Antichrift. That he does [o Exalt himfelf, will evidently appear, thus, 1, Pope Innocent the Third tells the (p) Emperor of Conftantinople (and with prodigious Error and Impudence, indeavors to prove tt out of (q) Scrip- ture) That the (*) Pope is as much greater Than the Emperor,as T he Sun is greater Than the Moon. So innocent the third; and (that we may. be fure bis Succeffors liked it well) Gregory the Ninth appro- ves, andrefers tt into the Body of Canon-Law: Aid (f) Greg. the Thirteenth approves it too;and (with the other Decretals ) confirms it for Law; and tis continued in all Editions of that Law, ever fince. Teas then certain and confef{s'd, ThatthePope Ex- alts himfelf above all thatis call’d God, above all Kings and Emperors; and that he is far greater than they.And if you inquire of the Proportion bow much he is greater? Ifay, 2. That their approved and received Glofles on their Law, (with fome dif- ference of Opinion) calculate how many times the Sun is greaterthan the Moon, and then infer the Pope's Greaine/s above the Emperor. Aid here 1. The Author ef ihe Glo{s, (Bernardus de Botono- was the man) agood Lawyer, but ( {ure Tam) no good Aftronomer,tetls us, (ignorantly and rédicu- loufiy,)----- That the Sun is greaterthan the Maon,. (and confequently the Pope greater than the Em- perore (p)) Vide, Caps Solitz.6. Extra de Major.& Obedien-- tiajand the Lemma totharChap.which is: this--——. Impe- rium Sacerdetiofub- efh co e¢ Obedire Te- Retire (q} 1 Pet. 2.12. (which place: evi- dently proves the contracy) Jer.t.10. Gen.1.16. Joh.24% 16.Matth, 16:19. (T) Quanta eft inter Solem & Lu- namytanta gnter Fou~ tificese® Reges aif= ferentia cogno{citur. DittoGap Solita 6. (f) Bulla Roma data 1380 Juri Can. prafixa. ene 2 ee ef - | The Epiftle to the Reader. (t) Cum igitur terra fit fepties ma- jor Luna, Sol autem otlies major terras reftat evgo,ut Ponti- ficalis Dignitas Quadragefies fepties fit Major Regalt. Gloffa verbo. tater Solem & Lunam. Cap. Solita 6. Ex- trade Major. & O- bedientia. I quote the Edition of the Canon Law at Pa- Ti, 1612. (u) Alias quin- quagies fepties. Ita Nota in Margine,ad dittum Cap. Solita verbo,iater Solem cx Lunam. Ibid. (x) Manifefium eft, quod magnitudo Solis continet mag- _ nitudinemterreCcen- “ties quadragies fep- ties duas medt- etates. Vid, Additi- onem ad Gloflam verbo. Inter Solem & Lunam. Cap.So- litz.6. (y) Palam ef , quod magnitude So- kis continet magni- tudinemLune fepties millies feptingentzes ce quadragies quan ter, © infuper ejus medietatem.\bidem jd dicta additione ad diétam Glofiam. (Cz) Aurum non tam pretiofius est peror) (¢) Forty feven times.Tdis 2s pretiy wevl, but auch foort of that Magnitude the‘Pope meant, (af be knew what he [aid )when he affirm’d, That he was as much greater than the Emperor, as the Sun was greater than the Moon. 2. And therefore another (u) Canonift, would have the Sun greater than the Moon (and fo the Pope greater than the Emperor) Fifty feven times, 3. But this (as too little) does not pleafe the Pope’s Party aud Parafites; and therefore Laurentius ( another Canonift fays, That it isc )manifeft that the Sun is greater than the Moon (fo the Pope thanthe Emperor) an hundred forty feven times. I omit the fractions;for if the ‘Pope be.147. times greater than the Emperor, methinks it might fa- tisfie his Ambition,fo that he needed not (land up- on the fraction, or little overplus. 4. But this alfo comes far fort of that Magnitude, which they alcribe tothe Sun above the Moon, foto the Pope above the Emperor for they tell us (y )That the Sun is greater than theMoon(7744%) feven thoufand feven hundred, forty four times, and one half more.To {uch a prodigious greatne/s, does the Bifbop of Rome exalt himfelf. So that if St.Paul (ay true, T hat he is Antichrift, who exalts himfelf above all Kings and Emperors) then it will evidently follow, that the Pope is Anti- chrift;for never man did, or (without Antichri- Pian Pride and Impiety) can fo exalt himfelf. They fometimes tell us in their Law, ----(z)That the Papal Dignity is tobe preferr’d to the Impe- rial, more than Gold is to Lead; and (zf Gratian pluinbo, quam Regia Dignitate (it Altior Dignitas Sacerdotals. Gratian Can. duo funt 1g. Di- flindt..99. fay <— ry, = s”. a so ase Se — The Epiftle to the Reader. ; [aytrne) it was the Pope who faidfo. Andthe Glofs gives the reafon of this Papal (a) Great- ne{s above all Kings ; Becaufe Kings and Princes are to fubmit their Necks to the Popes Knees;(4e might have faid, and their (b) Mouths to the Popes Feet,which the Emperor ts bound to kifs). That thu Impious and Antichriftian Dottrine, Ithink evident;and I have {ome reafon to believe that intelligent and impartial Fudges will think fotoo,and yet it has heretofore, and ftill # appro- ved and (as Catholick) received at Rome. For, 1.lhat Decretal of Pope innocent the Third,was by Gregory the Ninth made a Law,and(amongft other Decretals) by him commanded to be recei- ved a Law, inall(c) Uxiverfities and Papal Gonfiftories,about 450. years ago,and fo continues to this day. 2. For the Gloffes before-mentioned, they are not only inthe (d) old Editions of their Law, but were approved and confirmed after- wards by(e Gregory the Thirteenth(and [o ftand approved and confirmed to th day) who exprefly tells us, That the Law being by his (f;) command receiv d, corrected and purged; no man (for the future) fhould dare toadd, detract, or change any thing init, | (a) Quia Cola Regum ce Princi=, pum fubmittuntur GenibusSacerdotum. (By Sacerdotes here the Popesare prin- cipally mieant,3s is evident both by the Text and the Glofs ) Gloffa ad diGum Can. verbo. Duo funr. (b) Papsexcipit Imperatorem ad of= culum pedis ——ut primum videt Pa- pam, deteéto Capite, illum, genu terram tangens,vener atur-- ce Pontificns pedes Devote ofculatur. Lib. S:crarum Ce- remoniarum,Rom. 1560.1. 1. Tit. §.p. 22.Co].2,3. (c) Volentes at hac tantum Compi- latéone utantur Uni- ver fi in Fudicin Co in Scholisy Cte Greg.9. in Literis Acad. Bononienfi, dat.1230. Juri Ca- nonico Prefixis.E- dit.Lugd.1661. (d) Edir.Parif-1 520. cum Gloffis. (¢) Vide Bullam Greg. 13.datam Roma, Anno 1580. Cor- pori Juris Canonici prxfixam. (f) Nulli liceat Lioris Canonicé Furis,de mandato noftro Correctisy Recognitis,e Expurgatis qnicquam adders, det, abere,vel immutare,cc. Woid.didta Greg. 13-Bulla, In foort, whether the Champions of the Church of Rome aud Catholick Caufe, (as they call it) will think what is {aid inthefe Papers, worthy of any Anfwer, or no, | know not. But in cafe they do, foal make them if I miftake not)a very fair offer,which (if accepted ) will much leffen their pains and la- t | C : bour, The Epittle to the Reader. (e)They-tell us, that ic was our B. Saviour himfelf, who Conftituted Peter and his Suc- ceflors. Supream Monarchs of the Catholick Church. Chriftus Catholicam Ecclefiam, uni Soli in Terris Petro, Fee trique Succeffori Rom.Poatifici,inPoe teftatzs Plenitudine, tradidit Gubernan- dam. So Pius the Fifth in his Bull of Excommunication of Eliz. In Princi- pio. And Bellarmine fays—— --Succeffio ex Chyrifti /nftituto, cm Fare Divino eft, guia Ipfe Chriftus Jnftituit in Petro Pontificatums; ideo quicunque Petro fuc- cedit,a Chrifta acci- pit Poatificatum.De Rom. Pont.!.2.¢.12. §.utautem.Cum Pa- pa in Petri Cathe- dy2 Sedeat, fummum in coDignitatis gra- dum, nonnullis Hu- manis Conftitutioni- bus, fed Divinitus datum agnofcit.Ca- techif, Trident. Part.2.c.7. De Or- ' dinis Sacramento. §.28 vide Can, Sa- bour yet [o,as (af they performthe Condit rom annex. ed) fet i meh ) effeciually do their bu- fine{s, and make me their Profelyte : The thing I meanis this; If they can from Scripture, (by any one Cogent and Concluding. Argument’) prove any one of thefe following Propofitrons (and unle|s they be all proved, their Papal Monarchy:caunot ftand) I will grant the reft, and give them the Gaufe, I fay then, if they canmake it appear, + aS 1, Ehat our blefled Saviour before his Afcenfion; did conflitute Peter his Vicar, and gave him fuch a Monarchical Supremacy. and Jurif(diction (asis(g) now contended for) over the Apoftles and'the whole Church. For sf Peter bad no (uch Power he could not transfer it to ha Succeffors; it being im- poffible, that they /bould have that Power (Jure Succeflionis) which their Predecefforsnever dad. 2.Ifthey can prove that St. Peter, while he lived, did exercife fuch Power and Supream Jurifdfcti- on,even over the Apoftles,&c. By their own (h) Computation St. Peter lived 34.0r 35. years after the Afcenfion of our B. Saviour,and was( as they fay) Bifbop of Antioch 7. aud of Rome 25. years. Now tf itueither do, nor camappear, that in all that time he exercifed any [uch Monarchical Power or Furt{dittion; we may {afely conclade, either that be had no [uch Power (whith « moft true )or betray d his truft in not making ufeé of it, for his Mafters Glory, and his Churches good ; which (I {uppofe) our Adverfaries will not fay. In this Cafe, Idemeft non efle & non apparere ; crofancta. 2. Dift. 22.8 Gloffam & Turrecrematam. Idem. (hh) Baroniws fays, that Peter fufs fered Martyrdom Anno Chriffi 69. and therefure 34+ or 35. years after our blefied Saviours Paffion. Annal. Tom, 1.ad-Ann, 69. §. 1. ds ana The Epiftle to the Reader. and therefore our Adverfaries muft pardon us, sf we do not believe (what they cannot prove) St. Peters Monarchy. 3. But let it be fuppofed which neither has been,nor can be proved ) that Peter had, and executed [uch Power ; let them make it appear that it.was not Perfonal and Temporary, to ceafe with his Per- fon, (as the Apoftlefhip did) but to be transferred tofome(z)Succeflor. For sf st was temporary , and ceas'd with St. Peter’s Perfon,then whoever (after Peter’s death) pretends to that Power, is not bone fidei pofleflor, but an Impious and An- tichriftian Ufurper. | 4. But let all thofe ‘Particulars be fuppofed, (which being untrue,cannot poffibly be proved thatPeter had and executed [uch Power,and that it was to be tran{mitted to his Succeffor; Let them make it appear that the Bifhop of Rome was that (4) Suc- ceilor, that Peter was (as they fay ) 25. years Bp. of Rome,or 25.days,or that he ever was at Rome: For, if it be fo far from truth that Peter was 25. years Bp. of Rome, that it cannot appear from Scripture, that he was ever Bifoop there at all, or that he ever was at Rome. It will evidently » follow,that the Pope és not St. Peter’s Succe Sor, and fo can have no Title(Jure Succeffionis )to that Supremacy,they fay,Peter had: It being impoffible that the Pope fhould [ucceed Peter, if he never -preceeded him in the Bifboprick of Rome. 5. Let them make tt appear,that our bleffed Saviour, ~ while on Earth, either exercis’d or had fuch a - ‘Temporal Monarchy, as the (/.) Pope now chal- C2 lenges Ci) Bellarmine fzys, that ’tis evi- dentin Scripture, that Peter’s Supre- macy was to def- cend toa Succeffor Aliquem Petro Succedere,deducitur Evidenter ex Scrip- turis.De Rom.Pon. },2.c. 12. §. Obfer- vandum Tertio. (k) Bellarmine tellsus, Thatiris not exprefly in Scripture, that the Pope is Peter's Suc- cefior, but thit muft be proved by Apoftolical Tradi- tion.Rom. Pontifice faccedere Petro, son habetur expreffe tn Scripturis,fed habe= tur extraditione A- peftolicd. Bellarm. diéo loco. (4) They con- ftanrly tellus, the Pope has two Swords; and of the Temporal Sword they fay —Figu- rat Pontificalis hic gladius poteftatem fummamTemporalem, a Chrifto ejus Vica- rio collatam; juxta illad, data eft mibé omnis Poteftas.. in Colo ch in Terra, ~ ¢p alibi, dominabi- tur 4 Mari ufquead Mare,eo a Flumine, ulque ad Terminos Orbis Tervarum. Liber Sacrarum Cerimoniarum Ecclefiza Rom, Roma. 1560. Lib. 1. Tit. 7. ‘ De Enfe benedicendo, p: 36.Col. 1. "eu ee ee Te See en oe et —_— > ow Sa —~ -¢ _ 1 te The Epittle to the Reader. fm) Vide Me- thodum Veronia- nam, fen modum, guo quiliber Ca- thojicus poteft So- lis Bibliis, Religio- nis prztenfa Mini- firum evidentér mutum reddere, &c. Authore Fran- cifco Verono Pari- fienfi, Soc etatis Jefu Throlog. Co. Ion. Agrip 1610. Vide Jac. Mafeni}, mediratam Con- cordi:m Proteftan- tium cum Catholi- cis, ex verbo Dei.. _ Edit.Colon. 1661. (n) Francif, Vee. soni. Scientiam, é doGiffima Societa- te Jefa. prodeun- tem, veperamur, fententiam liben- ter fequimur, & la- bores, optimo fuc- ceffu 4 Deo dona- #0s,honoramus. A- drian.& PetrusWa- kenburch in Exam. Princip. fidei, &c. Exam.3.§, i. num. $-p.1ih, lenges as his Vicar. or unle{s this appear,alt ther pretences to {uch Power, (as Vicars of our B. Saviour) will be vain and irrational;it being — pinpoffible that the Pope or Peter fhould derive from him that Power which he himfelf neither had, nor ever bere on Earthexercis’d, Thefe are the Foundations upon which the Papal Monarchy ( Spiritual and Temporal) is built; and if thefe fail, the whole Fabrick will and muft fall ; and therefore they are concern'd, by [ome real and rational proof,te make them good. Now tf our Ad- verfaries can and will make tt appear,from Sacred Scripture, that Peter ever had or exercifed {uch a Power,as ts pretended; that it was not perfonalin him, but to be tran[mitted to his Succeffur; that he was 25. ears Bp. of Rome, and actually transfer- ved that Power tohis Succeffor there; or that our B. Saviour ever had or exercis’d fuch aterrene 6 temporal Power, as they pretend the Pope ( as his Vicar) bas from him:1 {ay,let them make all, or any one of thefe Particulars appear from Scripture, and Iwill confels,and retratt my error. Nor is the Cone dition unjuft or unequal, when lrequire Scripture proof. For they themfelves conftantly affirm that the Pope has right to bis Monarchical Supremacy Jure Divino; 4y the Conftitution of our B. Saviour, and Divine Right; and this their Popes,Canonifts and Divines (with great noife and confidence, but no reafon) indeavour to prove from Scripture,mifer ae bly miftaken and mi apis a T know, that their late (m) Fefutical Methodifts ((o much(n) magnify'd by their Party) require of Proteftants to confute their Popifb Doétrines (Tran{ubftantiation, the Sa- crifice of the Mafs, Purgatory, 8c.) by exprefs. : words. eo. ii ae . uit The Epiftle to the Reader. words of Scripture) wot admitting of Confeguences, however deduced from plain Texts as ‘Premiffes. This method of theirs (beng irrational and (0) des monftrated foto be) Ifball not tye them too: But if they can prove any of the aforelaid Pofitions by the exprefs words of Scripture, or 4y good Confequences deduced from it, or (what they pretend to) C/niver- fuland Apoftolical Tradition;} foall admit the proof. Nay, Ifoall make our Popifh Adverfaries two fur- ther, and (if that be poffitle) fairer Offers. 1, Let them prove éy any juft and concluding reafon whatfoever, that any Chriftian Church ia the World acknowledz’d, or the Church of Rome her felf affemed and publickly pleaded for fuch a Pa- pat Supremacy, as (p) now they pretend to, for 1000. years after our B. Saviour ; and (for my own part) I will confe{s and retract my Error. 2. Let them prove, ty any {uch concluding reafon, that any Churchinthe World Eaftern or Weftern, Greek or Latin) did acknowledge what now the Pope and his Party fo earneftly and vainly con- tend for) the Popes Infallibility,azd his Suprema- cy over all General Councils,for 1500 years after our beled Saviour; and for my part, Cedat Jiilus Agris, manus dabimus: captivas, I will retrad what here Ihave affirmed, and be (what I hope Inever foall be) their Profelyte. To Conclude, have no more to fay, (my Adverfaries will think I have (aid too much) fave only to de- fire the Readers, who fincerely and impartially defire truth and fatisfa&ion,to read and coufider the Murgent aswell asthe Text. Intha, they (0) Vide Difpur-. de fidei ex {crip ris demonftratio-- ne, contra novam nonnullorum Me- thodum, Per Joh. Dallzum. 8°, Ge- nev2, 1610. (p) They do now pretend to po- teftatem Summam Temporalem; as the Book of thir Sa- cred Ceremonies (a little before ci- ted) rells us, That our bleffed Saviour gave Peter (and in him the Pope) C@- leftis t» Terveni Ln- periy Fura. Cans Onines, 1.Dift.22. Power to depofe Kings and Empe-- rors, abfolve their Subjects from. Oaths of Allegi- ance, and’ difpole’ of their Domini- ons. Plat. in vita Greg.7. Conc. .La- teran.fubinnocent. 3-Can.de Haret. 3. Hence it was, that Bonif. 8. (that Proe digy of Antichri- fiian Prideand Im- piety) inthe So- lemn Jubilee fhew- ed himfelf. to the People the firft day in his Pontifi- calibus, and the next day,Impersalé habitu, Intula Cefa- rea Infignis, gladium ante fe nudatum juffit deferré.& fedens alta voce teftatur, Ecce. duo gladd}. Vide Paralip, ad Chron. Urfpergen. ad An. 1294. P: 3.44 have )h Note yen! The Epittle to the Reader. (2) It is notori- oufly known how many Decretal E- piftles have been forged, and fathe:- ed upon the Anci- - ent Bifhops. I fhall only inftance in the fifth Epifile of chat pious Pope sand Martyr, Clemensthe firft; in which he pieads for a commu- nity of all thingsin _the world, even of Wives. COMMUNES K- fus Omnium, que fant in-hot mundo, - Omnibus effe Debu- dt. In'omnibus Sant Sine Dubio,&> Con- juges. ‘Fol. Séchar- dus and James Mer - lin have that Epi- ftle,and thofe very words; and Gratz- an “has refert’d them ibto the Ca- non Law. Can.di- Je&tiffimis. 2. Cauf. 12. Quail. 1. and there they are ftill inall the Editions of that Law, even that corre&ed:and have my Pofitions aud the proofs of them,in plain Enghifbsln the Margent,the Authorities and Au- thors Irely upon, intheir own words, andthe Language inwhich they writ: and Ihave ( for the Readers eafe, not my own) cited not only the Authors and their Books but the Chapter, Para- graph, Page, and moftly the Edstions of them : That {othe Reader may with more eafe, find the places quoted, and judge whether I have cited and tranflated them aright. It « notorioufly known, that our Popifhb Adverfaries have pu- blifhed many forged Canons and Councils, many Spurious (a) Decretals and {uppofititious Traéts, under the names of Primitive Fathers, and Ane cient Bifbops ; that they have foamefully corrup- ted the Canons of Legitimate (b) Councils, and _ thoufands of other Authors ; making them (by adding and {ubftratting words or Sentences) fay what they never meant,or not.to [ay what indeed they did both mean and (ay: andthu they them- felves have (without Jhame or honefty) publickly own'd, intheir Expurgatory Indices ; and after all th fraud and falfsfication of Records, thefe Apocryphal Books and {uppofititious Authors are continually produced by them (for proofs of approved by Pope Gregory the Thirteenth. () I ‘thall inftanceonly in one, the 28. Canon of the Council of Chalcedon, as it is fhainefully corrupted in Gratian. Can. Renovant. 6. Dift. 22. -avhere,r. {t isin'the Original, deiCoyev de finimus,|tatuimus; for which Gratian has,Petimus. 20In the Original Canon, itis recoCurécg “Pwpn, Sencor Roma; but Grattan has Superior Roma. 3.1n the Original, it is, fox reeobaa, eAqualéa Privilegias But Gratian has Similia privilegia: as being unwilling that Conftantinople fhould have equal priviledges with Rome. 4. In the Original Canon, it js ——— y\ Ey gol "Exxanorassnots,8cce That Conftantinople fhould be equal to Rome, in Ecclefiaftical Matters, etiam in Ecclefiafticis. But Gratian (in contradiéion to the Canon) fays, Non tamen in Ecclefiafticis,exc.So it was in Gratiangn the old Editions;only in the later Editions of Gratian (An.16 12,16 18,166 1,8&c.) this laft corruption is ackaowledg’d,and (which is not u- fualy mended, Bar other corruptions remain fiill, in their laft and beft Editions of Gratian. their : The Epiftle:to the Reader. their Errors) againft Proteftants who well know, and (as many fober menof their own Com- munition) juftly condemn {uch impious Roman Arts ——Nectaliauxilio, nec defenforibus iftis Chri- ftus eget. Truth needs nofuch forg’d and falfe | Medium’s to-maintain it; nor will any honest man ufethem. Sure lai, Thave notin this Di{- courfe, built the truth of my Pofitions upon the Teftimonies of our own Proteftant Authors, (knowing that our Adverfaries would with {corn reject thery Teftimony) nor of any [uppofititious or | fpurious ones. The Teftimonies and ‘Proofs Ihave guoted,and relyupon, are drawn from Scripture, the genuine Works of the ancient Fathers and Councils, or (which ad hominem, muff be valid) from their own Councils, the Popes Bull, their Canon Law, their Cafuifts, School-men, Sum- mifts, the Trent Catechifm, te Book of the’Sa- cred Ceremonies of the Roman Church,thesr ap- proved and received Publick Offices, ([uch as _ their Miflal, Breviary, Ritual, Pontifical, &c, ) which Authorities (if Ido not mifquote, or mi- Stake their meaning) are, and(to them) muft be juft proofs of thofe Pofitions for which Ihave produced them, But let the Evidence of the Te- ftimonies, and the Authority of the Authors quo- ted,be what it will; I have little hope,that they will gain any afjent from our Adverfaries ; fo Long as they believe the Infallibility of their Pope _ and Church,and their Learned Men are folemn- ly {worn, firmly tobelieve their new Trent Creed (the whole Body of Popifo Errors) to their laft breath, and to Anathematize and damn what Do- chrine foever contradicts it, For while they are poffe[s’d eras ko rh RR REG OL res ae The Epiltle to the Reader. offe(s'd with thefe Principles, it may betruly — | rey them, i was {aid of the Luciferae Hereticks én St, same Soc “ap — Ms offe, quam perfuaderi,.you may fooner baffle , The puimnde them: They will (tn defpite o Premiffes) hold the Conclufion ; nor foall the cleareft demonftration overcome their blind Zeal : and Affection to their Catholick Caufe. However that God Almighty would be grace fly picaied j to ble(s us andthem, with aclear knowledge of Sacred Truth, with a firm belief, and (in dange- — vous times) upon undaunted and pious ondieiee of it, is and fhall be the Prayer of Thy Friend and Servant 06.3. 1689. in Chrift GOR ig The The Damnation and Excommunication of Elizabeth Queen of England,and her Adherents, withan Addition of other punifhments. Pius Bifhop, Servant to God’s Servants, for a perpetual memorial of the matter. : E that reigneth on 7 high » to whom is given all Power in Heaven & in Earth, commit- ted one Holy, Catholick and Apoftolick Church (out of whichthereis no Salvati- on) to one alone upon Earth, namely, to Peter the Prince of the Apoftles, and to Pe- er’s Succeflor the Bifhop of Rome, tobe governed in ful- nefs of Power. Him alone he made Prince over all People, and all Kingdoms, to pluck up, deftroy, fcatter,confume, plantand build, that he may contain the faithful that are Knit together with the band Damnatio t Excom-~ municatio Elilabe- the Regine Angliz, eigue Adberentium, cum aliarum pena- rum Adjectione. Pius Epifcopus, Servus Servorum Dei,ad per- petuam Ret memori- Ath. , Egnuans in Excelfis , cui dataeft Omnisin Calo ce? in Terra Po- teftas, unam Santkam, Catho- licam & Apoffolicam Ecclef- am (extra quam nulla eft falus) Joli in terris, videlicer, A- postolorum Princip: Petroy Pe- trique Succeffori Romano Pon- tifici, in Poteftatis plenitudine tradidit Gubernandam, Hune unum fuper omnes Gentes, & omnia Regna Principem confti- tuit, qui evellat , deftruat, dif- Ppet, difperdar, planter, G a dificer, ut fidelem pepulum, mu- tue Charitatis nexu constri- lum in unitare Spiritus contineat , faluumqne @& itn- D of +4 TS feo ar #5 7 Was a a] on Pope Pius the Fifth’s Bull of Charity, in the Unity of the Spirit, and prefent them columem fuo exhibeat Jalvato- — rt. : a fpotlefs, and unblameable to their Saviour. s.r. In difcharge of which Funétion, we which are by God’s goodnefs called to the Government of the afore- faid Church, do fpare no pains, labouring with all ear- neftnefs, that Unity, and the Catholick Religion ¢ which the Author thereof hath for the trial of his Childrer:7s Faith, and fer eur amend- ment,. fuffered to be punifh- ed with fo great Afflictions ) might be preferved uncor- rupt: But the number of the ungodly hath gotten fuch power, there isnow no place keft in the whole World, whichthey have not aflayed to corrupt with their moft wicked Doctrines: Amongft: ethers, Elizaberh, the pre- tended-Queen of Exgland, a Slave of Wickednefs,.lend- ing thereunto her helping. hand, with whom, as in a’ ‘Sanctuary, the moft pernici- ous of all men have founda Refuge. Thisvery Woman having feized on the King- §.1. Quo quidem tn munere obeundo, Nos ad preditte Ec- Glefie gubernacula Det Benig- nitate vocati, nullum laborem intermittimus, omni operacon- tendentes, ut ipfa Unitas, &- Catholica Religio ( quam iliu Aytlor ad probandam fuorum fidem, & corretlionem noftramy. tantis proceliis conflitiari per- mifit) integra confervetur. Sed: Impiorum numerus tantum po- tentia invaluit » ut nullus jam. in Orbe locus fit relittus, quem ills peffimis dottrinis corrumpere fon tentdrint , adnitente inter éeteros flagitiorum ferva Eli- zabeth, pratenfa Anglie Re~ kin, ad quam, veluti ad afy- lum, omnium infeftiffimi pro- fuginn invenerunt. Hec adv: Regno ocenpato, fupremi Eccle- fia capitis locum, in omni An- glia, ejnfque pracipnam An- thoritatem atque Furifdittionem: monftruofe {ibe ufurpans, regnum iplam jam tum ad fidem Ca- tholicam & bonam frugem re- duttum, rurfus in exitium mi- Serum revocavit, dom, and monftroufly ufurping the place of Supream Head’ of the Church in all England; and the chief Authority and Jurifdiction thereof, hathagain brought back the faid King- com into miferable deftruction, which was then newly re- duced to the Catholick Baith and good Fruits. §. 2, de tint Se BE ew oy b eee oe y yr Ute yerer hs PP ee Ss a Pee ey Oe! againft Queen Elizabeth. hand inhibited the exercife of the true Religion, which Mary lawful Queen of fa- mous memory, had by the help of this See reftored, af- ter it had been formerly o- verthrown by Henry the Eighth, a Revolter there- from; and following and embracing the Errors of He- reticks, fhe hath removed the Royal Council confifting of the Englifh Nobility , and filled it with obfcure men, being Hereticks , oppreffed the Embracersof the Catho- lick Faith, placed impious Preachers, Minifters of Ini- uity, abolifhed the Sacri- fice of the Mafs, Prayers, Faftings, Choice of Meats, Unmarried Life, and the Ca- tholick Rites and Ceremo- nies. Commanded Books to be read in the whole Realm containing manifeft Herefie ; and impious Myfteries and Inftitutions, by her felf en- tertained , and obferved ac- cording to the Prefcript of Calvin, to be likewife obfer- ved by her Subjects 5 prefum- ed to throw Bifhops, Parfons of Churches, and other Ca- tholick Priefts, out of their Churches and Benefices ; and to beftow them and other §.2. For having by ftrong §. 2. Uf mamgue vere Religionis , quam ab illius de- fertore Henrico VIII. olim everfjam, Clare 14m. Maria Regina legitima, hujus Sedis Prafidio reparaverat , potentt wiann inbibito, fecutifque & amplexis Hereticorum errori- bus, Regium Confiliumex An- glica Nobilitare confettum di- remit , iludque obfeuris home nibus Hereticis complevit , Catholice Fider cultores op- preffit, improbos Concionatores, atque Impietatum Adminiftros repofut, Miffe Sacrificium , Preces, Fejunia, Ciborum dileclum, Ritufque Catholicos abolevit. Libros manifeftan Harefim continentes, toto Reg- no proponi, impa Myfteria, t inftituta ad Calvini Pre- Scriptum & fe fufcepta, & ob- fervata, etiam & Jfubditis ob- Servari mandavit. Epifcopos, Ecclefiarum Rettores , & alios Sacerdores Catholicos fuisEccle- fiis,& Beneficiis ejicereyac de it- lis & alits Eccleftafticis rebus in hareticos homines disponere,déqs Ecclefie caufis decernere anfay Prelatis Clero, & Popule,ne Ro- manam Ecclefiam agnofcerent, neve ejus Preceptis , Santtio~ nibufque Canonicis obtempera- rent, Interdixit, plerofque in nefarias leges fuas venire , & Romani Pontificis Axnttorita- D 2 Church Pope Pius the Fifth’s Bull _—.) Church Livings. upon- Here- ticks, and to determine of Church Caufes, prohibited the Prelates,, Clergy, and People. ta acknowledge the Church of Xome, or obey the Rrecepts.and Canonical.San- ctions thereof, compelled moft of them to condefcend to her wicked Laws,.and to abjure the Authority and O- bedience of the Bifhop of Rome, and to acknowledge her to be fole Lady in Tem- poral and Spiritual matters , and this by Oath; impofed Penalties and Punifhments upon thofe. which obeyed not , and exatted them of thofe which perfevered in the unity of the Faith and their Obedience aforefaid , caft the Catholick Prelates and Rectors of Churches in Prifon,. tem. atque obedientiam abjura- re; feque folam, in Temporali- ee ea a bus é Spiritualibus Dominam — agnofecre jurtjurando. coegit; paenas Ce fupplicia in eos qui diio non fem Audientes , Impofuit, eafdemque ad iis, qui in unitate fideiy & predidia Obedientia perfeverarunt, Exe- git. Catholicos Antiftites, & Ecclefiarum Rettores in vine cula conjecit 5 ubi raultt diu- turno Languore & Triftitia Confethi, Extremum vite diem mifere finiverunt. [Picua & notoria funt, & grae Viffima. quamplurimorum Teftin monio, ita comprobata, ut nul- lus omnino locus-Excufationis 5. Defenfionis, aunt. Tergiverfatior nis relinguatur, . where many,of them, being fpent withlong languifhing and forrow, .miferably,ended their lives. All which things, fee- ing they are manifeft and notorious to all Nations, and by the graveft Teftimony of very many fo fubftantially proved, that there is na place at all left for Excufe, Defence, or Evae fion. 6.3. We feing that im- pietiesand wicked actions are multiplied one upon ano- ther; and moreover, that the perfecution of the faith- ful, and affliction for Religi- on, groweth every day hea- vier and heavier, through the §. 3.. Los multiplicantibus altis atque aliis fuper alias Im- pietatibus, c facinoribus , & preterea fidelinm perfecutione , Religionifque afflittione, impul- Ju &. Operé d. Elizabeth guo- tidie magis Ingravefcente, qus- niam illins animum ita obfirma- Ins. Que omnia. cum apud Omnes Nationes per- ere oe ee Pe el Lie ye : aoniaih Cue Elizabeth. thitigationand Means of the faid Elizabeth, becaufe we underftand her mind to be fo hardned. and indurate , that fhe hath not only contemned the godly Requefts and Ad- monitions of Catholick Prin- ces, concerning her healing - and converfion, but alfo hath not fo much as permitted the Nuncios of this See, to crofs the Seas into. Exgland:, are {trained of: neceflity to be- take our felves tothe Wea- pons. of Juftice againft her, not being able to mitigate our forrow , that we are drawn. to.. take punifhment upon one,.to whofe Ance- ftors the whole State of Chriftendom hath been fo much bounden. Being there- fore fupported with his Au- thority , whofe pleafure it was to place Us (though un- able for fo great a burthen ) tum atque induratun Intelligi- mus, ut non modo pias Carholi- corum Principum de fanitare @ converfione, preces, monitionef- que contempferit , fed ne hujus quidem fedis ad ipfam hac de caufa Nuncios in Anglian» trajicere permiferit , ad Arma Fuftitia contra eam de neceffi- tate converfi, dolorem lenire non poflumus, quod Adducamur in unam animadyertere ,. Cujus majores de Republica:Chriftiana tantopere meruire; Illins stae que Andoritate fuffulti, Qui Nos: in hoc Supremo Fuftitra Throno, licer tanto Oneri Im- pares, voluit Collocare, de A+ poftolice poreftatis» plenttudsne declaramus predittam Eliza- beth Hereticam, haretico- rumque fautricem , eique adha- rentes in preditlis , Anathe- matis fententiam incurriffe-, effeque a Chrifti Corporis unita- te precifos, in this Supream ‘Throne of Juftice; wedoout of the fulnefS of our Apoftolick Power; -declare the aforefaid Elszabeth , being an Heretick,. and a favourer of Hereticks, and her Adherents in the matters aforefaid, to:have incurred the fen- tence of Anathema’, and to be cut off fromthe Unity of the Body of Chrift.. §. 4.. And. moreover;..we dodeclare Her to be depri- ved ofher pretended Title to the Kingdom aforefaid, and of all Dominion, Dignity,. and Priviledge whatfoever. . §: 4. Quin etiam ipfam pra tenfo Regni preditti jure, nec+ nonomnt qnocunque Domi- mio, Dignitae, Privilegioqus privatam, S. S- "Pope Pius the Fifth's Bull, &cc. §.5. And alfo the Nobi- lity, Subjects, and People of the faid Kingdom, and all o- thers, which have in any fort fworn unto her, to be for e- ver abfolved from any fuch Oath, and all manner of Du- ty, of Dominion, Allegiance, and Obedience; As we alfo do by Authority of thefe Prefentsabfolve them,and do deprive the fame Elizabeth of her pretended Title to the Kingdom, & all other things abovefaid. And we do Com- mand and Interdict all and e- very the Noblemen,Subjects, People, and others aforefaid, that they prefume not toobey her, or her Monitions , Man- §. 5. Et etiam Proceres, Jubditos, & populos astii Regni, ac ceteros omnes quitllt quomo- docunque juraverunt. A Fu- ramento lujufmodi , ac omm prorfus Domini, Fideliratis , & obfequit debito, perpetuo ab- Solutos, prout Nos illos Prafen- tium Auctoritate abfolvimms,e privamus eandem Elizabeth pretenfo Fure Regni, aliifone Omnibus fupradictis. Praci- pimeufque & Interdicsmus Uni- verfis & fingulis proceribus , Subditis, populis , & altis pra- dittis , ne ill ejufve monitis , Mandatris, & Legibus audeant obedire. Oui fecus egerint, eos fimili Anathematis Senten- tid innodamus, dates, atid -Laws: And thofe which fhall dothe contrary,We do innodate with thelike Sentence of Anathema. §.6. And becaufe it were a matterof too much difficul- ty, to convey thefe Prefents toall places wherefoever it. fhall be needful ,; our will is, that the Copies thereof, un- der a publick Notaries hand, and fealed with the Seal ofan Ecclefiaftical Prelate , or of his Court, fhall carry altoge- ther the fame Credit with all People, Judicial and Extra- judicial, as thefe Prefents fhould do, iftthey were exhi- §.6. Quiavero diffietle nimi effer, Prefentes quocungue illis Opus erit perferre, volumusy ut eorumexempla, Netarij public mann, € Prelati Ecclefiaftics, ejnfue Curie Sigille Obfignata eandem illam prorfus sit in Fudicio, & extra illud, ubique Gentinm faciant,guam ipfe Pre- Sentes facerent, fi effent exbibite vel oftenfe. Dat’? Rome, apud Santtum Petrum, Anno Incar- nationisDominica 1570. 5.Cal, Mai; Pontificar? noftri _Auno 5. bited orfhewed. Given at Rome, at St. Peters, in the Year-of the Incarnation of our Lord, \1570. the Fifth of the of Aday, and of our Popedom the Fifth ‘year. a Calends ae eee een PRR ANIMADVERSIONS AND OBSERVATIONS Upon the Impious: ; Extat hzc Bulla in Damnation and Excommunication rin .sseten 2. pag. 229. 0 F O. Elizabeth PTUs oe Amoig7o, Efore I come to a particular and diftin& Exami- - nation of the feveral Parts and Paragraphs of this Impious Popifh Bull, I fhallin general obferve, __ I. That Piws V. was not the firft or only Obferv Pope,who ufurped this Extravagant and Anti- ehriftian Power oyer Kings and Emperors; to damn, de- | pole, 2 Bullario Romano. - 8 Objervations on the Pope’s Bull (a) Carolus Sigo- nofe, and deprive them of all their Royal Rights and Im- on meEne i‘ perial Jurifdiction , for both his Predeceflors and Succeffors neice ry. approved, and with prodigious pride and impiety, exercis’d b) Omnium Confen- ; ‘ Pe qui pi fuch Power. “‘Thatthis may appear, I fhall give the Reader ginibus vencratio- {ome inftances, extant upon Record, in their own Popifh wards pte nae g Annals and Hiftories. 7 a bol ian 1. Pope (4) Conftantine ina Council of Italian Bifhops (it was about the Year 714.) Anathematife’s all who de- tim, Diro in eum ape -compofito Carmi- ny’d the worfhipping of Images,and (6) particularly and ne, Poenis Iaferc- by name damns the Emperor Philippicus to the Torments of J “ie pia bie Hell. So Carolus Sigonius tellsus,and Martinus Polonus, de -Regno Veale and the Fafciculus Temporum concur with him. lib.o.p.219.Extae 2. After Pope Conftamtine, Gregory the fecond, and Gre- bant preclara Gre- gory the third,fucceed (¢ ); and both of them Excomma- oor i Se cer nicate the Emperor Leo J/aurus , for this only Crime , a pe ere becaufe he was againft worlhipping of Images; and cris Interdicere, & though the Jralians had {worn Allegiance to him, yet Jurata Talia obe- they null that Oath: And the Hiftorian commends thefe ditntia Sholiare non Actions of thofe two, Popes, as excellent Examples. a spe 2 poe for Pofterity. And Platina fays, that Gregory the third gini bus fi pastegens (2) Excommunicated the Emperor Leo, and deprived him of prebuiffet. his Empire. - , A) Gregorius3. 3. ToGregory the third, fucceeded Pope Zachary, and Leonem /mperio & (if Gratian fay true) hee) depofed Childericus King of Se hes France, and abfolves his Subjects from their Oaths of vita Gregorij 3. Allegiance, and gives his Kingdomto Pipin = And this (¢) Zacharias Papa hedid, not for the great Crimes of Childeric , but becaufe Regem Francorum, he was unprofitable, and unfit for the Government 5, not melee ines that a was agi the ( I ) cree eee he quod evat inutilis was Effeminate , ana aiffolute wit omen. And from depoluit és Fran- this Canon, Fob. Semeca (the Gloflator ) infers, Thar cigenas a yuramento —¢he Pope may depofe the Emperor, and provesit by citing o- scant 5 ther Canons; And by the Authority of Pope (g) Gelafius, Caul.15. Queft. 6. who tells Avnaftafius the Emperor, that he had power to (£) Non quod infuffi- Depofe him, and provesit from the Example of this ciens {ed quod diffo- Pope Zachary. Iknow, that what Gratian, and tutus erat cum muli- eiibuseo efeminatus. Gloflibid.verbo Jnstilis. (g)Gloflibid.verbo Alias; the + againft Queen Elizabeth. 9 the Canonift, fay, of Pope Zachary’s Depofing Childeric, is evidently untrue, (and by many ( 4) demonttrated fo to be) yet it ftands uncenfur’d in their laft and beft (4) Edition of the Canon Law, which Pope Gregory. XIII. (.&) approved and publifh’d, as moft correct. And they further tell us, That Clemenr. Vill. publifhed. an (1) Exact Correction ofall the Glofles and Additions to the Canon Law, andyet this of Pope Zachary?s de- pofing Childertc ( and, what the Glofs fays ofit ) is nei- ther leftout, nor any way cenfur’d. Whence it isevi- dent, that they approve the Doctrine of depofing Kings, and (having no juft reafon for it) forge Inftances to proveit. Pope Hildebrand, or (m) Gregory. Vl. depofeth the Emperor Henry 1V.. by rhe Authority given (n ) by God, (as he fays ) of binding and toofing both in Heaven and Earth; And then he (0) abfolves his Subjetts from their Oath of Fidelity, and thea prohibits them to y bim. This Bull isdated at Rome, Anno Domini 1075. and five years after he Excommunicates, and Depofes him again too. And implores the Affiftance of Peter and Paul, in this his Excommunication and Depofition of the Emperor ; that the World may ( p ) know, that as they have power to bind and loofe in Heaven, fo they have power on Earth to give and take away Empires, Kingdoms, Principalities, Dukedoms, Earldoms, and ( according as they {hall deferve, and he is (q) Fudge of that) the poffeffions of all men. This power hefays, Peter had; and fo be, and the Bifhops of Rome have it too, and that from God, as Vicars of Chrift, and “Peter’s Succeffors. And fo by this moft Erroneous and Impious Doctrine, the Popes have a Power ( which nei- ther Peter, norany, norall the Apoftles ever had) to difpofe of all mens Temporal Eftates in the World, whether they be Supream or Subjects. ( b) Vid.. Joh. Lausoium Epift. Tom.7.p.117,118y Sc. & p. 245, 245, &c. ~Hottomanni Franco-Galliam, c- 13+ Ds 96,97,98. : (i) Vid. Edit. Paris 1612.81618. (&) Vid Bullam Gregorij. 12. dat. Romz. 1. Die Ju- lij. F580. . (1) Vide Indi- cemLibrorum Pro- hibjtorum = Lufita- nicum Olyfipone, 1624. Pp. 350° ifs Carolo Molinzo. (m) Vide Bul- Jarium Romanum ‘Romz. Anno1638. Tom. 1p. 49- ( 2) Poteftate a Deo data Ligandi & Solvend! in Coe- lo, & in Terra. - bid. (0 ) Omnes Chri. Rianes 2 vinculo Fur amentl, quod fim» bi faciunt, aut faci ent, abfolvo, & ut nullus ei ferviat, fim cut Regt, interdice Ibid. §. Je , _ Cp) at Mundus intelligat, quia ff poteftis in Calg liga re & folvere,poteftis in Terra Imperia, Regna,Principatus, Mar chias, Ducatus, Comitatus, < Omninm Hominum poffeffiones, pro meritis tollere, unicuique & Concedere. In ditto Cullario Roman. Bulle Excommunicationis. Her. 4.§.10. p.§t.Col. tr. €q )Sive Roman. Pontificem Supremum in Ecclefid Dei Fudicem. Ira Gregorivs. 13. in Bulla data Roma, 8. Ae i or 1575. In Ecloge Bullarum Lugdunl. 1582. p. 359. Col. 2. E s. After Io Obfervations on the Pope's: Bull i ~ Cr) Vide Bul- Jam. 13. Gregorit. 6 datum Rome. Anno 1239. In -Bullario Romano y - Tones p.89,90- (f) Vid.-Con- Ritutiosem Ejus 3: dar.Lugduni 1245. In Bullaris Roma- no, Tom. I. p. 94, (t) Damnatio — & Excommunica- tio Friderici. 2. I- bidem. { u_) Cam Fratri- bus & Sacro Conci- lio,deliberatione di- ligenti habitd. Yb. diaz Conftitutio- mis. §. 6. Bullarij didi. P- 95- Col. Ie Hin. uluma. (x-) Non fine Omnium audientt- . am 8 Circumftan- tiun fiupore. & horro:e.Matth. Pa- ris.in Hen.3.ad An- num 1245. p. 663° hin. 33. ee gs. After this, Pope Gregory. IX. (7) Excommunicates:the- Emperor Friderick, \l. Abfolves his Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance, lays an Interd:cton all his Cities, . Caftles, andiVillages, Excommunicates all that favour him, orany way aihift or obey him, commands the Ger- _ wan Bifhops.(upon pain of Excommunication ) folemnly to publifh this Excommunication with all their Impious: Solemnities, ringing of Bells, lighting and then extin- guifhing Candles, &c. | 6. After this. Pope (f ) Jnnocent 1V. Cin the like form). Excommunicates and Depofes the faid Frederick, The Lemma.Or Title prefix?d to the Bull is-thus (+ ) Ze Dam- nation and Excommunication of Frederick. Il. @&c. And left this might be thought arafh and inconfiderate Act: ofthe Pope, hehimfelftellsus,. That ( «) bedid diligent- ly deliberate about it, with ls Brethren ( the Cardinals he means ) and the Sacred Council, thé General Council of Lions.) 1 know, that A<atthew Paris fays,. that he pu- blifh’d that Bxcommunication in that Council , not without the ( x) Horror.and. Amazement of all who heard it. “But Platinatellsus 4That it was done bythe ( y,) general. and con- current confent of the Council: And Innocent himfelf ex- prefly fays, Fhat it was done ( Frederick Excommnni- cate) by the ( 2°) Council it felf ;. (andtherefore the Ma- jor part muft concur.) and if it was net fo, that Pope was not only fallible, but actually falfe : And it is a4 confiderable Obfervation which A@arthew Paris has, (and therefore I thall not omit it) when he tellsus———-Tbar fome did pofirively. affirm, ( and he believed it ) that( a) Innocent. LV. did above allthings earn ftly defire tovnin the ( ¥ ) Fredericum Omninm Confenfa Imperio & Regnis privavét. Platina. in vira Fanocentij.:4.p. 209, Col. 1. Edit. Col. Agripp 1626. (2) Quem( Fridericum ) Concilinm generale Lugdunen- fe Caffaverat & condemnaverat. Matthew Paris in Hen. 3, ad An, 1250. p. 773. lin- ujtima: (a) Anongallis.affirmative dicebatur , quod Dominus Papa fitienter & fuper Ome nia defiderabat , Fridericum ( quem magnum Draconem vocabat ) peffundare, ut ipfo {uppedit ato «> conculcato, Reges Francorum c Anglia, altofque Christianitatis Reges, ( quos omnes Rogue los & Serpentulos effet dicebat-) facilius, Exemplo dicti Friderici pertervitos , Conculcaret , c Bonis fuis, ac Prelatos corum, ad Libitum fpoliaret. Matth. Paris. in Hem 3. addidum Annum 1250. p.774. lia, 2. &c.. ; Emperor ——_—*> r, , “againft Queen Elizabeth. If Enperor Frederick, ( whom he called the great Dragon ) thar, he being trampled upon, the King of France, England, and | other Chriftian Kings, (whom he calld dimunitive = and little Serpents ) affrighted with the fad Fate of Frede- rick, might more cafily be kept under, andthey and their Pre- lates fpoiled of their Goods, and by him plundered. Sothat althoughhe, and other Popes did pretend, ( asappears by their Bulls ) that they depofed Kings for the Extirpa- tion of Herefie, the Prefervation of the Catholick Faith, and Chriftian Religion ; yet ’cis evident to any intelligent and impartial Judge of their Actions, that it was their prodigious ambition and covetoufnefs, their inordinate and erroneous defire of Dominion, of Rule and Riches, which made them ufurp and exercife a power to depofe _Kingsand Emperors, which St. Peter ( from whom they pretend to have it ) never had, nor pretended to. : 7. Pope Paw.IIl. (}) Excommunicates, Curfes, Depofes and Damns Henry, Vill. of Exgland, and all who adhere to him, favour or obey him; abfolves his Subjects from ail Oaths of Allegiance; commands them all, under pain of Excommunication, not toobey him, or any(¢) - Magiltrate or Officer under him, nor to acknowledge the King ‘or any of his Fudges or Officers to be their Superiors, And fur- ther ( witha {trange Impiety and Impudence ) he declares King Henry and his Complices and Favourers and their Children and Defcendents to be Infamous, incapable to be Witnefles, make Wills, or be Heirs toany; Incapa- ble to do any legal Act, and rhat ix any Caufe(d) of Debt, or any other Caufe Civil or Criminal, none flould be boundto anfwer them, and yet they bound to anfwer every body. And to omit the reft, ¢ for I fhall at the end of thefe Ob- fervations, fet down the whole Bull ) he commands the (¢) Ecclefiafticks (Secular and Regular ) to quit the King- dom, and not to return, tillthe Perfons Excommunicate, de- (>) Vide Bul lam.7. Pauli.3 dat. Rom#.3. Cal.Sept. Anno. 153%. In Bullario Romano. Tom, 1.p. 514. E- ditionis = Romz. 1638. . (c ) Mandantes, ut ab Henvict Regis, fuorumque Officialie um, Fudicumts Mae giftratunm quorum- canque Obedienta penitus: ¢» omnino recedant,necillasst fuperiores vecognof- cant , néque corum Mandatis Obtempe- rent. Diz Bulla. §. 10, Cd) Et Nuki ip- fis, fed iff aliis [u- per Cqocunque debito, > negotio, tam Civiliquam Criminali, de jure vefpondere teneantur. bid. S. Ile (€) Prelatis quoque & Cateris per(onis Ecclefiafticis mandat Jub.penis.in Bulla Contentis , quatenus de Regno Anglie difcedant,nec revertantur, donee décti Excommunicati, privaté,maledicti, @& damnati merucrint ablolationis Beneficium. Ibid. §. 13.p. 516. | FB, 2 prived, Iz eee, Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull ¢f) Cambdens Elizabeth. lib.3. p- 360, 361. ad An- mum 1988. ( g ) See a Book with this Title----- Important Confide- yations.8cc. written by the Secular Prieftshere in Eng- band, printed Anno 4601. and reprin- ted with other Tra&s , with this Tile prived, curfed and damn’d (the King and all his Loyal Subje&s he means ) be abfolved from their Cenfures. This. Bull, though fram’d and ready to be publith’d, yet the Execution of it was fufpended for three years, and then actually publifhedin the Year 193%. which was the fifth: year of Pope Paul. III. as appears by the Date of it, in the aforefaid Bullary. And when it was publifhed, as it was in it felf highly Impious, fo (to Hez. VIII, and his. Loyal Subjects ) it was ridiculous; and all the Effect it had was, that it increafed their hate and contempt ofthe Antichriftian pride and folly of its Author. It appeared ( what indeed it was ) Brutum fulmen, and that King had too great a courage and underftanding, to be frighted with an Jgnis fatuus, Papal Squibs,.and Wild-fire,which. could neither warm or burn him. 8. Laftly; asthe Popes proceeding Pius. V. fo thofe who followed, approved and ( fo far as they were able). put in practice that execrable Doctrine of Depofing Kings. Pope Gregory. XUE. did immediately fucceed: Pius V. and renues and confirms his. Bull. for depofing Queen Elizabeth, and abfolving her Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance ¢ as is. teftified not only by ( f) Cambden, but by the Romith Priefts themfelves, (the (¢ ) Seculars, who feem’d moft moderate ).and in profecuti- on of that damnatory Sentence, the faid Pope Gregory - did conftitute Fitz-Gerald (an Irifh Rebel againft the Queen ) General of all the Jrifo Rebels; that fo he and they by Fire and Sword might Execute the Sentence of | thofe two Popes, depofing that Queen Thisis expref- ly teftify’d by Fitz*Gerald (&) himfelf, inan Edict pu- blifh’d by him, after he was General, declaring the Ju- A Collection of feveral Treatifes concerning the Reafons and Occafi- on of Penal Laws,¢c.London 1675. In which Collection, pag.76. the Secular Priefts tell us, that Pope Gregory. 13.did excommunicate Queen Elizabeth. (hh) Gregorins. 13.in Ducem ac Ge- neralem bujus belli Capitanenm, Nos Elegit,ut ex ipfius Diplomate conftat : Quod tanto magis fecit, — quia ews Predeceffor Pius. 5. Blizabetham herefium Patronam Omni Regia Poteftate privaverat. Vid. Edi&um Uluftriff, D. Jac. Geraldini,de Juftitia ejus belli, quod in Hibernia pro fide gerit. °Tis Extantin the Hiftory of the Irith Rebellion, Lond. 1680, in the Appendix, p. 8 {tice 4 ~ againft Queen Elizabeth. 13 tice of that Jrifh War, which( he fays ) was undertaken i for the Catholick Faith, and reftoring itin Jreland. To ; Gregory. XIII. Szxtus Quintus immediately fucceeds, and 4 confirms the damnatory Sentences of his two Predeceffors, and M (as he who well knew, tells us) Excommunicates and Ci) depofes the Queen, Abfolves her Subjetts from their Oaths — ‘) Cambdens of Fidelity, and publifhed a Croifado, as againft Turks and Blizaveth. lib. 3. po Infidels (indeed as afterwards evidently appear’d againft 350) 361» England and Queen Elizabeth ) and gave ( what he never had to give ) plenary Indulgence to all whofhould affift in that War. Nor is this all; Cardinal Allen (k)writaTrai- , (&) Cambden terous and Seditieus Book, to Exhort allthe Englith and I- ibid. lib. 3. p. 364» rifh Papifts, to joyn with the Spanifh Forces ( againft their Queen and Country) under the Prince of Parma: and Pope Sixtus V. fends Allen (withthat Book, and his own Bull ) snto the Low-Countries, and there agreat number of thofe Books and Bulls were Printed at Antverpe, to be fent into England. Were it neceflary, many things now might be faid, pertinent to this purpofe; but (I fuppofe ) the Inftances already given, willbe fufficient to convince In- telligent and Impartial Perfons, That Pope Pius. V. was: neither the firft nor laft, who ufurped this Extravagant Power to Depofe Princes; feeing feveral of his Predecef- forsand Succeflors, for above. 600. years, have owned, approved, and ( as they had opportunity ) put that Power in practife : This in General premis’d, I come now to- confider the Bull of Pius. V. wherein he damnsand de- pofeth Queen Elizabeth, wherein twothings occur very confiderable ; | r. The 7Emyeuoa, or Title prefix’d to the Bull. 2. The Particulars contain’d in it. __. Forthefirft; the Title prefix’d to the Bull isthus: —— Obfervarion; | =—Dhe Damnation of Elizabeth, ec. where, though Dam- . _ nation may feem a very hard word(as indeed it is,in the fenfe they ufe it, as fhall by and by appear ) yetit isnot unufual; - but occurs in other Bulls of the like nature : So we find it bil | Obfervations on the Pope's Bull . —_ (1) Damnatio& Depofitio Frideréct. -2. Vid. Bullarium Romanum, Romz, 1638. FOm.1-D.94- Col. 7. Edita erat Bulla ifta An.i24¢. m) Damnatio Een.8. epufque Fau- torum, (rc. In Bul- Jario Romano.ibid. p-514- Col.2. Edi- ta dicta bulla,Anno 1535. ‘& poftea 1538. si n ) Vid. Bulla- rium Romanum Lug- dunj. 1655. im 4. Tomis in Folio, & Eclogen Bullarum 8 motu proprio- rum P i.4,&c.Lug- duni. 1582. 8°. & NovamCollectionem, &c. Eman. Roder. _ Turnoni.1609.fol. where in that one Volume you have above. goo. Bulls, with the Names of 46. Popes, who pu- olifhed them. (0) VideCon. flitut. 22. Julij Pa- pz. 2. InBullario Romano Tom.1.p. 378. Ec Conftitut. $1.Gregorij.13.I0 dictoBullarioT om. 2. p. 348. vide Extravag. Communes, |. 5: Tit.9. cap. Unigenitus. 2. Cp) Decuiffémus cum (Lie therum) Luce clarius,Sanétos Rom. Pontifices Predeceffores noftros, in [uss Canonibus feu Conftituti onibus Nunquam Evraffe. Vide Bulfam Apoftolicam Leopis. 10. contra Errores Lutheri, & fequa- _ cium. Dat. Rome, 17. Cal. Julij, An. 15.20. & Pontificatus ful, Oftavo. Apud Pet.Crab Cone. Tom. 3.p. 715. &c. And his Predecefior, Zulius. 2. faysas much for the Church of Rome,—— S. Sandia Ecclefia Komana, Magiftra fidei, omnium Ervorum Expers, unica, immaculata, &c. Confti- tutto. 27+ Julij.2. data Anno. 1612. Im Bullario Romano. Tom. 1. p. 384. ee inthe Bull of Pope Junocenr, IV. wherein he Excommuni- catesthe Emperor Frederick. 1]. For the Lemma or Title of that Bull is thus---( 4) The Damnation @ Depofition of Frede- rick. II; Sointhe Bullof Pope Pau. Til. Excommunica- ting Henry, VII. the Title prefix’d to it is----( m) The Dam- nation of Henry. VILL. and his Favourers, &c. Sothat Pius. V. Damning Queen Elizabeth, was not fingular (though Impious ) he had fome of his Predeceflors Forms to follow. I fay, his Predeceflors ; for {do not find that any Bifhops in the World ( fave thofe of Rome ) ever ufed fuch Unchri- ftian, and indeed Anti-chriftian Forms of Excommunicating and Damning Kings and Emperors. And it is obferyable, ‘and wellknown to thofe whodiligently read.and confider the Papal Bulls now extant, ( of which there isa valt ( 2 ) number ) that the Popes of later Ages, when they go a- bout to juftifie fome extravagant Act of their ufurped Power ; they ufually cite ( 0) the Bulls and Conftitutions of their Predeceflors, who had done the like; not formatter of fact barely; but to prove a Right; that becaufe their Pre- deceffors had done fo formerly, therefore they (who fuc- ceeded in the fame Power ) might do ittoo. Now, al- though to arguethus, 4 Fatto ad us, be evidently inconfe- quent and irrational: (no better thanthis Peter ( de fatto ) deny’d and forfwore his Mafter: Ergo, His Succef- fors (dejure) may dofoto. ) Yet, iftheir Principles were true, (as I fuppofe they may think them ) fuch Arguing would be more concluding. For, Pope Leo, X. exprefly Cp) affirms, and publickly declares, in one of their Gene- ral Councils, that itis more clear than light it felf; That none of his Predeceffors, Popes of Rome, Did ever Err, in any of their Canons or Conftitutions. Now if this were true, (as a he itn —— 7 -pblickly (+) maintain?d thefe two Pofitions, avainft Queen Elizabeth — na mere A 15 it isevidently falfe, and his Afferting it an Argument not only of his Fallibility, but of his great Error and Folly ) That none of bis Predeceffors ever Eri?d, then they might with more Security follow them; for certainly, it can be no great fault or danger to follow an unerring Guide. Efpeci- ally ifit be true which they tell us. For 1. In their Lawsand Canons, approved by their Su- pream Authority, and retained in. publick ufe in their Church, weare told, (4) That all their Papal Sanébions are fo robe received, as if the Divine Voice of Peter himfelf bad Confirmed them: This (as Gratian there tells us) was Pope Agatho’s Sentence, audis Received into rhe Body of their Canon Law, Revifed, Corretted, and Purged from all things Contrary to Catholick Verity: So(r) Gregory. XV. fays, and con- firms it. Whence it evidently follows; that (in Pope Gregory’s Judgment ) This Sentence of Azarho is not re- “pugnant to Catholick Verity: And in the fame place it ts farther declared for Law, ( Pope Stephen. I. is cited as Au- thor of’ that Sentence ) Thar, ({) Whatever the Church of Rome does Ordain or Conftitute, it 1s ( without all Contraditti- on) perpetually to be Obferved. 2. Thoughthis be ( beyond all truth and. reafon ) high- ly erroneous; yet the Jefuits Cof late.) have gone much higher, and in their Claromont Colledge at Paris, pu- | 1. That our Blefjed Saviour left Peter and his Succeffors, the fame Infalli- bility, he himfelf had, fo oft as they fooke @ Cathedra, 2. That (even out of a General Council ) he is the Infallible Judge in Gontroverffes of Faith, both in Queftions of Right and Fatt. This ( as to the main of it; though Erroneous and Impious) is maintain’d by others as wellas Jefuits. F. Gregory de Ri- ves, a Capuchin Prieft, tells us (and his Book.is approved by. the General, and feveral others of his Order, and by Father D. Roguet, a Dominican, and Doctor of Divinity , ergo, in Ecclef, Rom. Controverfiarum fidet Judex Infalltbilis, etiam Extra (q) Sic Omnes Apostolice Sedis Sanéziones accipiene de funt,tanquam Ip- fius Divint Petre voce Firmate fint. Can. fic Omnes 2.. dift. 19. & Ibid. Can. 3, 4, &C. Cr) Vide Bul- lam Greg. 13. da- tam Romz. 1. Jul. 1580. Jur. Can, prefixam. CS) Quicquid Statuit , Quicquid Ordinat Romaza Ec- clefia, Ab Omnibus perpetuo & Irrefra- gabiliter eft Obfer- vandum. Ybid. Can. Enim vero, 4. Dift. 19. Ct ) chrijtum ita Caput Ecclefie Ag- nofcimus , ut éliius regimen,dum in Ce los abiit,primum Pe- tro, dein fucceffori- bus commiferit, & eandem quam habe- bat Ipfe Infallibili- tatem, concefferit, quoties ex Cathedra loqueretur. Datur 5 Concélinm Generale, tum in soo Suen Juris & Faiti, Vids Expofit. Thefeos, in Col. Claromontano propo- fitz. 12. Dec. 1661, i (Fe. oe 16 Cu) Sé chriftz Authoritas non pen- ideret aConcilio, ft adbuc in terris vi- veret.fed Omni Con- cilio Majer effet. Eddem Ratione, & Pontificis Authori- tas,que ipfius Chri- ‘fti Vicariaeft, Con- cilio fuperior eft--e-= Privilegium Infalli-, bilis veritatis, non Concilio, fed Fonté- fici 2 Chrifte Colla- tum oft. Lut. 22.3 2- Gr.de Rives Epi- tome Concil. in Principio pralud. {X )Ecclefia Ro- mana elt Fudex Con- troverfiarum in Re- bus Fidei, & pins Determinationes Sunt De Fide. Ibid. Prelud. 9. Edit. Lugd. Anno.1663. ( y )Verbum Dei., vel eft Scriptum in Scripturis vel non fcriptum, Traditio- nescvel Explicatum, cum dubia in verbo Scripto aut Tradito Explicantur. Quod fitPrefertimper Pa- pam, five Extracon- ciléa,feuin Concili- Jo bythe fame Reafon, the Authority of the Pope ( who is Chrifts ce ) (uw) That as the Authority of Chrift ( our bleffed Savi our) if he yere.now on Earth, were greater than all Councils , Vicar ) is greater than allCouncils too. That the Priviledge of Infallibility was given to the Pope, not to Councils; and then Concludes, That the (x) Church of Rome ( he means the Pope ) is Fudge of Controverfies, and all her Definitions and Determinations are De Fide. Thus De Xives, And three or four years before him, Lid. Basel (a Parifian Doctor and Propenitentiary ) exprefly affirms, That the ( y )Word of God isthreefold. 3. His written Word an Scripture. 2. His unwritten Word, inthe Traditions of the Church. 3. The Word Declared or Explain?d , when doubtful paffages in Scripture or Tradition are explain’d, and their meaning determin®d by the Pope, whether in, or out of Councils; and this (he fays) és the moft approved way, in which men acquicfce, and think, they need look no further, AndhenceheInters, That feeimg this cs fo; we (2) onght not tobe afraid to follow the Pope?s Guidance in Dottrines of Faith and Manners, but acquiefcein his Fudg- ment, and fubmit all our writings to be Corretted by him. nei- ther will nor need Cite any more Authorities, to prove the aforefaid Particulars; That Their Popes may damn and De- pofe Kings and Emperors ( efpecially if they be Hereticks ) andthink they have (as Chrifts Vicars ) a juft Prerogative and Power to doit. Sure 1 am, that thefe Pofitions (though Erroneous and Impious ) are generally maintain’d by the Je- fuits, Canonifts, (4) Schoolmen , and their Followers ( which are very many ) receiv’d into the Body of their Ca- non Law of theirbeft, and ( asthey themfelves fay ) their moft Correct Editions, and approved, and (when they had opportunity ) practis’d by ( their Supream Powers ) their 25. Ufque modus ultimus Magis probatus eft,¢» Majori fuavitate cé Plures acqutefcunt,ut nibil ulterins Contendendum exifiment. Lud. Bail in Prin. Apparatus ad fammam Conc. De triplici verbo Dei, (2) Que cum ita fint, nec Nos debemus vereri eyus ductum fequi, In Dottrind Fides & Morum, ejus Fudicio Nos Shee Scripta Omnia corrigenda fubmittere. Idem in Calce prefationis ad LeAerem, Tom, i. prafixam. ¢{ 2) Vide Aquinatem. 2.2. Quaft, 11, Art.3. Utrum Aereticé fint tellerane di? negat. &ibid. Quzft.i2. Art. 2. “trum Princeps propter Apoftafiam afide, amittat Dominium tn Subditos, tta~quod ei obedire non tenentur ? He affirms it, and {ays —— Ey4s Subditi a Dominia ejus & Furamento Fidelitatis (fi fit Excommunicatas ) Ipfo fatto leberantur. Popes againjt Queen Elizabeth. 7 nes and General Councils. Iwovld not be miftaken ; I _heieh that all who now do, or for this Six hundred years laft paft, have liv’din the Communion of the Church of Rome, eitherdo, or didapprove fuch Papal Pofitions or ices. Iknow the Sorbon and Univerfity of Paris, and etn in other Countries, have publickly Declared their disbeliefand diflike of them; Efpecially in (0 ) Germany , in the time of Alen, Ill. Hen. AV. Frederick I. He. not only private Perfons, but fome Synods declared the Papal Excommunications and Depofitions of their Emperors, not only Injuft and Impious, but Antichriftian. Igrant alfo, That Father Caron in his Remonfrrantia Fibernorum ( iffome have rightly told the Number ) has cited Two hundred and fifty Popith Authors, who deny the Popes Power to depofe Kings: And though [know that many of his Cita- tions are Impertinent , yet I fhall neither deny nor doubt, but that there are many thoufand honeft Papilts in the out- ward Communion of the Church of Rome, who diflike this Doctrine. But this will neither Juttife or Excufe the Church of Rome, fo long as her Governing and Ruling part publickly approves and maintains it. For, 1. Father (¢ ) Caron himfelf tells us, that ( notwith{tanding his Book , and all his Authorities for Loyalty to Kings ) The Divines of Loyane, The Pope?s Nuncio, the Cardinals, four or five Popes, ( Paulus. V. Pius. V. Alexander. VII. Innocentius X. (he might eafily have reckon’d many more ) did con- demn his Doéttrine, The Inquifitors dam his Book, and his Superiors Excommunicate him, 2. It is confeiled, That the Supream Infallible Power of their Church, refides ei- ther in the Pope, or Council, or both together; And tis alfo certain, That their Popes, in their approved, and (in (4 )publick ufe) received Canon Law, in their Authen- tick Bulls, ( publifh’d by themfelves ) in their General Councils ( and ( e ) with their Confentr ) have approved , and ( for thefe Six hundred years laft paft ) many times (2) Vid. Johan. Aventinum Anpnal:; Bojorum. Lib. 5,6, 7. Carol. Sigonium de Regno traliz, Matth.pariLge.Ad An.1078 P.fo,re. & p. 13.lim, 1. & p- 958. lim. 30. & 773. lin. go. & p. 974. lite 1. 2. 8 p. 875. where R. Grojthead (for his Tyrannical Ufur- pations ) calls the Pope Antichrift. (¢ )Remoaftranr: Hibernorum, pai t. 1. Cap. 3. &c. (d) Volentes Cver- ba fant Gregorij.P a- pe.9. ) at hac Tane tum Compilatione 4=- niverfi utantur, ee in Fudiciis & Sche- lis;c. Bulla Greg. 9. Decretal, prz- fixa. (e) Innocent. 4. Excommunicates Friderick. 2.in the General Council at Lions, Omnium Con- fenfu, Oc. Platina in vita Innocent.4. And Pope /nnocent himfelf faid con- fiantly that the Council of Lions Excommusicated | is j : » p. 772. lin. 58.59. And nd Depofed that Emperor. Marth. Paris in Hen. 3. Ad Ann.1250. p 773. lit. 58.59. Ar Pope Puch, 2. rells mit red he Excommanicated the Emperor Hens 4. Fudisio Tetius Ecclefe. Carol. Sigonius de Regno Italia, !. 9. p. 237. lin. 18. f 2 £ pra@is’d 18 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull Obftrv. 3. (£) Damnum a demendo, quia dam- num eft Ret diminu- tio unde Damna Lu- ne, apad Gellinm Nod. Atticarum lib. 20.Cap.8. And Varro, Damnuma demptione lid. 4. de i egibus.So Iffodore lib. 5 Orig.cap.22. (2) Damnum tft anijfio tornm que habucras. Quindili- anus Declamat.120. Anda guod Lawy- er tells me, that Damnare; eft rem fine remedio {ib- levandi tormentis feu Ignominie fen- tentialiter deputare. _ Panormiten.in cap. Damnamus. in. 2. Notab. de fumma Trinit. & fide Ca- tholica. pra@is’d this Doctrine of Depofing Kings ; nor has the Church of Rome (1 mean the Governing and Ruling part of it ) by any publick A&t or Declaration difown’d or cen- far’d it, as doubtlefs fhe would, had fhe indeed difliked it. Qua non prohibet, cum poffit,jubet. lf any manthink otherwile, and can really fhew me,that their Popes & General Councils have not formerly approved, or fince have difown’dand dif- . approv’d this Doétrine : I fhaH willingly acknowledge my miltake, and bethankful tohim for a Civility, which ¢ at prefent ) I really believe Ifhall never receive. However, Grata fupervenient qua non fperantur, 2 3. Seeing itis Evident that Pope Pius. V. ( and his Pre- deceffors in the like Cafes ) callsthe Anathemaand Curfe contain’d inthis Bull, The Damnation of QO. Elizaberh, The next Query will be, What that hard word fignifies, and whatthey meanby it, intheir Bulls? For the Solution of which doubt, and Satisfa@ion to the Query: 1. I takeit to be certainand confefs’d; that the word Damuum( from whence Damnation comes ) fignifies a (f) diminution, or (g ) lofs of fome good things, liad and enjoyed before, or of aright to future good things, and then Damnation (as to our prefent Cafe ) will be a judicial fentence, which ( by way of punifhment) impofes fuch lofs and diminution. 2. As the Damnum or lofs may be eitherof Temporal things here ( as lofs of Honours, Liberty, Lands or Life ) or of Spiritual and Eternal things, (as Heaven and Salvation ) hereafter ; fo the Damnation alfo ( according to the Na- ture of the fentence, and the mifchief intended by it) may be Temporal or Eternal, or both; if it penally inflict the lofs both of Goods Temporal and Eternal. 3. I fay then (and1 hope tomake it evident ) that the mifchiefintend-. ed by this Papal Bull, and Excommunication ( fo far as the malice and injuftice of an Ufurped Power could ) endea- voured to be brought upon that good Queen, was not only Temporal, bat alfo Spiritual and Eternal.. This the word Damnation, in the 7Emyeagh, or Title of the Bull, (in their Popifh Conftruction ) intends and fignifies. For the Tem- poral mifchiefs intended to be brought upon that good Queen, ca a i named in the Bull it felf, as we fhall fee anon. - againft Queen Elizabeth. Queen, there is no queftion, they are all particularly For the Spiritual, thatis, a feclufion out of Heavenand Happinefs, and Eternal.Damnation of Body and Soul ; that thetfe alfo were the intended and defigned Effects of this Impious Bull and Excommunication, isnow-tobe proved. And here it is to be Confidered, : 1. That theyconftantly fay, and ( having {trong Delu- fion ) poflibly may believe it; That Hereticks ( and fuch the Queen isdeclaredto be inthe Bull) dying Excommu- nicate, (asthat Queen did, and all true Proteftants do ) are Eternally Damn’d. For, 1. Avery great (b ) Canonit of our own Nation, (while Popifh Superftition unhappily pre- vail’d hete ) tells us, That every Excommunicate Perfon is a Member of the Devil. And for farther proof of this, he Cites (i ) Gratian and their Canon Law, ( and he might have Cited other as pertinent places in Gratian ) who tells us, inanother Canon (k ), Dhar Excemmunication is a Dam- nation to Eternal Death. And Fobn Semeca the Gloflator gives us their meaning of it, That it ts certainly true, when the (1) Perfon Excommunicate is incorrigible , and contems the Excommunication, (as for my partl really doccntemn all their Excommunications, as Bruta fulmina, which nei- ther do, nor can hurt any honeft Proteftant ) fothat by their Injuft Law, and moft uncharitable Divinity, not only Queen Elizabeth, but all Proteftants ( who are every Year Excommunicated by the Pope, in their Bulla. ( m) Cene Domini ) are Eternaky damned, and that ¢ Cathedra. A Sen- tence Erroneous and Impious ; and( thoughit be the Popes, whom they mifcall Jfaible ) inconfiftent with Truth, o Chriftian Charity. | TY he 2. But we have ( both for Learning and Authority ) a far greater Authorthan Lindwood or Gratian, and )in our days ) long after them ; I mean Cardinal Baronius; who tells us (” ) That Pope Gregory. VII. did not only de- poferke Emperor Hen. AV. but Excommunicate, and Decree him . Fo2 to —— ere (h) Excommu- nicatus eff Wem- bram Diaboli. Lind- wood ad Cap. Se- cul Principes. ver- bo Reconciliatio- ris. De Immunit. Ecclefiz. ( ¢ )Gratian.Can.. Omnis Chriftianus. 32. Caul11.Quatt. - (k ) Excommuni- catio eff eAterne Mortis Damnatio. T- dem Gratian. Can. Nemo 41.Cauf.11, Qvait. 3. (1) Eff Pespetua Lamnatio cum ab Excommunicatocon- temnitur. Gloff, ad dium Can, verbo mortis. (m) This Bulla Cone often ( with fome alterations ) Occurs in Byllario Romano. vid. Con- ftit.25 Julli.2.Tom 1. pag. 382. Edit. Roma. 1638. & Conftit. 63. Pauli. 5. Tom.3-p.83. ubi reliqua, hujus Bul- lz Exemplaria di- &o Bullario com- prehenfa, indican- tur. (n) Non modo deponi,fed etiamEx- communicart, C* in c#terno = Examixze Lamnari Decrevit. Baronius Aonnal. Tom.8.ad.An.Chri {ti.593-num.86, aft - 20 Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull eee Co) Gregor. 7. ‘Hib.g.Epift.2.& 23. & lib. 8. Epift. 21. ( p ) Henricus. 4. primam a Gregorio Papaydein ab urba- %05P oftremo & Nobis, Fudicio Totins Ec- clefie, Perpetuo A- nathemate Obliga- tus eff. Car. Sigo- nius de Regno [ta- liz. lib.9. pag 237. € 4) Henricum,£E- j4sq; fautores, Adha- rentes (rc. Excom- manicatos Decerni- Museo[gue Anathe- mitis, Maledittio- nis, ( eAterna Pamnationis mucro- me. percutimus. In Bulla Damnationis Hen.8. Dat. Roma. Cal.Sept.An.1535. C1) Si Imperial, Rrgali, aut Pontif- cali Dégnitate pre- falgeant §.3. dicta. Salle. (€) Penis que Litle Majeftatis & Herstice previtatis "45 Imponuntur. I- Idem. (t) Decernentes ¢at pro Schifmaricis, > de Catholica fide male fentientibus , éam Dathan & A- birot partem Damnationem habere bi formam - fub pana Malediionis Aiterne. to be Eternally Damr?d. And for this he (0 ) Cites Pope Gregory’s own Epifiles, who furely beft knew his own mind, and the meaning of his own Decree. a 3. But wehave greater Authors and Authority for this, than Baronius; for Pope Pafchal. Il. tells us, (p) That he had Excommunicated the Emperor Hen. 1V. inaCounedl ; and adds, That by the Fudgment of the whole Church, he lay bound under an Eternal Anathema, And after this Pope Paul, Ill. (4) Damns (thaw’s the word) and Excommunicates our King Hen. VIU. axzd all his Favourers and Adberents; And we {mite them (faith he ) with the Sword of an Anathema, Male- dittion, and Eternal Damnation. \n the Year 1459. Pins Il. ( with the Unanimous Confent of bis Council, at Mantua, Excommunicates and Damns all thofe (even (x ) Kings and Emperors) who {hall Appeal from the Popeto a General Council 4. and that they (hall be punifld as (f) Ivaytors and Hereticks. Pope fulius. 11. afterwards confirms this Conititution of his Predeceflor, as to all the Punifhments contain7d init; Excommunicates and Curfes all Perfons, Ecclefialtical and Secular, of what Dignity foever ( though Kings ) who fhall offend againft that Conftitution, and Decrees that they fhall have (t) their Portion & Damnation with Dathan and Abiron, The Damnation then intended and threatned'in this Impious Bull of Pius. V. ( as in other Papal Bulls of the like nature ) is not only fome Temporal lofs and damage (though that alfo be included and exprefled ) but the Eternal Damnation of Body and Soul, Which further appears by that Famous ( or indeed Infamous, Erroneous and Ridiculous ) Conftituti- on of Boniface. VIII. wherein having: faid, Thar there is but one Catholick Church, out of which, there is no Salvation , and that our Blefled Saviour made Peter and bis Succeffors bis Vicari, Yice-Gerents, and Heads of that Church; he adds, That (u) whoever are not of that Church, and in Subjethion : Conflit. 22. Pii. 2. § 6.vid. P. Crab. Concil. Tom. 3. p. 650. Col 2. 8 (u) Porro (xbeffe Kom. Pont ifici Om- ni humane Creature declaramus, dicimus, définimus, @ pronuncicmus Omnino effe de Necefitate Salutis. Conftir. Bonifacii. 8. dat. Roma. Ann, 1 i Major. & Obed Exirav. Communes. 301. Pont, Ann. 8. Cap. una faodam. 3. aud againft Queen Elizabeth. —_ . 21 and Obedient tothe Pope, can have no Salvation. And Pius V. inthis very Bull, exprefly fays the fame. For, 1. He fays, That out of the Apoftolick, (x ) Church (he means evi- dently his own Roman Church) there is no Salvation. 2. He declares Queen Elizabeth an (Cy) Heretick, that fhe and all her Adherents had Incuryv?d an Anathema and Maledi- étion, were Excommunicate, and cut off from the Body of Chri. Sothat Queen Elizateth, andall her Loyal Prote- {tant Subjects, who never were, nor could be, (as with- out great Error and Impiety they could not ) fubject to the Pope, nor Members of his Apoftolical Church, are ( by this Bull ) Eternally Dami?d, 4. Bot thisis not all ; for we have greater Evidence , that by the word Damvation in their Bulls, wherein all He- reticks, ( Proteftants you may be fure, who without Truth or Charity, they call {o ) are Curs’d and Excommunicated, they do and muft mean Eternal Damnation, For, 1. Pope Leo. X. in the Lateran (z) Council, ( which with them is General and Oecumenial ) innovates and eftablifheth ( withthe Approbationand Confent of that Council ) the aforefaid Doctrine and Conftitution of Pope Boniface, VIII. 2. The Trent Council doth fo too, and abfolutely Anathe- matizes and Damns all thofe whodo not believe their whole new Creed; (in which there is not onetrue Article, but all Erroneous, many Superftitious and Impious ) and tells us, Jt is the Catholick (a) Faith, without the belief of which, no man can be faved, and {wear firmly to believe it to their laft breath , and Anathematize all who donor. And, (which is further very confiderable and pertinent to confirm what is abovefaid ) they doin that Oath promife, vow, and fwear to receive and imbrace ( & ) All things delivered , defined, and declared in their General Councils, and All(c ) the Coujti- tutions of their Church, -For thefe Particulars are parts of (x) Ecclefit A- poftolica extra quam nulla eft Salus. io Prin. Bullz.Pii.sg. ( y ) Declaramus Elizabetham Here- ticam eique Adhe- rentes Asathematis fententéam incurri[- fe, effeque a Chrifté Corporistenitate pra cifoss Lbid.§. 3. (Zz) Cum de ne- cejitate Salatis fit, OmnesChrifti fidelés Romano Pontificé (ubeffe,prout Divine Scripture OS ancto- rum Patrum Tefti- monio edocemur, Conftitutione Boni- facié Pape. 8. que incipit unam San- tlam, declaratur. onree Conftitutionem Ipfam Sacro prefenté Concilio Approbante Innovamus, & Ap- probamus.Conc.La- teran. fub. Léone. 10. Sefl. ro. apud P.Crab.Conc. Tom. 3p. 697. Col. 1. (a). Contraria Omniax» Herefes, ab Ecclefia Lamnae tas & Arathemati- natas Ego pariter Anathematizo.Haing veram Catholica fidem, Extra quam Nemo Salvus effe Pote2, quam veraciter tenea, Cad Extremum vite Spiritum, Conftanti~ fimé retinere, fpondeo, voveo, juro. Conc. Trident. Seff. 24. De Reformat. in Calce Cap. 12. p. 452. Edit. Antverp. 1633. vata, Indubitanter recipio, & profiteor. Ibid. p. 4§ 2+ Cb) Omnia a Conciliis Oecamenicis tradita, definita , & Decla- (c) Apoftolicas Traditianes , religuaf- gue Eyifdem Ecclefie Conftitusiones frmifime admitta & amplector. Wid. p. 45t. that ~~~ 22 | Objerudsiens on the Pope's Bull aan! —_— “Cd ) Cone. Tri- dent. Seff. 24: De Reformat. cap. 12- Provift de Benefici- is, &c. Teneantar fi- dei publicam facere profefionemin Rom. Ecclefie Obedientza fe Permanfuros (pone deant ac Furent. p; 432. didtz Edido- nis. And that we may know thatthe Faith they are to profefs and {wear ~to, is the Creed of Pius. V. in the a- fore-named Editi- onof the Council of Trext,at Antverp. 1633. Pim. §. his Creed,and the For- ma JFuramentz Pro- feffionis Fidei, is placed immediate- ly after that 12.cap, Seff. 24. De Refor- _ Mat. pag. 450+ Obferv. 4. (Ce) Jer. 1.10. (£) Petro & Suc- cefforibus, Ecclefi- am, in plenitudine Poteftatis gubernan- dam tradidit. Hune unum fuper Omnes Gentes, dy Omnia Regna —Principem Conftitutt,qui Evel- dat, Deftruat, Viffi- pet, Difperdat, plane cet Ce edificet 5 ut _ gedeles Salvos exhi- beat Salvatori. that new Creed, to the Belief and Profeflion of which they arefworn. Andthe Trevt Council it felf (as well as the Pope inthat Creed ) (4) requires that they make fuch a Profeflion. Whence it evidently follows, that all their Bifhops, all Regulars of what Order foever, who are pro- vided of Monafteries, Religions Houfes, &c. All Canons and Dzgnitarées in their Church, all who have any Gere of Souls, and all who profefs and teachany of the Liberal Arts, ec. ( for all thefe are required to take that Oath ) are {worn to receive, believe, and profefs all the Definitions of the Lateran Council under Leo. X. and the Conjtitution of Pope Boniface. VIII. which denounces Damnation to all thofe who fubmit not to the Pope, and embrace not their Popifh Religion; and hence it further, and as evidently follows, that not only Queen Elizabeth, but all good Pro- teftants then, and ever fince, ( whoneither did, nor with- out great Error and Impicty, could fo fubmit to their Popes, or believe their New Creed } are, by their Papal and uncharitable Divinity, Erernally Damn?d, Sothat it isnot only fome Temporal mifchief or lofs, but the Ererzal Damnation of Body and Soul, which is threatned, and De- clared to be the Effect and Inevitable Confequence of this againft Queen Elizabeth, and fuch other Excommunicati- ons of thofe whom they call Hereticks. : 4. Inthe beginning of this Impious Bull, we are told by the Pope, That our Bleffed Saviour committed the Government of his Church ( with all plenitude and fulnefs of Power ) to Peter and his Succeffors, And that we might know, how great the Power was overall Kings and Kingdoms, he miferably mifapplies a Text in (¢ ) Jeremy, and fays (f) That our bleffed Saviour did Conftitute Peter alone a Prince, over All Nations, and all Kingdoms, to Pull up, and Throw down, to Diffipate and Deftroy, to Plant aad Build ( in Ordine ad Spi- ritualia ) in Order to the Salvation of his Faithful People, fo that (if we may believe this Infallible Expofitor ) the fame Power which God gave feremy over all Nations and King- doms, to pull up and deftroy them, the very fame did our blefled Saviour give to Peter and his Succeflors. Nor is | Pius. ; * ] \ s + again/t Queen Elizabeth 23 > cretalium prafixa. t Pins. V. the only Pope who makes ule of that Text to prove their extravagant Papal Power over Kings: Pope 4- lexander. Ul. having told fome of his Brethren, how the (2) Emperor held his Stirrup when he mounted his Palfrey ; In hisnext Conftitution, ( having faid, -That the Diligence of the Bifhops and Paftors was neceflary to pull up, and cut off Hereticks, and wicked-men in the Church ) he Cites the place of Feremy to prove it; and fays, Thar the Power over Nations and Kingdoms, to pull up, caft down, and deftroy, was given to Jeremy ( h), and In Him, to the Evangelical Prieft, to Peter aud his Succeffors, as he there exprefly ex- plainsit. And Pope Paul. Ill. tells us ; («) That he was Vicar of Chrift, our bleffed Saviour, and plac?d in the Throne of Fultice Above All Kings in the whole World, Ac- cording to the Prophecy of Jeremy ; And then Citesthe words of Jeremy before mention’d. And (toomit others) Pope Boniface, Vill. Cites the fame Text ( though toas little purpofe ) tothe fame end; to prove the (k ) Popes power above Kings, foasto punifhand depofe them. And before him Janocent. II. in his wild and irrational Epiftle to the Emperor of Conftantinople (1), Cites the fame Text of fe- remy, and another ( Gem. 1.16.) more impertinent ( if that be poffible ) to prove the vait Power of Popes above all ( ) Kingsand Emperors. By all which, Papal Bulls and Contftitutions ( as by many others ofthe like nature ) it mayevidently appear, that they challenge a Power to depofe Kings, and that they bring the Text of Feremy as a ground and proof of it. . But although their Popes brag, ‘Thar they have (n) all Laws in the Archives of their own breajts, and that they are Supream and Infallible Judges im all Controverfies of Faith; yet their whole Difcourfe and Deductions from the Text of the Prophet Fervemy, isinconfequent, and indeed ridicu- jor. & Obed. Extrav. Communes. ( g) Cum Afcen- devemus Palfredum noftrum, Fridericus Imp.Stapham tenuite &c.Conftit.8 Alex- and. 3. In Bullario Rom. Tom. i. p. 65. Col. 2. Ch) Deus Fere= miam, (2 in illo E- vangelicdm Sacer dotem inftruxit di- cens; Ecce Conjtitué Te fuper Gentes & Regna, nt Evellas , detruas, difperdaz, ec. que Poteftas imminet in Romane Antiftite, qué a Chrifto, ut fit Capur Ecclefie, accepit. I- bid. Conftit. 9. p. 65 Col. 2. ‘ C1) Eyus Vices gerentes in terris , cr in Sede Jutitie Conflituti, Fuxta Feremie Vaticini- um,cc. fuper Omnes Reges Univerfe Tors re. {0 Bulla Dam- natfonts Hen. 8. da- ta Kom. 1535.& 1938. ; (k ) Spiritualis Potefias terrenam jodicare deber, f bona non fuerit : fic Veriticatur Vatici- nism Ferenie, Con- ftitus Te fuper Gene tes,&c, Caprunam San&am.1. de ma- (1) Cap. Solicit. 6. Extra. De Major. & Obedientia. (m_) Deus Papam Totius Orbis precépuum obtinere voluit Magiftratum. Bonif. 8. in Bulla. 6. De- hous, etalium , (2) Dittum Bonif. 8. Cap. Licet Romanus. De Conftitur. to. 6. Romanus Pontifex} wa Omnia én Scrinio pedlovis fai cenfetur baberes | Obfervations on the Pope's Bull. lous, and no ways concerns either Peter, or any of his pre- tended Succeffors. For, 1. This Power which God gave to Feremy, was Perfonal, to himfelfonly, not hereditary or after his death to he continued to any Succeflor; much lefs to Peter, who came above Six hundred years after. That the Popes of this or former Ages, were Succeflors to Peter, both the Popes themfelves, and Popifh Authors univerfally af- firm-;-but ( as yet ) L have found none ( except the Pope and fome few ofhis Party ) who fay that either Peter, or any Pope , was Succeflor to Feremy. It?s true, Pope A- lexander, II]. (in the Place quoted a little before ) fays; Fhatthat Power over Nations and Kingdoms, to pull np, dif- fipare, and deftroy, &c. was (by God) given to Jeremy, andin Himto Peter. So that (by this wild Suppofiti- on ) Peter fucceeded into that Power, which before him, Jeremy had. But (notwithftanding his Infallibility) this is gratis ditlum without any fhadow or pretence of Rea- ion: For he who fucceeds into a Right which another poffefs’d before him, muft do it either, 1. Per generatio- nem & Fure Sanguinis; asa Son fucceeds his Father, or the next Heir, J jus defuntti: and that Peter, or any Pope did this way fucceed Feremy, as none ( with any reafon ) can, Ifuppofe none willfay. 2. Per Confecrationem @& Fure Ordinis ; {o one Bithop fucceeds another in the fame Bifhoprick. Neither could Peter fucceed Feremy this way 3 ’ for Jeremy was never Bifhop of Rome, or any other place, and then cis impoflible that they fhould fucceed him ina Place he never had, and be Succeflor to one who never . was their Predeceffor. 3. A man may be faid to fuc- ceed another, who has anew Commiflion given him, to Execute an Office, which ( though intermitted ) fome had long before him. So fuppofe the King fhould give one a Commiffion to be High Conftable of Exgland, af- ter the Place had been long void ; he who had fuch Com-. miflion, may be faid to fucceed him, who had that Office laft, though One or Two hundred years before. Now if the Pope ( or any for him ) can fhew, that aia aviour 2 Sle et. ee ee Up bel ts ee a lle! Sots _ ite, ee wm - as i ey ae Phiet i , againft Queen Elizabeth. a5. Saviour gave Peter the fame Commiffion , which God gave Jeremy, and fethimorer Nations and Kingdoms , topullup, diffipate, end deftroy, oc. (as Pope Pins. V. exprefly fays (0) hedid, inthis His imp‘ous Bull againtft Q, Elizabeth ) then will Confefs, that in this Senfe Pe- ter may be called Feremy’s Succellor. But that our blef- {ed Saviour gave Peter any fuch Commiflion ( though the Pope fay it ) is abfolutely untrue, not only without any foundation or ground of Reafon for it inScripture, ( and nothing elfe can prove it ) but point blank againft it. -As our Saviors Kingdom was not of this World, no Temporal Power or Dominion; fo he neither exercis’d any fuch Power himfelf, nor gave Peter or his Apolties, ¢ who, all of them had Equal Power with Peter ) any fuch (p ) Temporal Power over Nations and Kingdoms, to pull up, de- (troy, and diffipare, cc. All the Power they had was Spi- ritual; they could punifh no man (Cunlefs miraculoufly , which the Pope pretends not to) iz his perfon, by lofs of Life, or Liberty ( by Imprifonment ) nor in his purfe, by impofing and exacting Pecuniary Mulcts ; as has been, and might be further demonttrated, were it now my bu- finefs: only ( by the way )I crave leave to obferve, That Pope Piusin this Bull, makes that Commiflion, which - he fays, our blefled Saviour gave Peter, far larger than that which God gave Jeremy. For he tellsus, 1. That our bleffed Saviour did (q ) Conftiture Peter a Prince , to pull up, and defiroy, @c. but thereisno fuch thing in Fe- remy’s Commiflion. 2. That Peter was Conftituted a Prince over (r) Al Nations, and All Kingdoms ; but Feremy bad not fuch Univerfal Power, as is evident from the ({) Text. Butto makethis further appear, itis to be Confidei 7d, ( © ) Regnans ix Excelfis (1. e. Cbri« fas) Ecclefiam oli Petro & Succeffori- bus tradidit Guber- nandam And then it immediately fol- lows Hunt u- num ( Petrum fcilie cet /uper Omnes Gen= t 7s,» Omnéa Regna Principem Con(titue it, qnievellat, deo firnat, difipat, dij~ perdat, plantet, cc. Bulla diGain Prin- cipio. Cp ) Pope Nicol. 1. (and he as Infal- lible as any of his Succeffors tells ns That Eccles non habet Gladimn nifé Spiritualem,qui non occidit , fed vivifi- cat. Lu tprandusin vita,Nicol. 1. Cap. 107. But he lived | above. 800, years fince , and though Gratian records it for Law ( Can. in- ter hac.6, Cauf22. Queft. 2.) yet the Cafe is alter’d fince and the Glofs up- on that Canon({ver- bo Gladium) tells us, that the mean- 2. That Feremy wasa Prieft, and aProphet; fo that if Pe- ing is;that thePope | | has not the Tem- poral Sword, Quoad Executionem only : the Power of the Temporal Sword belongs to the Emperor, but the Pope makes him En peror, and gives him that Power: and this he proves out of a Decree of Pope Innocent. 3. Cap. Venerabil. 34. Extra. De Ele&. & Electi Pote- ftate. (4) Hancunam ( Petrum feilicet ) Principem Conflituit, Gc. Lid. in di&ta Bulla. Cx) Super Omnes Gentes, & Omnia Regna. ibid. (f) Jer. i. 10. 7 G ter ae, — . 26 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull Hai: (t ) Vide Corn: A Lapide in Prin. Argument. Com- ment. fui in Jere- miam. ( #) For proof of this, (ee theQuo- tations before Ob- ferv. 2. (x) Pope Ho- norius, & Pope Vi- gilius. auciently condemned for He- reticks in General Councils; and of Jater times,the Ge- neral Councils of Pifa, Conflance,and Bafil condemned others. — ey ter and his Succeffors fucceeded him, it muft be in one of thofe two Capacities. But, 1. ’Tis certain, that nei- ther Peter, nor any Chriftian Bifhop did, or could fuc- ceed him, asa Prieft ; he being a Prieft of Azrox?s Or- der, which abfolutely ceafed at our Saviour’s death. 2. Nordid he fucceed Feremy as to his Prophetical Office. r. Becaufe that was, Extraordinary , Temporary, and Expired with his Perfon. The Prophetical Office was not Hereditary or Succeflive. ’Tis true, fome Prophets preceded in time, and fome afterwards followed: So (t+) Feremy was after Zfazah about One hundred fixty five years; Ezekéel after him Four and thirty years, Daziel after him Twenty years. Buteach Prophet hada new Call and Commiflion, and that for particular and diffe- rent purpofes, as isevident by the Prophefies themlelves, 2. Feremy and thofe Prophets were Otowvevsos, Divinely Infpired, and that to an Infallibility, and their Prophe- cies (as Divine, and the Word of God ) referr’d into the Sacred Canon of Scripture ; now although Peter, (not by Succeffion from Feremy, but byanew Call and Com- miffion from our blefled Saviour) was ©%oxveusos, and had fuch an Affiftance of the Holy Spirit, as made him Infallible, and his Doctrine Divine Truth; yet fuch af- fiftance being perfonal in him, (as it was in all Prophets before him ) his Succeflors cannot, without Impudence and Impiety pretend toit, though fome of the (u) Ca- nonifts, the Fefuits, and Papal Parafites, would have us believe ( what the ( « .) World knows to be falfe ) thar they are Infallible. . Butthat Imay (in fhort ) come to the main fcope and hinge of the Queftion; the truth is Evident, Tharall thefe Popes in the Expofition and Application of this Text in Jeremy, (notwithftanding their pretended Su- premacy and Infallibility ) are miferably miftaken, and put afenfe uponit, which, before them, never any Fa- ther or Ancient Author did; no nor their own Learned Writers of later times,even when Popery moft prevail’d; afenfe (if 1 may call it fo ) inconfiftent with the true and ae e ata - 4 again|t Queen Elizabeth. ag and certain meaning of Feremy. For when cis in that Text, I have fer thee over the Nations and K ingdoms, to pulldown, aiffipate, deftroy, plant, aud build ; That which (y) Alexander. \\I. (and other Popes after him ) Cite this Text for, is, to infera Power in Jeremy, ( and from him, inthem) fofar, to pull down, diffipate, and de- {troy, asto Depofe Kings and Emperors, and Abjfolve their Subjetts from all Oaths of Allegiance: Though the Text mean nothing lefs; nor can any fuch Impious Conclufion, by any (fave poflibly Popifh ) Logick, be deduced from it. For whenthe (<) Text fays, J have fet thee over the Nations, to pull down, and deftroy, &c. 1. The meaning isnot, that feremy (by this Commiflion ) had Power and Jurifdiction, ( per modum Imperantis )as a Prince and Su- perior, to pulldown and deftroy any man, much lefs Kings and Emperors, nay fo far was he from that, that he quiet- ly and patiently {ubmitted to the Authority and Com- mands of Injuft and Impious Superiors, ( as is evident in his Prophecy) and was feveral times ( 4 ) Imprifon?d and caft isto Dungeons, with great danger of his Life , at Ferufalem; and when carried Captive into Egypr,by fome Rebellious Jews, who would not obey the Word of God by him, he was more miferably ufed, and at laft,by them ~ (6) murder’d and martyr’d. So far was Feremy ( after God had given him that ( ¢ ) Commiflion ) from pulling down, or deftroying any man, that ( onthe contrary ) ~ he patiently fubmitted to his Superiors, and was by them "(though moft unjuftly ) punifhed, puli’d down, and at laff deftroy’d. 2. Butthe meaning of that Text evi- dently is, I have fet thee over Nations and Kingdoms, to pull down, deftroy, and diffipate, &c. Per modum Prophe- tants, G Quid Fudicio Fufto fatturus effer Deus, pradicen- tis; Asa Prophet, to foretell what God would do; that ( unlefsthey repented) he would pull down, deftroy, and diflipate thofe Nations and Kingdoms, againft which { by God’s exprefs Command ) he Prophefied. Feremy had no Commiffion, no Power or Authority to pull down, or deftroy any one fingle Perfon, much lefs Kings G2 and ( y) Vide Con- ftirut. 9. Alexand. 3-In Bullario Rom. Tom.1. p. 65, Col. 2. (x) Jer.t. ro. (4 ) He is beaten by Pafbsr. Jer. 20, 1. Apprehended 8 Arraigned. Jer.26. 8. Imprifon’d by Zedekiah.Chap.32. g. and beaten and imprifon’d by the Princes. Jer.37.15. by them put into a Dungeon. Jer.38.6 (b) A [uis Cone civibus in Tapbnis eAgypti, Lapidibus. Obrutus, Martyr oce cubuit. Ita Hiero- nymus, Tertul.Do- roth. Epiphan. Tfi- odor. &c. Corn. A. Lapide Comment, in Jerem. in Argu- mento, | ( ¢) The Com- miffion was given him, when he was a Child. Jer. 1, 6.7. when he was 14.0r 15. years old. So Corn. A Lapidein Prin. Argumenti Commentartis fuis in feremiam pra- fixi. aa 28 Ob fervations on the Pope’s Bull (d ) Gen.41.13. { ¢ itis a memo- rable Story weare told to this pure pote; not by any Lutheran, buta Learned $0°bon Do- Gor,an ear-witnefs of it, whofays, That when Pope Jino- cent X. was prefied to Determine the Controverfie be- tween the Jefuirs and 7anfenifts, He ( who was bred a Lawyer )told them that he was No Di- vine, that Divinity was not His Profef- fion, nor bad he ftu- died Divinity.Mon- fieur de St. Amour in his Jéurnal Part. 3. Cap, 12. & p. 520. (f) Vide Jer. 18. 7 8.Sc. Jer.25.1 5. 16.17. &ce & Cap. 42. 10. & 45+ 4e Ce) Conftitué Te ut Evehas, ie. at In- bermineris Aoftibus mMels, (Quos Regioni= bus (uz Plantavi) Mé. inde per Bella, CNC evisl{inr ie ni fe vefipuertnt. A Lapl- de.in jer. 1. Jo, ’ Ch}ita Dews 1 lan- tat & Evellit Gens tes : mam Feremias retpfa nec plantavit mec Evulit Gentes. Ergo, ut Evellas co» <TD and Emperors; nerdidhe ever do, or attempt any fuch: thing ; he only Prophecied, and premonifh’d them from God, that Deitru‘tion would come upon them for their — fins, but it was God only whw could and did execute that Sentence, and whenthey repented not, deftroyed them. SoinScripture, the Prophet is faid to do thar, which he foretells will be done. Jo/eph in Prifon, tells Pharach’s Butler and Baker, That within rbree days the one fhould be reflored to hws Place, and the other hanged, This coming to pafs (not byany Power of Yofep, for he was a Prifoner ) yet the (4) Text fays, That He re- flored the one, and that He hang?d the other, And this- thofe Popes, who fo often urge this Text of Jeremy 5 might have eafily and certainly known, had they ftudied © Scripture and Divinity as muchas Human Policy ( astco (¢) many of them donot .) For what I have faid is ex- prefly faid in the very Text of Feremy’s Prophecies as he who compares and confiders ( f ) two or three Chap- tersinit, may evidently fee. Surelam, (to fay nothing of the Fathers and Ancient Writers ofthe Chureh i what I have faid of the true meaning of this place in Feremy> is acknowledg7d even by the Jefuits arid Canonifts ( the greateft Flatterers of the Pope, and Sticklers for his pre tended Supremacy ) who Expound the Text as I have done done. I fhall inftance in One or Two. . Corn: A, Lapide (a Noted and Learned Jefuit) Expound- ing this Place of Jeremy, fays thus (g ) Ihave fet thee over the Nations, that thou fhould pull up: That is, ( faith he) that thou fhouldf? Threaten my Enemies, that unle|s they repent, Iwill pull them out of the Countries, where I have placed them. Andthenhe tellsus truly, that this is the: Opinion of Hierome, Theodoret, Rabanus, Vatablus, Ly~ ranus, Dton-Carthufianus, andothers. And then headds €h ) That ut is God ( not Feremy ) who Pulls Up 5 and Plants the Nations. So that when tis faid I have fer thee To pull up, and plant the Nations: itis all Plantes Idein eff quod, ut has Gentes evellendas,, illas plantandas. A Deo. mineris ac Predicess dem lLbidem.. ene againft ee Bisabeil: ) 29 one asif he had {aid I have fer thee to Threaten and Preach that God would Pull up and Plant thofe Nations, This _ js that we fay and prove to be the meaning of that Text in Jeremy, and the Jefuit fully Confents, and Acknow- ledges it to be true. _ Pope Innocont. Mit. in his (# ) Epiftle to the Emperor of Conftantinople, (amongit feveral other places of Scrip- ..ture) brings this Text of Feremy, to prove the Prieft ( ¢- {pecially Perer’s Succeflor the Pope ) to be ( k ) Superior to all Kings: and yet Bernardus de Botono (the ( l) Author of the Glofs there ) when he comes to Explain that Text I have fer thee over the Nations, to pull up, and plant ; he has nothing of Depofing and fetting up Kings: but Conceives the mean ngto be —— That Feremy was fet c- ver (m ) Nations, To pull up Vices, and plant Virtues, He truly Conceives that Feremy was not Conftituted 2 Prince, with Dominion and Jurifdiction over Kings and Emps- rors; to fet them up, or pull themdown, at his: plea- fure; ( to which purpofe many of the Popes produce it) but 4 Prophet, to foretell them, what God would do. That is, He would plant them, if they were Penitent; if not, pull down and deftroy them. So the Author of the Glofs; and they tell us,. that he (# ) writ moft Learn- ed Gloffes: upon the Decretals of Gregory..1X. which ( 0) afterwards had the Approbation of Pope Gregory. XIII. Be it concluded then,. that Pzus. V-and'thofe other Popes before mention’d ( notwithftanding their Infallibility ). have miferably miftaken the true meaning of this place of Feremy. And indeed he who reads and ferioufly Con- fiders the feveral Places of Scripture, which the Popes of the laft 600..years have explained in their Bulls and Decretals, and produc’d as: proofs of their extravagant and ufurp’d Supremacy 3 [fay, he will have juft reafon to believe, that Popes are not the beft Expofitors of Scripture. For Inftance; (to omit others )1 hall refer the Reader to thofe (p)8. or 9. Places, which Pope Innocent, Ul, and Boniface. Vill. have Cited,. and’ Ex- plain’d, intwo of their Conftitutions, both Extantin their (i )Cap. Solirz.. 6. Extra de Major.. & Obedientia. (ky Oftendit Sas Cerdotium preemine=- re Regibus,diito Fe= remie Gloffaad di- ctum Cap. verbo. Solite Benignitatie- (1) Vide Corpus JurisCan.cum Glof— fis; Paris. 3612 In Nota , Titulum..- Tom. 2.Immediaté’ (feu pagina proxi- m2) fequente. ‘(m) Conftitui 72, ut Evellas | Vitia- fetlécet. & plantes} Virtutes. Glofla ad dictum, Cap. Soli-- tz.verbo, Confti-- tui Te, &c. ‘(D.) Gloffas Ery- ditifimas Edidit. Vid.didtam Notam: In Prin. Tom, 25- Juris Can. Paris. 1612. ' (0) Vid. Bullam: Greg..13-Corp.Ju-- ris Can. prafixams. Cp) 1. Peter. 2.- 13.14. Jer. 1. to. Gen. 1. 16:17. &c.- Joh.21. 16. Matths _ 16.18.19, Luc.22. 38. Rom. 13. 1. 2: Gen. 1, 1. 1. Cor.- 2. 15% a 30 Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull —* (4) That of In- nocent.3. Cap, Soli- te.6.Extra de Ma- jorit. & Obed. And that of Boniface. 8. Cap. Unam San- étam.1.Eodem Tit. .Extray. Commun, Obferv. §. Cr) Chriftus Et- tlefiam <Apoftolorum Frincips tradidit gubernandam 5 & dune ynum Super Om- nes Gentes Omnia Regna Principem Oonftitut. Dicte Bul'z principio. (Cs) Matth.ro.2. (t ) Petrus Apo- flolorum Primus @& erimas, poterat A- poftolts preecipere,e fiin fide aut mori- bus ervarent, Corri- gere,@c. Corn. A Lapide in Matth. 10. 2. (a) Ceteri Evan- gclifte Mattheum preponunt Thome , Mattheus .Thomam Prefert. Paulus ad Galat.2.9. Facobum primo loco recenfet, ante Petrum & Fo- bannem. Exiftimat. Hieronymus ( {fo E- rafmus {ays ) Ejus effe, Ordinem Apo- ftolorum distribue- re, Qui tiles Blegit : their ( ¢) Canon Law, in the places before Cited, where the Expofitions and Applications of thofe places, by thofe Popes, are not only evidently Erroneous, but (be- ing repugnant to all good Senfe and Reafon ) exceed- ingly rediculous: fuch as may give their Adverfaries reafon to believe that the Authorsof fuch wild Interpre- tations, arerather Fools than Infallible. : 5. Pope Pius. V. Here in the beginning of this his Bull, calls (r ) Peter ( as other Popes and their Parafites ufually do) Brince of the Apojiles; and tells us, that our bleffed Savs- our did Jer and conftitute him a Prince over all Nations and Kingdoms. From whence, they (Illogically and without any fhadow of Juft Confequence ) would Conclude, Peter?s Supremacy, hisDominion and Authority even over all the Apoftles. For although Peter in the Gofpel ( when the Names of the Twelve Apofties are numbred ) is called (s) ao1@, Primus, and amongft Latin Authors anciently ( Princeps Apoftolorum ) The Prince of the Apoftles ; yet that (¢) Papal Supremacy, which the Popes and their Party generally attribute to him, that they Cas his Succeffors ) might have it themfelves, cannot thence be concluded. So (#4) Erafmus tells us, ( out of St. Héerome ) That the Apo- files in the other Evangelifts, are not reckon?d in the Order they are in Matthew ; left any man fhould thizk, that Peter were firft of all the Apoftles, becaufe he is reckon?d in the firft Place, Matthew reckoas Thomas before himfelf, but Mark after him: Matthew reckons Andrew before James and John, but Mark after them, So St. Paul reckons James before Peter and John, though Matthew puts Peter firft. And Erajfmus there fays further, that Aierome intimates, That the Apoftles were alt ( as to their Apoftolick Office ) Equal. That which makes mebelieve, that what Era/mus Obferves out of Hierome, is true, isthis; The Spanifh Inquifitors have damn?dit, and Cin their Judex (x) Expurgatorius) commanded it to be snnuens, Authoritatem Apoftolis Omnibus Parem fuiffe, quod ad Apoftolict munevis funttionem atsinet. Erafmus in Locuat. 1667. p. 289, Col. 1. (*) Index Librorum Prohib, & Expurg. Madriti. | | blotted againft Queen Elizabeth 31 plotted out. But Erafmus adds further, —— ( y ) That it cannot Logically and firmly be concluded, from the order wherein the Apoftles ave number?d, which of them is to be preferr'd be- fore the reft, becaufe where many are number?d, there is a necef- fity we begin with fome one, and *ris not material which we begin with, And Thisthe Inauifitorslet pafs, without a Delea- tur; they donotcondemn it tobe blotted out, and fo feem to approve it, otherwife it had not pafs’7d, fothat ( even by our Adverfaries confent )all that can berationally In- : ferr’d, fromthat Text, where in numbering the Apoftles, Peter is called wea]@, firft, is only (2) a Primacy of Or- der, ( which we willingly grant ) but no Primacy ( much lefs aSupremacy ) of Authority, Dominion, and Jurifdi- ction over the ref of the Apoftles; which the Pope and his Party defire, and we jultly deny. 2. And as wal@ or Primus; {0 Princeps, or Prince (amongft the beft Latin Authors) ufvally fignifies Order Only, orfome Excellent Quality in thofe whoare call’d Principes, without any ( 4 ) Authority or Furifdittion over thofe in relation to whom they are fo call’d. Andthat the Reft of the Apoftles were call’d Principes as well as Peter, 1 have Authentick warrant even the Roman Breviary, reftored according to the Decree of the Council of Trent, publifh?d by Péus. V. ( The very Pope who publifh’d this Impious Bull againft Queen Eliza- beth) and then Revifed by the Authority of Clement. VIII and Urban, Vill. and Printed at Aztverp. 1660. In this Breviary, we have this (6) Hymn, in the Office for the Feaft of St. Peter and Paul; Ecclefiarum Principes, Belli Triumphales Duces, Celeftis Aula Milites, Et vera Mundi Lumina, &c. Now in this Hymn Perer and Paul too, are call’d Ecclefia- rum Principes, Princes of the Churches , For being a Hymn _ for the Feaft of thofe two Apoftles; Ecclefiaram Principes _ cannot relate to lefs than two; nor Properly to atte om then (CY) Certeex Or- dine recenfionis, non Efficacitér Colligi- tur ov Cui [it prae- ferendus 5 fiquidem ubi multi numeran~ tur, aliquts primus fit opportet.Erafmus ibidem, in Matth. TO. 2. (x) So the word rpaT@ ulually fig- nifies; Ex(ebius calls Simon Magusyrpa- 1@- wdons aivere ws Apynyos. pri- mis Dux Harefeos , {cilicet Primus Or= dine Temporis, non Jwisdittionis. Bu. feb.Hift. Lib.2.Cap. ¥3-P51. Edit. Va~ lefit. (a) So Homer & Virgil are gail'd Poetarum Principes. So in Tully, Patrone’ Principes, Eminent Advocates. So Pla- to & Ariftotle, Phi lofopkorum Princi» pes,and yet no Dow minion or Jurifdi- étion meant in thefe Expreffions. ( 6) Dicti Brevi- ari) Part. zftiva,ad Diem. 29. Juni), ia Fefto $s. Apafto- lorum Petri & Pau- Ii. p. 476. & in Fe- fto $.Andtez.Nov> 30. Ibidem pag, 780% * “s 32 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull (c) Vide ‘Com- “mune Santorum in Calce Partis Afti- vex, didi Breviarij, & in Communi A- poftolorum & E. vangeliftarum.pag. he Cd) Ad matuti- Hum, Invitatorium. Regem Apsitolorum Dominum,Venéte a- doremus. (-¢ ) Vide Card. Cufan Opera. p. 836. & Gratin. Cauf. 2. Quaft. 7. Can. Eeati. 37. & Thecdoret in Gal. 2-p.27c.where #e- ter and Paul are call'd perydaor x pat Amsodat- & in 2. Cor. 11. 6. P-251-F rincipes A- poftolorum alij pre- ter Petrum.Vid.Bel- larmin. de Rom. Pontf. |. 1 c.42.p. B61. Poteftas cla- vinm tranfivit ad alios Apoftolos, ¢ 4d Omuts Ecclefice Principes,&c. Thefe are the words of Pope Leo (and he Infallible ) ‘cited there by Bellarmine. (£) Hoc erant ut- tque & Cateri Apo- ftoli Quod fait Pe- trus, Pari Confortio prediti & Honoris & Poteftatis. Cyprian de Unitate Ecclefia. p. 208. Edit. Rigaltij. them twoin that Place. Though elfewhere it. (-¢ ) relates to all the Apoftles; as in the Place cited in the Margent 5 when after the Invitatory, (as they call it ) (a) Come let us adorethe Lord, King of the Apoftles , it follows thus; Eterna Chrifti munera, Apoftvlorum Gloria, Palmos & Fymnos debitos, Letis canamus mentibus. Ecclefiarum (e) Principes, Beli Triumphales Duces, Calefiis Aula Milites, Et vera Mundi Lumina, &c. So that if we may believe their own Authentick Breviary, Publifh’d and Carefully Revifed by thefe Popes, according to the Decree of the Trent Council; All the other Apo- ftles (under our blefled Saviour, and by his Authority ) were Princes of the Chriftian Church as well as (f) Peter, Now I defire to know, how thefe things will Confift ? (g) Pius. V. in this Bull againft Queen Elizabeth, fays, That our bliffed Saviour Committed the Government of his Church to One Only, to Peter, and Conftituted him Only a Prince over all Nations and Kingdoms, ( fo he in his Bull ) and yet the fame Pope, in this Roman Breviary, (for it was Approved and Publifhed by him) and the Hymn here cited, fays, That all the Apoftles were Ecclefiarnm Principes ; and if fo,then Peter was not the Only Prince to whom the Government of the Church was Committed; no, the Commiffion of every Apoftle ( given by our blefled Saviour ) was as unli- mited and as large as Perers. This will appear in all the Particulars of it, equally given to all, as they areexprefly fet down in Scripture, from whence alone, we can furely know, what their Authority and Commiion was. Our blefled Saviour tells them, andus, (bh) 1, As my Fa- Cg ) Ecclefiam{nam unk Soli, Petro Comuifit gubernandam, ¢ hunt num Super Omnes Gentes & Regna Principess Confti- guit. Bulla dicta in Principio. ( b) Joh. 20,24. , ther againft Queen Elizabeth. 33 a her Jent me, fofend Iyou. There we havethe Author and Authority of their Commiffion. The fame blefled Saviour of the World fends themall. 2.. Then he breath’d upon . them, and faid, (2) Receive yerhe Holy Ghoft. There we have the Principle inabling them to difcharge that great Of- fice and Truft repofedin them; It was that Holy Spirit, which gave them,. ©. Infallibility intheir Dotlrine. 2. Power to work, Miracles for (k) Confirmation of it. 3. Then he adds, (/) whofe fins ye retain, they are retained, c,.Here we have the great Spiritual Power given them for the calling and governing the Church, which iselfewhere called, ( ) The Power of the Keys; which confifts in binding and loofing, retaining and remitting fins. blefled Saviour in the Place laft cited, and is (by our.Ad- _ yerfaries ) (2) confefs’d. So that cis evident that the Power of the Keys, the Power of binding and loofing, of retaining and remitting fins,. is equally given to alkthe A- poftles, toeveryone as wellas Peter. 4.. He Aflignsthem their Place and Province, where, and the way how they were to Exercife their. Apoftolical Power —(0) Go and Teach All Nations, baptizing them, and teaching them to ob- ferve all things, whatfoever I have Commanded you. Their Diocefe. was the World —( p).Go ye into All the World, and preach: the Gofpel to every Creature (every man. ).. And the adminiftring the Sacraments, and teaching.men to be- lieve and obferve the.whole Gofpel, was the bufinefS they were to do in that their:Diocefe. 5, And'to ixconrage them to this great and difficult Work,. he gracioufly pro- mifes -his:Prefence and Divine Affiftance, Lo, Iam (q) with you. Always, evento the End.of the World, Thefe are the Powers and Promifes given tothe Apoftles, and (which to me feems Evident) without difference or diftinétion, Equally toall ; to Simon the Cannite, (for Cr) foit fhould be writ) as well, and as much as to Simon Pe ter. Ifany think otherwife, if he can, and will (by any _ Cogent Reafon ) make it appear either, 1. That the fore- ' going Powers and Promifes were not Equally given to all 2..Or. that fome other Power -or Promife the Apoftles. j H was For. fo tis Explain’d by our: ¢i) Ibidem. ver. 225 (2) Mark.16.2% (/) Ibid. verf. 23s: (m) Matths16.19.° (n) Minijftri Ec- clefie ad Remmiffio-- nem peccati,Per Vir- tutem Clavinm Mi- nifterialiter operan= - tur. Lyran..in-Joh. 20. 23. Wid, Tirt- pum, Menochium, . &c.in Matth. 16. - 19+: ¢.0) Matth. 28. -- FQ. 20. ( p) Mark.16.1,. (7) Matth. 28.-. 20. (1) Simon, who.’ Matth.10.4. is calle ed Simon the Cana-- nite,in the Syriack Verfion there, and Luk. 6.1. iscall’d’. Simon» Cyaams .» which is the Greek word for Cannéta, . or.Cinneus.For the Syriack P88J>- Canna fignifies 2,j-- Aomes Vid. Ang. Caminium, in Ex- plicat. locorum, Ne. Tefl. p. $1. Oe 34 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull Objettio. (5) Vide Confii- tut. Bonif. 8. Cap. unam Sandctam. 1. De Majorit. & O- bed.Extrav. Com- munes.& Innocent. 3.Cap. Solicitz. 6. Extra. de Major. & Obedientia. (t) Math, 16. 18. I 9» (u) Promittit hic Chriftus Petro, quod ipfe & Succeffor E- qus Omnis, fit Eccle- fia SupremumCaput, Princeps G Monar= cha. Jac. Tirinus in Matth.16.18.109. (xX) Quamvis mor- ‘Talis homo (it Petrus Ejufque Sueceffor , tamen Celefti predi- ditus Poteftate, e& quod tile é Cathedra decreverit , baben-— dum eft tanquam ab Ipfo Deo Decretum. was (in Scripture ) given peculiarly to Peter, whereby he had an Authority and Dominion over the other Apoftles and the whole Church, to make 4im Only a Prince over all Nations and Kingdoms, (as Pope Pim. V. inthis his wild Bull confidently affirms } I fay, he whocan and will make © both or either of thefe appear, fhall have my hearty thanks forthe Difcovery, and I hall ( for the fucure ) have a bet- ter Opinion of Peter?s Supremacy , which (at prefent) I take to be a groundlefs Error, without any proof or pro- bability. » I know that the Popes in their (s ) Conftitutions, and their Party ufually urge that place in ( ¢ ) A4atthew to prove Peter’s ( and thence their own ) vaft and Monarchical Su- premacy over the whole Church, ( even the Apoftles them- felves not excepted) the words T hefe Thou art Pe- ter, and upon This Rock, Iwill build my Chnrch_—~And I give untothee , The Keys of the Kingdomof Heaven. From this Place, ( moft irrationally, and without any Senfe or Confequence) they infer, That (u) Peter, and every Suc- ceffor of his, was Conftituted Supream Head, Prince and Mo- narch of the Univerfal Church. Sothat what Peter or his( x) Succeffor fhall (& Cathedra ) Determine and Decree, is to be received, asif God himfelf had decreedit. So Tirinms, and their Canon Law, in their moft Correct Editions. Though this be Erroneous, and evidently Impious, yet Tirinws, Gratian, and their Canonifts are not fingular in this point, another Learned Jefuit ( in his Commentary onthis Place ) tells us, That when our blefled Saviour fays, On this Rock will I build my Church, he peaks of (y ) Peter, as theFunda- | mental Rock, on which the Church wbhult. And headds— (x) That though our blefJed Saviour was chiefly that Fundamen- tal Rock, yet Peter and the Popes of Rome Jucceeded him, as his Vicars, with Supream Power, Gc. This place, they con- Idem Ibidem, ad verf. 19. Gratian. Can. 2. Sic Omnes. dift.19. (y ). De Petro ut Fundamentali Petra loquitur Chriftus.Joh. Stephan. Menochius in Matth, 16.18. (Z ) Chriftus eft Fundamen- talis Petra Precipue, fed ei Succefferunt Petrus e& reliqui fummi Fontifices, ut Ejus Vicarié Cum Summa Poteflate: Mewochius ibid. p. 41. Col. 2. vid. Gratian. Can. In nono. Dift. 25, _ Ceive, enough to a bare Affertion. -.€) Foan certainly was. p. 807. ad Annum, gor. againft Brioni asabicale 4 ceive, concerns no Apoftle but Peter, and proves his, and his Succeflors Supremacy. Tothis, Ifay, 1. That all they fay, inthis particular, js gratis diétwm for they only fay it, without any pretence of proof. If we will take their bare word, we may, o- therwife we may chufe;, for they bring no proof to prove their Expofition of this Text, fuch as might conrmand and neceflitate our Affent. Andthen a bare denial, is Anfwer For ( as St. Hierome {ays in the like cafe ) an unproved Polition, eadem facilitate rejici- tur, qua Affirmatur. 2. Whenthey fay, our bleffed Saviour was a chief Fundamental Rock,on which the Church was built, and that St. Peter and the Popes fucceeded him, with Supream Power. They confequently muft fay Two things; 1, That our bleffed Saviour left his tlaceand Office of being the Fundamental Rock, to Peter, when he left this World. For ifhe kept it, and ftilldokeepit, neither the Pope nor Peter could be his Succeflors. Noman can be Succeflor and fucceed into a Place till his Predeceflor leave it. Linus neither did, nor could fucceed Perer in the Bifhoprick of Rome, whilft Peter liv?d, and poflefs’d it himfelf ; fo that by this Erroneous and Impious Do@Grine, they have dif plac’d our blefled Saviour from being the Fundamental Rock, on which the Church is built, and inftead of him, have plac?d Peter firft, and then particular Popes fuccef- fively.. And then let the World judze, in what a mik- rable Condition the Church of Chrift muft be. 1. When the Fundamental Rock on which it was built, was an( 4.) Idolater, as AMarcellinus was. 2. Oran Heretick, as (6) Liberius, (¢ ) Honorius, (a) Vigilius, @c. were, 3. Or an Impudent whorilh Woman, as Fohannes Anglicus, or Pope 4. Or when many Popes toge- ther, no lefs than Fifty (by the Confeffion of their own Learned men ) were (f) Apoftaticc pores quam Apoftolici. Refponfio.. ¥. (a) Marcellinus Pontifex ad Sacrifi- cia Gentinum duns, Deos alienos Adora- vit.’ Jat.in vit.Mar- cel. (0) Cum Arianis fentiebat, rc. Plat. in vit. Liber. (c) Honorius Sy- nod. 6. damnatur. A&. 18. vid. The- oph.Chronagraph. Pp. 299. Zor. Ana- ftaf. Biblioth.in vi- tis Pontif.p, 54. Francif. Combefis in Au€tario Bibli- orh.Greec, Patrum. Tom.2.p.66,Syne- | dus Niceaa.2.apud Joverium. Part. 1. p-106.Col 2, (d) Vid. Synod. 5-& Rich. Crakan- thorp. in Vigilio Dormitante. Ed. Richerium in Hift. Concil Generalium p. 302. (2) Vid. Plat. in vita Johan. 8. & Notas Car. Annibalis Fabroti , ad vitas Pont. Anaft. p.290, ( f}) ¥id. Genebrardi Chronol, circa fnitium feculi. ro. 1. 4. H 2 j. Or 36 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull ee (£) Tune faediffi- “gna Rom.Ecclefi a fa- cées, cum Rome Do- ~minarent uw fordidif= fina Mevetvices,qua- rum arbitrio, Intru- derentur in Sedem ‘Petri ecarum Amafij Pfeudopontificessque non nifi ad fignane datempora,in Cata- logo Rom. Pontif. feriptis Quis enima feortis intrufos fine lege,legitimos dicere poffit Romanos fuiffe Pontifices? Baroni- us Annal.Tom.1o. cad An. 912.§. 14- p:663.vid.eundem ad An.897.§. 8. p. -624- &ad An.925. §.10. p.688. Edit. Annal. Antverp. 1618. vid. loca & hic adde. (b) Poft Clem.4. ewacat Sedes.Ann.3.- m. 2. dies.10. Poft Nicolaum.3. vacat. ‘Sedes. Ann.3. Poft Clement. 5 vacat Sedes. Ann, 2.m.3. d.17.Platina in E- dus vita. 3. Or when the Popes were fuch:(g) Monftrous Villains, as were put into, and out of St. Peter's Chair by Impudent Whores ,.made Popes by Violence and Simony , fuch ( as even in Baronius his Fudgment ) none fhould, or daredcall true Popes, whofe names were recorded only to fil up the Caalogues of the Roman Bifhops. -6. Orin the Vacancies, when for (+b) two or three years, ‘and (if fome (+) Writers fay true )fome- ~~ time for Eight years, there was no Popeatall, and fo ( by this Doétrine ) the Church had no Fundamental Rock at all, for feveral years together, ~7. Laftly, Or whenthey had for near (k) Fifty yearstogether, nyo or three Popes at the fame time; when it was Impoflible they fhould be all Legiti- mate, and true Succeflors of St. Peter, and ( what they pretend -to ) Vicars of Chrift our blefled Saviour; and which, or whether any of them, were fuch indeed, none did, or could know: Nay, ’ciscertain, (and muft by out Adverfaries be confefs’d, unlefs they will deny their own received Principles ) that fometimes, all of the Pretenders were Impious Ufurpers of the Papal Chair, without any - Jult Right or Title to it. Then the firlt Gouncilof (7) — Pifa met (andit was a General One, confifting ofabove. -600.'( m) Fathers) there were Two Popes in being (fuch asthey were ) Gregory. XII. and Benedit?, X11. who were both (#) Damn7d and Depofed, as Perjur’d Perfons, Schij- maticks, and Hereticks, @c. and that by an unanimous Con- fent and Decree of that Great Council. At the Council at Conftance ( four or five (0) yearsafter ) there were three Popes; the two beforenamed, Gregory and Beneditt, (who would not fit down, though damn’dat Pifa, and Fohn. XXII. For the two former, what Villains they were, the Council of Pifzhas toldus. For Fohv. XXIII. the Council of Con- “~ (é) Sunt qui {cribunt, -poft mortem Nicolai.1.Sedem vacafle Ann.8. menf.7. d. 9. Platina in Calce vite Nicolai. 1. Ck) Yo that great Schifm, commonly reckon’d for the 27. Schifm in ‘their Church; which begun about the year 1378. “rbaaus. 6. being Pope at Rome,and Clem. 9, cat Avignion. (1) AnnoDom. 1409. or as others. 1410. (m) Longus A Coriolano, Summa Con. p. 857. Col. 2. (2) In maxima Prelatorum Frequentia, utérque Pontifee ab dis damnatus eg, utroque tanquam Perjuro, Schifmatico, Harttico é Pontificats dejecto. Idem Ibidem ol.1. (0) Concil. Conftantienfe Anno.141g¢. Stance ad me M againft Queen Elizabeth. — ¥ dh ’ iveshim this Character mi time he was Pope) notorioufly Scandalous to the “Church, that his Life was damnable, and he in his Conver{ation sete : iL adds, (in ley of Impieties nor to be nam’d: And the Counci lds, ‘tied Piksiske Sentence of his Depofition) (q ) That he nee broke his Vow, his Oath, and Promife made to God, and his ‘Church, that-he was Notorioufly Simoniacal, and by his difhoneft eftable Life and Manners notorioufly Scandalous, ec, N ofa if cbefe ( i fuch other ) Popes be the sos ‘Rock upon which the Church is built, ( and this ot fay, and would: have us believe it ) She muft of neceffity be in : miferable Condition, and the Gates of Hell muft ise againft her, when they evidently prevail againft the Roc ; upon which ( they fay ) the is built 5 for ifthe — Foundation fail, that whichis built uponit, muftevi a fall and come to Ruin. This is the firft osetia their Doctrine, manifeftly Erroneous but thisis not all ; For there is a fecond Confequence of it,both Erroneous, pad indeed Blafphemous. For, 2. when they fay, that ae f= Jed Saviour was the Fundamental Rock,on which the Churc was built, and that Peter and the Popes after, did fucceed him in that Place and Office, cum Poteftaris plenitudine, ( {ays Pins. V. here ) Gun Summa Poteftate (as others Generally) Henceit follows, That the prefent Pope has (and every one of his Predeceflors had ) the fame Power required to the being of a Fundamental Rock, which our bleffed Sa- ‘viour had. Forifthey fucceed him in the fame Place, and ith 4 Supream Power, then they have the fame Place and ai ber blefled Saviour had. His Power neither ay nor could be greater than Poteftas fumma (fummo non ic tur Superiws, there can be nothing higher than the higheft, nor fuperior to the Supream ) and if Peter had, and every pitiful Pope has poreftarem Summam, then they have a Pow- er as great, and equal tothat our bleffed. Saviour had before he Refigned it to his Succeffors: But I might have faved the vi is ; *Cl | ?d and ex- f proving this; for *cis Acknowledg scely AlieePa in their Roman Carechifin ( ex Decreto Con- Peter (p ) That he was a Per- (Pp) Nobis Legiti- me Conftat. Johan. Papam.23. atempos re quo fuit affumptus, ulque nunc,Papatum tn Scandalum Eecle- fie notorium rexiffes vitaque [ua Damnae bili ejX{que Nephan- ais moribus, populis exemplum vite Male prebuiffe. Concil. Conftant. Seff. 10. ( 4) Foban. 23. Schifmatis nutritt- Viti, 2 VOLO, promi|~ fo, & Furamento per Ipfum Deo, Ecclefice & huicConcéliapre- [titis divimativum, Simouiacum notori= vm,fuis Inboneftis Co —Deteffabilibus vita & moribus Ec- clefiam Dei ¢ Pom palum Chriftianum notorie {candalizan-~ tem. Idem Concil; Seif. 12. in fenten- tia contra Johan, 23. definitiva. cilij Tridensins, juffu Pii. V. Edito) in which they faythat — ‘teams 38 5 Obfervations on the P ope’s Bull ~-(r) Catechifmus Romanus. art. 1. Cap. lo. §§. 11.92. » €5) Toid §13.p. 327. Edit. Parif. 4635. (+) Matth.6.19. c4) Vid. Chry- foft. in Matth. 26. - Hom.8 2. pag. 702+ Edit. 16.07. Ifiod. Pelufiora.l.1.Epift. 235. Aug. Retract. 1. 1.c.20. 8 De ver- bis Dom. Serm, 13. Tom, 18.Col. 58. ira Cyrillus & A- nonymus. in Cate- tena Nicetz Serra- - sum Epifcopi ad ‘Matth. 16.18. vide Catenam Graecam in Matth.per poffi- num jefuitam Cap. 16. 18. Hilarius Pi- ctantenf. De Trini- tate.l.2.p.25, Edit. Krafmi. Theophy- ja&. in Matth. 16. 18. (x) Index Libro- rum Prohibir & Kixpurg. Madriti. 3667. in Defid. E- rafmo.p 289.C0h. i, Peter was (r ) Caput & Princeps Omnium Apoftolorum. And then it there follows, Chriftus (s) Petrum Univerfi Fideli- um GentrtsCaput, ut Qui ei fucceffit Eandem Plane T orius Ec- clefia Poteftatem habere voluerit, At was our blefled Saviour’s will, That Pererfhould have The fame Powsr our bleffed Sa- viowr had, Sed Apage nugas Impias & Blafphemas. The bare recitation of fuch wild Pofitions, thould and will be Confutation enough to all fober Chriltians; who are foli- citous to maintain our blefled Saviours Honor , and- will never give that Place or Power tothe Pope or Peter, which is folely and eternally due to their Redeemer. | 3. But further, when our Adverfaries, upon that Place of Atatthew (Thon (t) are Peter, and npon-this Rock I will build my Church \ would have us believe, Thar Peter was that Rock, while he liv?d, and his Succeffors after him, And thence infer their Supremacy. They muft pardon our Infidelity, if we believe it not. For, 1. They do or might know , that not only Proteftants, but the Fathers, and (#) An- cient Ecclefiaftical Writers generally, by Rockin that Text, underftand wer Peters Perfon, but either the Proféffion of his Faith he there made, or our blefled Saviowr. But our Ad- verfaries like not this Deétrine;. And therefore when Hi- lary had truly faid Unum hoc eft immobile fundamentum, Una hac eft felix fidei Petra, Petri Ore Confefla ; and Erafinus had put this Note inthe Margent, Petram Interpretatur Ip- fam Fidei Profeffionem , and when the fame Erafmm on Math. XV1.18. had cited Auguffin for the fame fenfe of the place, which Hilary gives ; And had put inthe Mar- - gent Ecclefia non eft fundata fuper Petrum. The (x) Spanifh Inquifitors’ command it to be blotted out of Era/- mus his Text and Margent ; Although Hilary and Auguftin, and many others ( as they well knew ) faid the fame thing. 2, And thistruth is fo Evident, that not only the Fathers, and Ancient Authors, but Sober and Learned men in the Church of Rome, even in darkeft times when Popery unhap- pily prevailed, were of the fame Judgment; And by the Rock in this Place of Adatthew, [upon this Rock, I will build my Church | widerftand not Perer, but that Gonfeffion of bis Faith. azainft Queen Elizabeth 39 Faith there made, tobe meant. So(y) FohaSemeca, Au- thor of the Glofs upon Gratian, and(z) Nic. Lyranus, and Anjel, Laudunenfis, Author of the (2) Interlineary GLfs, upon his Text of Matthew; by the Rock on which the Church was built, underftand Chrift C our bleffed Saviour ) and not Peter (>). Anda late Learned Sorbon Doctor (though he would feem to fay, that Perer was that Rock ) yet ac- knowledgeth, that by that Rock, the (c) Faith of Peter might be meant, and not his Perfon. Nay, whichis more confiderable ( and may feem ftrange to the Reader ) the Fathers of the Treze Council exprefly fay, That the (d) Creed or Profeffion of Faith, which the Church of Rome ufeth, (the Conftantinopolitan Creed they meany and there fet it down ) #5 The Firm and Only Foundation, again{t wiich the Gates of Hel can never prevail, and our prefent (¢ ) Text is in the Margent Cited for it, whence it evidently ap- pears, that thofe Fathers at Trest have Declared, Thatthe Creed, or true Faith of Chrift, isthat firm Rock, and The Cy ) Super bane Petram 3 1. ¢. fuper tidei Tue folidita- tem. Can.loquitur. 18,Cauf.24.Quet. 1. verbo.Petram,in Glofla. (Z) Super bane Petram, quam Cone felfus es5hee. Chri finm. Lyranus in March. 16.18. (a) Super banc Petram, 1. €. Chri {ium in quem credite Gloffa Interlinea- tia in dium Lo- cum. (5) So Grego- rius Magnus in 7. Pfalmos Poeniten- tial. Tom. 2. Ope- rum Parif. 1619. pag. 908. D. ebriftus eff Petra, a qua Petrus Nomen Accepit, & Super Quam (¢ edificaturum Eccle- fram dixit—— Quod Ecclefia nullis Perfecutionibus fit fuperanda, Ipfe Super Quem edificata eft, O- flendit, cum ait, Porte Inferoram non prevalebunt contra eam. So Strabo Fuldenfisin his Ordin. Gloff. on Matth. 16. 18. circa Ann. 840. And after them Lyraaus (in the Place cited ) who though he wasa Francifcan Frier, and flourifhed almoft Four hundred years ago, and in many things ( as thofe times were ) Popifh enough; yet he was not come fo far, as to make Peter, or any but Chrift, the Rock on which the Church was buile: And again,6n the 1 Cor, 3-11. Solas Chriftus eft Fundamentum Ecclefte, quod ex fe firmitatem & ftabilitatem habet. And the Glofs on their own Canon Law, fays, Tinat Chrift was the Rock; for Boniface. 8. in that famous Extravagant. Cap. Unam Sanctam. 1. Indeavouring to prove the Papal Supremacy from feverat Places in Scripture 5 he adds, That the Authority givento Peter and his Succeffors by our blef- fed Saviour, was not Human but Divine. Ac Authoritas licet bomini data,non humana, fed potius Divina, ore divino Petre data & Succefforibus, &c. The Glofs onthefe words, Et autem he ¢ Aus thoritas. p. 191. fays thus Hac Authoritas eft Divina, quia firmata eft in Petra firma, in Chrifto, qui erat verus Deus: & quod fit Divina, quia fundata in eo; patet ex Evangelio; quia Chriftus loquebatur cum dixit, fuper han: Petram 3 id eft, [uper meipfum (qui {um Petra, & qui fieni- ficor per Petram) edificabo Ecclefiam meam, ita Gloff. verbo, Eft autem bec Authoritas, Ad. Cap. Unam San@am. 1. Extrav. Commun. CC) Super hanc Petram, i. e. Super Jpfam Petru, feu Petram feu Cepham, vel Super Fidem Petii que est Catholica. Dr. Hen. Holden in Ar- notat. in Nov. Teftam. Parif. 1660. ad Marth. 16. 18. & ad 7. Matth. verf. ec. Cd) Synodus Statuit , premittendam effe Confeffionem Fidei — Synbolum fided 3 quo Romana Ecclifia utitur, tanquam Principium ac Fundamentum firmum ac u“nicum , contra quod porte Inferé nanquam pravatebunt. Conc. Trident, Seil. 3. Feb. 4. Ann. 1546. (¢) Matth 16. 18. : Only ee ec Ne en eS ene ble Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull ({) Per Petram, Confeffionem Fi- dei inselligunt Chryfoftomus,Cy- rillus, Hilarius, & Rom. Pontifices, Leo magnus, Aga- tho,Nicolaus, & A- drianus primus in fuis Decretalibus. Stapleton, Princep. Fidei Dod. De- monftr. Contrav. 201. 6.¢. 2.p.207. 208. ~ (RB) Lequitur Do- minus ad Petrnm 3 Ego dicoTibi, quia Tn es Petrus, & Su-. per hanc Petram «- diftcabo Ecclefeam meams Super Ilam unum edificat Ec- clefiam. Catechif.. Trid. ex Decreto Conc. Trid. 4 Pio g. Editus. Part. 1. Cap.1o.de.9.Sym- boli Art. §. 52. p. rige Edit. Parif. 1635. (b) Matth. 7. 24. 25. (i) 1Joh. 2.4. Se Only Foundation on which the Church is built, and againft which the Gates of Hell cannot prevail; and if thar Faith be the only. Foundation of fuch firmnefs, then the Pope is not. For if there be another, then that isnot ( what the Trent Fathers fay itis) the Only Foundation, And laftly , it isvery confiderable, what (f ) Stapleton ( their Learned Profeflor at Doway, and great Champion of their Church ) confefleth (and: without great Impudence, he could not ‘deny it ) that not only Chryfoftome, Cyril, and Hilary; but four Popes, Leo, Agatho, Nicholas, and Adrian ( each of them the firft of that name ) have, in their Decretal Epi-- files, declared, That the Rock on which the Church was built, wasnot Peter?s Perfon, but his Faith or Confeffion of: it. This was the Opinion of thofe ancient Popes, and they as infallible fure as any. of their Succeffors. By the way, (that we may obferve the Contradiction. amongit our Adverfaries, notwithftanding the pretended Infalli- bility of their Church ) The. Trent Catechifm fays Cg) That Peter Only was the Rock on which our bleffed Saviour built his Church. And this the Author (or Authors ) of the Catechifm pretends to prove out of Cyprian, and fome others there named. -So thatifthe Trent Council fay True: the Greed, or the Confeffion of the Catholick Faith, is the On- ly. Foundation on which the Church is built, but if the Zvene Catechifm be inthe Right, Peter Only is that Rock and Foun- dation. Now feeing it is impoffible, that both thefe Po- fitions fhould be true, it Evidently follows, that there is. an Error in the Council or Catechifm, or ( which I ra- ther believe ) in both.. That this may further appear, I fa a That cis certain, and generally Confefs’d, That 4 Lively Faith, and a firm belief of the Gofpel, is a Rock and Foundation againft which the Gates of Hell cannot prevail. Our blefled Saviour tells us, That be (h) who hears hist Sayings, and doth them; ( he whoreally and praétically believes the Gofpel ) builds upon a Rock, And St. Fohn tellsus, That Such Faith is (i) vittorious, nay vitkory, and cannot be over- come. Hence it is) that in the Liturgy of St. Tames, ‘s the Pe ee OP IS Te ee ete we eS el wee hee showaig Queen Elizabeth. the Adminiftration of the Eucharift, they pray ——That God would blefs the Sacred Elements, that they might be dfe- Elyal, to the ( k) Eftablitbment of the Holy Catholick, Church , which he had Founded and Built upon the Rockof Faith, But though Faith anda firm belief of the Gofpel, be a Rock, yet "tis not (as the Tremt Fathers fay ) the Ouly Rock, on which the Church is built. Peter was a Rock. too; this cur Adverfaries Confefs, and earneftly Contend for. But ne- ther was he the Ozly Rock though the Trent Catechifm and Popifh Writers commonly fay fo )nor fuch 4 Rock, asthey (-without any Reafon or Juft Ground ) would have him. That this may appear, it isto be Confidered, ° Pope Nicol. 2. Ecclefia fuper Fetram fidei fundata. Gratian.Can. Omnes. 1. CK ) Orat S1-0% dos, ut Saera Syinbo- la Omnibus cedant, ES SMeLY by Tihs = J ‘ Yies, x Kasoar* uns Exnadvoias nv eMusrlwous st TH Ie rpcey 795 a2 sews, In Lick “ac. Gree. Pari. 1550. Pp: 20. vid. Fabr: Stipulenfem in Marth. 16.18. So Dift.22. And the Apoftle in his Canonical Epiftle ( Jude 20. ) advifeth all, to buéld np themfelves on their mut boly Faith. — 41.) That ( by Evident Scripture ) our bleffed Saviour is ‘the Prime and Chief Fundamental Rock on which the whole Church is built. (1) Behold (fays God by Say ) I lay in Sion, for a Foundation a Stone, a precious Corner Stone, 4 Sure Foundation, cc. 1 know that in the Vulgar Latin of (m) Sixtw..V. and (2) Clemens, 8. itis untruly ren- “der’d Lapidem pretiofem in Fundamento F undatum. “Whence (0 ) Bellarmine will have it meant of Perer, and fo of the Pope; who(inhis Opinion ) is Lapis pretiofus in Fundamento fundatus, But had the Cardinal confulted ‘the Hebrew Text, or the Verfion of the Septuagint, or (p) Hiercmes Verfion of both, and his Notes upon them; he might have feen his Error - But though Bellarmine 'Expound this place of Z/zy, to be meant of Peter; yet (q) Peter bimfelf (who underftood that Text as well asthe Cardinal ) refers it to our bleffed Saviour, fo does “(7 ) Paul too; andif this be not fufficient to Convince “the Cardinal, and fuch other Papal Parafites; our bleffed Saviour expounds it not of Perer, but himfelf, and that C2) ¥a.28.16, = Cm ) Edic.Rom. - 1590. ( 2) Edit.Rom. I $52. ( o ) Bellarmine, in Prafat. ad Libr. de Pontif. Rom. vid; R. Crakantly. Contra Spalatenf. Cap.81.§.3.p.612. (p) Vid.Hiero- nym. in Ifaiz 28. verf. 16. Hfiodor. Clarius in. 1. Gor. 3. 10. Fundatiji- mim Fundamentus Chriftus. (4) 1 Pet. 2.6, 7. 8.and AQ: gta. (7 Rom, 9. 33.8100. WCor 3.11. & 1 Corto. | 1 after Ags Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull Cf) Math. 21. 24. But tlough Paul and Peter,and eur blefied: »Savi- our himfelf do-ex- pound the. word Rock.on which the Churchis built,noe to be meant of Pe- ter,but Chrife the Mejiah,(asappears by the - foregoing ‘Texts) yet Maldo- nate the Jefuie ( whofer words: I: fhall cite anon {ays ---That tis very far from fenfe fo to exe pound it. Maldona- rein Match.16.17. p- 339. Col. 1.E. And yet Card. Cu- fanus fays, That Chrift. was that Kock. Operum p. 826. And fo cyrill in the Aurea Cate- ba Gree. Patrum in Pfalmos David. so. per Dan:Barbaram Patriarcham A qui- lejenfem; Venet. 1569. ad verfi2. Pfal. 39. (alias. 40% P.400:401.50 Gre-): gorius Magnus: in. 9. Plal.: Poenitent. Tom. 2. pr98e.D. So, Chryfoftom,&c (t) 1. Per. 2.5, - (4) Eph.2.20: (x) Rev.21.14. Cy) Noveritis Symbolum hoc effe Fandamentum fuper afer hehad (/,); faid:to Peet bou-anes an xpon this\RockJ will build my Charch, (2.) This being granted (.as of neceflity it muft.) that our~ blefled Saviour is the: firft Immoveable Rock; and moft fare Foundation on whichthe Church is built , Itis alfo granted; and mutt befo, ( Scripture exprefly faying it.) That Pe- ter 6s: AF enndation too, on which the Church is built. But. in. a way far different from that our Adverfaries dream’ of; ( forthey do but dream; nor will any Confidering and Intelligent Perfon think them well awake when they writfuch things ) For,,1, When weifay, That-Peter is a Foundation on which the Church is built; our meaning is. not, that he has by this, any Prerogative or Superiority, much lefs-( what our Adverfaries pretend :) any Monar- chical Supremacy over the*reft of the Apoftles, and the whole Church; for every one of the Apoftles is, as well and as-much a Foundation of the Ghriftian.Church, . as Peter. The (t) Apoftle. tells.us, That the.Church: $5 4 foiritual Howe, whichis built upon ( uw) The Foundation of the Apoftles and Prophets, Fefus Chrift being the Chief Cor- ner-ftone, And St. Fobnto the fame. purpofe {peaking of the Church, the New Jerufalem,. fays —— ( x ) The.G- ty had Twelve Foundations, and in them the names of the Tivelve Apoftles of the Lamb, In thefe Texts all the Apo- Mtles ( Fames and Paul, aswell.as Peter ) ‘are foundati- ons ofthe Church equally, and without.any diftinétion or difference, no Prerogative given to Peter above the reft; much lefs that -vaft Monarchical Supremacy. which is pretended to. Boththe Greek and Latin Fathers fay, That the Gofpel, the Chriftian Faith, .or:the Creed. ( which contains the Sum of it.) or Peter?s Confeffiow of our bleffed Saviour to be Chrift the Son of the Living God, ,( which is the Chief Fundamental Article ofour Faith, I fay, That (in thofe Father’s Judgment) this Faith is the-Foundae tion on which the Church is built, St. Auguftin, Explain- ing the Creed tothe Catechumens, has thefe words —— Cy) Know you: ( faith he ) rhar:.this Creed is the-Foundation quod adificinm Ecclehe firrexit. Aug. lib, 3. de Symbolo ad Catechumen. Tom 9. 68 againft Queen Elizabeth. 43 on which the Edifice or Building.of the Church israifed. To the fame purpofe.T heophylaé tells us——(z.) That the Faith which Peter confe/s°d, was to be.the Foundation of the faith- ful,that is of the Church. Thisis.a:Truth fo evident, that a Learned Jefuite, having citedand approved (4) Alca- zar, (a zealous Roman Catholick) for this very fame Opinion, does not only receiveand approve, but large- ly and undeniably proveit,.out of Clemens Romanus, Au- guftine, Hierome, Ruffin, the (6) Trent Council , and:(c) St. Paul: And then adds (da) That other Councils and Fathers fay the Jame. Another (¢) Learned Jefuite confefles, ‘That it was the Opinion of many AncienpFa- thers (yet he endeavours to corfuteit) that thofe words (upon this Rock I will build my Ghurch );|.are thus to be underftood—— Upon this Faith, or Confeffion of Faith which thou haft made, That Lam Chrift the Son of she Living God) will I build my Church ; And then hecites many Fa- thers to prove it; and immediately quotes St. Augu/tine, and (with little refpect or modelty) fays ——That (f ) Auguftine’s Opinion. was further from fenfe, then thofe he __ therecited, becanfe he made Chrift the Rock, on which the _ Church was built. | , ASH ieoroyia nv Ouoroynous , Oluersoy Mehnree AVLE TOY MmSEUEN~ tev» Toeophyla&. in Matth. 16.19, 18. | (a) Alcazar's words are thefe—- Cenfeo Apaltolos ideo fundatores Ecclofiae diciy quia fedei Summam ediderunt , em effufi Cruoris Tee ftimonio,necnon pre- dicatione ¢ mira- Culis in hominum a- nim —infeverunt. Corn. A‘Lapide in ‘Apocal. 21.14. p. 112. Col.2.C, (>) Cone. Trid. Seff. 3: Apéffolicum Symbolum vocat fire Mum atque Unicum Fundamentum, cone tra quod porte Inq Paulo fuit Fattum. feré non prevalebunt. Idem, ibid. Col... E. (¢) Tale Fundamentum a “a Cor. 3.10. at Sapiens Architettus Fundamentum pofui. Idem, ibidem. (d) Idem dicunt alia Concilia & Patres. \bid. (¢) Sunt inter veteres Authores, qué Interpretantur fuper bane Petram 5 ie. fuperhanc Fidem 5 aut fuperhanc Fidei Confefionem qua me Filium effe Dei vivi dix- afiz : ut Hilarius, Greg. Nyf[enus, Chryfoftomus, Cyrillus Alexandrinus, Ambyofius in Eptftolas Payli, exc. Maldonat. in Math. 16..17..p.339.Col. 1. E. (f) Longins etiam a fenfu vecedens Auguftinus interpretatur, (oper hanc Petram, 1. ¢. fuper-meipfum, quia Petra erat Chrifius. “Mal- donat: ibid. (3.) Itakeitthen for certain, and .confefs’d, (and fo does _ avery (g) Learned Jefuite too, that the twelve Foundati- ons, inthat Place in the Revelation before cited, (Cap.21. 14.) fignifies the Twelve Apoftles on whom the Wall of ( the New Ferufalem, or the Church of Chrift was built, 12+ 4psftotos 5 ipfo- Yam enim humeris quafi innixus Ecclefie murus recumbite Ideo enim torum nomina fundamentis Infcripta funt, ut figni- ficetwr iplis effe fundamenta c fundatores Chec enins duo codem recidunt) Ecclefie, Corn. A Lapide in Apoc. 21, 14. p.312. Col.1.D. (g). Certum eft aq pad omnes hee 126 Fundamenta_( Rev. 21014.) fenificare Iz and eres st ED oe 44 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull (b) 1 Tim. 3.45. 3 Cér.3.9.16- (i) 1 Pet. 2.5- (k) Eph. 4 1 Ie 2 (1) Eph. 1.22. 23. ‘The Chxrch which is bis Body. (m) 1 Cor 3. 95 to. And J (fays Paul) as a Mafler- Builder. (n) Ye are God's building, and.as a skilful Mafter-buil- der, Ihave laid the Foundation. 1 Cor. I 3. II, 12. where eopos,peritum figni- ficat. copdss 6 TwY Ociay tuxcspQ- Hefychius. (0 ) Fandamen- tum pofuts i-e.prima initia fidet Annun- eiavi.Lyranus. An- munchavi vite @tere ne fundamentum, 1d eft, chriftum. Fab. Stabulenfis. Td ais "RugsCeias Oeuz- aloy. Theodor.vid. - Cor,A LapideinA- pocal.21.F 4. p.312. Co).2.E. vid.Grot. ip i Cor.3.10.Rom, ¥¢.20.Hebr.6,1.Ita etiam Lyranus & Glotfa Interlines- ria.” , and therefore their Names € as St. John fays ) were writ- ten on thofe Foundations, to fignifie, that the Apoftles ( Paul as wellas Peter) were Founders or Foundations of the Chriftian Church. And that this may more diftinet- ly appear, and from Scripture it felf, that every Apo- ftle, (as wellas Peter) is a Foundation of the Chriftian Church, we areto confider. Firft, That in Scripture the Church is commonly call’d (4) 4 Houle, the Houfe of God; and every good Chriftianis a (¢) Hvely Stone which goes tothe buslding of that fpiritual Houfe. 2. Our blef- fed Saviour call’d and fent ad his Apostles, (as wellas Pe- ter) to(k) build this Houfe, He gave fome <Apoftles - for the edifying (2s ctxedvuty) or building the body of Chris, Thatis, the (2) Church. 3. The Apofles all of them, Paul (m) as wellas Peter) were ALaSter-Builders of this Houfe. Evident itis (inthe Text cited ) that St. Paul was a Mafter-Builder, and St. Perey wasno more 3 nor is he any where in Scripture, exprefly faid to be fo much 3, though I believe, andgranthewas. 4. The Means by which thele AZaSter- Builders edify’d and builtthe Church, were thefe : Their diligent preaching of the Gofpel, (firft, end more infallibly Communicated tothem, then to any others) Their pious and exemplary Converfation,which made their Preaching more effectual, and gave Reputa- tiontoit, and themfelves; Their confirming with Mira- cles, and fealing the Truth of it, with their Blood and Martyrdom. 5. Hence, the Gofpel it felf and our Chri- ftian Faith, iscall’d the Foundation of the Church; as may appear by what is faid-before, and by St. Pasl, who ex- prefly (7) calls it fo. For that Foundation, which he ‘there fays he had laid at Corinth (as may appear from the _ Context) was the (0,) Gofpel he had preach’d among them. Sothat (by the Authorities above cited) Ithink it may appear, that Divines( Ancient and Modern, Pro- teftant and Papiit) feem toagree inthis; That there is a double Foundation of the Church, Doétrinal and. Perfo- nal: The firft isthe Gofpel, orthofe holy Precepts, and gracious Promifes contain’d in it; On the belief and — : practife againft Queen Elizabeth. 45 practife whereof, the Church folely relies for Grace here, and Glory hereafter; And therefore , they are commonly and jaftly cali? the Foundation on which the Churchis built. Whenceit is very ufual in Scripture, to fay, that by Preaching the Gofpel, the (p) Church is edi- fy'4 or built. And becaufe our blefled Saviour immedi- ately call’d all his Apoftles, gave them Authority, and the Infallible Afiftance of his Spirit, and fent them to preach the Gofpel, and they { with great fuccefs) did it, converting Nations, building or founding Churches ) therefore they were call’d Adaffer- Builders, Founders, and Foundations of the Chriftian Church; as our (qg) Adver- . fariesconfefs. Now (as tothis Particular) as the Apo- ‘ftles were Founders or Foundations of the Chriftian Church; Peter hadno Preheminence or Prerogative a- bove the other Apoftles ; He wasno more Petra, a Foun- der or Foundation of the Church,then the other Apoftles. Nay inthis (if any) certainly St. Paul might challenge a Preference and Preheminence above Peter himfelf, or any _of the reft.For he( with truth and modefty enough,(r tells: rubs us-——That in preacing the Gofpel he laboured more then they Al: (And (f) Ireneuws gives the reafon of it ) His Sufferings were( +.) more, He planted more Chur- _ches, He writ more Epiftles, then they all5 ( his being Fourteen, and all the reft but Seven, and they (in refpect of his, fhort ones too; whichthen were , and ever fince ° have been, and (whilethe World ftands) will be Do- ctrinal Foundations of the Chriftian Church. But that which makes more againft Peter’s Supremacy , and for St. Paul?s Preference before him, (at leaft his Indepen- dence upon Perer (as the Supream Monarch oftheChurch) is; That he tellsthe Corinthians, That the care of (u) All the Churches lay upon him, Nor that only, but that he made Orders and (x) Confitueions for all thofe Churches, So -F Ordain which they were bound to obferve * Vid. OrigincmcontraCelfum, Graco-Lat. P- 49- peeluvae (faith (u) 2 Cor. 11. 28. (X) 1 Cor. 7. 17+ szws ty THs ExnAnoias mbouts Miaragtouets (7) A&. 9. 27. i Cor.14. 3.5. $o St. Paul’s Authori- ty was given him for Edification,. or’ building the iia: 2Cor, ro. (q) Ideoenim A= poftolorum nomina _Fundamentis Eccle= fie infcripta (unt. Rev.21.14,ut /igne- ficetur ipfos effe Fun- damenta c Funda- tores (hac enim duo codemrecidunt) Ei= clefie. Corn. A La- pide ubj.fupra, in APOC. 21.14 P3120 ¢r) 1 Cor.1g,102. I laboured more a- bundantly then. they- All. And 2 Cori ts 23. (f)Plusxeliqauiss quia ili, wt pluri- mum, Tuden predie cabant,quorum faci- lis Catechizatio( cum Legem & Prophetas admiferunt) Paulus Gentibus, qui utraj- que negabant. rer haus adverf,Hare- fes gs C-41-P.379- C. Edit. Feu-Ar- dentij. Ks / (t)2 Cor.11.22, Tlacwy “Exxanciey . en Obfervations on.the P ope’s Bull ant (y) Cone. Trid- Seff. 4.in Decreto de Edit. Sacrorum ‘Librerum. CZ) Atantoo- pas; Inde diareJ- fees Editium, did- rakisy Conftitutio. Gloffz veteres in Calce Cyrilli, &c. (.a) Asariz]o- “(aly 10 Proeilorat 9 X Tesdt |e: civ 'o Bamasus Date ]- qyrat Tog up” ga 7% UmmKooLE — € 's weLas Xj Seta fe 878 Baoirews megsayie Phavori- ‘Mus. verbo dhaa]- TOplehb» Cb \°Tots 7m xanbeio —Exeives vevouoSeTHKey—— BUC yOMOSTOY Te yard HAe 1 heod, th 1 Cor. 7. 17+ Ot- eamenins and Theo- phylatt fay to the fame purpofe, on the fame place. a 1Cor.16.1. C)Tis eixspe~ y@- xnpvé. Photius Epift. 117. p.rg8. & ibid. p.109. , Kd) TaiiaG- J BN as, x5 mien TH eixsuivn Paulus autem peculéaritér Orbi Univerfo. Nie col. Methon. de Corp. & Sang. Chrifti in Magna Bibl. Patrum: Tom 12. p. 619. (faith he) iA the Churches. So our Englifh truly ren- ders it. I know the Vulgar Latin (which the Trent (y) Fathers ridiculoufly declare Authentick ) renders it o- therwife — So J teachin all Churches: but the ( z) word there, fignifies not to teach, but properly to (4) Or- dain and Legally Conftitue, Define, and Command. So that thereupon Obedience becomes due from thofe who are concern’d in fuch Conftitution or Ordinance. And this Theodoret tookto be the true meaning of that Text ; and therefore hefays, That Pauls Ordaining +n all Chur- ches , was giving thema(b).Law, which they were to o- bey. Sothat here are two things exprefly faid of Paul in Scripture, and that by himfelf , who beft knew, and was Teffis idoneus, & Siaveve@-, a Witnels beyond. all Exception. 1. That the care of all the Churches lay upon him. 2. That he made Ecclefialtical Laws and Conftitutions for them All: whereas (inScripture) no fuch thing.is faid of Peter, .or any other Apoftle. Upon confideration of the Premifes,fome of the Ancients have call’d St. Paul, A Preacher tothe whole World; So(¢) Pho- tins and Nicolaus Methonenfis Epifcopus, {peaking of feve- ral Apoftles Officiating at feveral places ; as of James at Ferufalem, Fohn in Afia, Peter and Paul at Antioch, ec. Hesadds 5 concerning (d) Paul— larly Officiate to the whole World, -And,to the fame pur- pole Zheodorer , Expounding the words of the Apoftle That the care of All the Churches lay upon him, He fays, That the (e) follicitude.and care of the whole World lay upon Paul. Morethanthis cannot be faid of Peter, nor is there half fo much faid of him, as of-St. Pax/ in Scripture. Had Peter told us That the Care of All the Churches lay upon him, and.that he made Orders and Conftitutions, to be obferved in All Churches, ( both which are exprefly.{faid.of St. Paul) the Canonifts and Popifh Party, would have had fome pretence (who now have (e)Tidons ths oixeusuns im ee meWpipoo TAY wteuvay Univerfi Orbis Tirraram follicisndinem mecum gtro.Theod.in 2 Cor.11.28. none) That he did particu- againft Queen Elizabeth 47 none) for” Peter’s Supremacy. I urge not this, to af- ctibe to Panl, that Supremacy wedeny'to Peter, ( For” neither had they, nor‘any other Apoftle, any fuch thing) but only'to thew; That St. Paul (his ‘Labours, Sufferings, themany Churchesfounded by him , and his Canonical Writings confider’?d) may be thought (not without rea- fon) a more eminent Founder‘of the Chriftian Church, then’St: Peter; 2. But as it is, and muft be confefs’d. by Divines, Ancient and Modern, Proteftants and Pa- pifts, That the Gofpel is the Doctrinal Foundation, and that Petra, onwhichthe Church ‘is built’; So ‘there is al- fo a Perfonal Foundation, evidently mention’d in Scrip- ture’ Imean Perfons, on whom the Chriftian Church is built: And they are 1. Our bleffed Saviour. 2. His Apottles. _ 1. That our bleffed Saviour'is'a Rock, and that xa? 7EE- __ x. Our bleffed exav; themoft firm and immoveable Rock on which the Saviour. Churchis*built, is evident’ from the { f) Scriptures before’. Vode Marthe cited. Such'a’Rock; as Peter neither was, nor could be, g Spear 2 vig see much lefs any of ‘thofe they call his Succeffors.. For, r.Our’ Cor.3.11.8-1 Cors bleffed Saviour was , and {till isa Rock on (g) which’ (as 10-48 Adhg.tts Trenaustells us) the’ Univer fal Church ; both before and fince : ae fs th - his coming intothe'World; was built. He was(h) promi- gon sine crane . i am fed by God prefently after the fall of Adam, and then fuc- ee ceflively by (i) all the Prophets; His Death and Paffion' was” id tye Euan a Propitiation , aswell for the Sins of thofe who (k)li- Aw cis 7 Ozuérree « ved before,-as ours who'live after it; and thofe Promifes of oe tery the Mefliah were fuch, as all the Patriarchs, Prophets, and egy eibor; “flee he co Dubie 8 LLOVse4S “Tee Deere avis. Vide Hieronymum in locum ; & 1 Pet. 2. 6, 7. ubi Tfalam citat, & eadem pene verba habet, qux apud 70. Interpretes hodié Extant. Vide Procopium in‘ Ifai.-44. p. 504+ &° Fabrs Stapulenfem in Matth. 16. 18. (g) Chriftus lapis [ummus Angularis Omnia fuftinens, in unam fedem Abrabe Colligens cos, qué in Utroque Teftamento apti {unt in'edifecationem Deis Ire~ nzus lib. 4.cap. 42. pag. 380. Edit. Feuardentij. (b) Gene g. tgs (4) A&, 33,182. . 24, Lucy 1670, & Lucy 24.27. (Rh) Heb.9 + 1S. Pious. ete RE ee ee oe as ’ ’ y ve ? Lt ee le - ‘ peu se 4:8 —— Objervations on the Pope’s Bull (1) Hebr.11. 13. Vid.Eufeb Hift.|. ¢. €.2. p, 6. B. Edit. Valefij. Tero > Ol bm TAs mpadTys ety pwmopovbes miy- Jeg ,8CC. Omnes.ab o- vigine Generis hu- mani qui juftitie laude floruerant, ut Abraham, Moles, & Quicunque postea ju- fii, Omnes Corisium agnoverunt 5 eique tanquam Dei Filio, debitum cultum Ex- bibuerunt. Ex De- monftrat.Evang.l.1. Capp. 5.6.° (m. Saoas toy Xesdy ndkour. Chriftam diftinété cognitum habuernnt. Eeéfeb. Hift.l.1.c.4. p.16.B. (n) “eye Xer s1ayes ef x, Ut oyo- fart «Si non no- mine, reipfa tamen Chriftianos, Idem plane haber Augu- fiinus, Retrad. 1,1. €.13. (0) Galat.3.8. {p) Luc. 24.25 2%, 29+ 44. (q) A&. 26.22, 23.and Ad 28.23. (7) Lombard. Sent. 1. 3. Dift. 25. vide Juhan. Marti- nez de Ripalda ad diéam DiftinGionem. Pious men before Chrift did (D kyow and believe, Nay, Cif we believe Ex/ebius ) the Promifes of the Meflias ,. were ( m ) clearly and diftinktly revealed to the Ancient Patriarchs and Prophets (though in a lefs degree and meafure of clearnefs ) and their Belief and fuitable Obedience fuch, that < though they had not the same, yet. they might truly be (n) call?d Chriftians before Chrift.. The Apoitle telis us, That the (0) Gofpel: was preached to Abrabam and fo it was to all the Azcient Church, by the (p) Pro- phets; who foretold them of the Incarnation, Patlion , and Refurrection of Chrift. It was the Gofpel St. Paul every where preach?d, and yet he fays, that He preach- ed No ( q) other Things , then thofe which the Prophets and Mofes did fay fhould come. And this is a Truth fo mani- feft , that ( to fay no more of the Ancient Chriftian Writers) (7) Peter Lombard, and the Popifh School- men, writing de Fide Antiquorum, of the Faith by which the Saints, before our blefled Saviour, were faved; they all fay , that they then ‘(as ‘we now) were faved by Faith 22 Chrift their Redeemer. The difference was, 1.T hey believed i” Chriffo Exbibendo, we in Chrifto Atk Exbibi~ to. 2. Their Faith before our blefled Saviow’s coming, was more imperfect and implicite, Owrs (fince he is - come, and the Gofpel clearly publifi’d) much more Perfect and Explicite. This I fay, to prove that our blefled Saviour was the Rock, on which the Church un- der the Old Teftament was built, and (in this Particu- lar) fuch a Rock and Foundation of the Church as Peter never was, nor could be; it being impoifible he fhould be a Foundation of that Church which was founded al- moft Four thoufand years before he was born. 2.Our blef- fed Saviour is a Rock and Foundation, on which the whole Chriftian Ghurch is built, even the Apoftles themielves, as wellas others: who (all of them, ( /) Peter as well as Paul) (£) Auguftinus in Evang. fecundum Matth, Serm. 13. Tom. 10.p. $9.9. Bafil.1569. Super banc petram quam confel[us es, dicens, Tu es Chriftus Filius Det viusy adificabo Ecctefiam meam. 1d eft, Super meipfum edificabo EccleGam meam. Super Me edificabo Te, non Me fuper Te dificerur fuper Petram, non Petra fuper Petrum Wid.p.59.A. Non inPauli, necin Petri. Nomine baptixati fumus, fed Chriftis mt Petrus a- ny again/? Queen Elizabeth. 49 in ré{pect of Chrift ( who is the great immoveable Rock, which fuftains the (t) whole Building ) are Superfiruttions ; though otherwife, in refpect ofthe Chriftian World con- verted by their Preaching, they are call’d Foundations, yet only Secundary Foundations , all of whichare built upon the Principal and prime Foundation Jefus Chrift (#). So inthe like Inftance, all the Apoftles ( Peter as well as the reft) were both Sheep and Shepherds. 1. Sheep, in refpect of Chrift, who is the (x) great and (y) chief Shepherd. (z) Sheep hear my voice, ( {ays our blefled Saviour: ) The Apoftles did fo ; when he call’d them, they heard and obey’'dhim. Again, J lay (a) down my life for my Sheep ; fo he did for his Apoftles, elfe they could not have been faved; And therefore they alfo are his Sheep. 2. Yet they were Shepherds too ( fent by, and fubordinate to the great and chief Shepherd Fefus Chrift ) in refpect of the Church and Chriftians, over which the( 4) Holy Ghoft had fetthem. 3. Our blefled Saviour is fuch a foundation and founder of bis Church, as does not find, but make thefe Lively Stones, which are the Materials with which he builds it. He gives hisSpirit, and by it Grace and a Lively Faith, which things alone make men Lively Stones, and fit for that Building. This no Apoftle, (not Peter, much lefs any fucceeding Pope ) ever did, or could do; nor ( with- out great folly and impiety ) can pretend to. 4. Our blef- fed Saviour is fucha Rock, fuch a Foundation and Founder ofthe Church, as was and is Proprietary and the fole true Owner of it ; 7tis his Honje, purchafed with his precious Blood ; Ct) “Amivre” yao deusar@ 6 Xessbs, &C. Omni- um fiquidem funda- mentum eft Chriftus, qui [ibi ad mota, fi- xa firmaque [utines at. Procopius in Cap. 44. Ifaiz p. 504. And a lictle after TeS¢- Hertones Xe. Ec- clefie idem funda- mentum feckt,qué Ip- fe Fundamentum eft, fuper quod & nos, tauquam Lapides pretiofe , fuperftrui- mur. Procopius ib. pag-519. Omnis Ec- clefie Compages in nitétuy Cm» Incuime bit, ut nunquam ca- dat,fummo Angnlar2 Lapidé Chrifto Fefirs Vuguitin. Bnarrats in Pial. $6. Tom 8s pag. 955. Operum Bafil. 1569. Cu ») Fundamin- tum eft folus Chriftws vel fides Ipfius. Oba je&. Apoc. 21. 14. Apoftols funt Funda menta. Soli. Fuse damentum proprie eft illud quod habet firmitatem c& ftabilitatem in fe; fic Solus Chriffus eS Fundamentum. 2. Jmpro- fic Apofoli dicuntur fundamenta qui primitus Adheferunt Chrifto. Lyranus ing Cor. 3 vid. Pet. Lombard. in locum. pag. 73. CG. D. Chriftus primus Laps & Angularis 5 (9 prie, tlud quod adberet primo Fundamento; ficut funt Lapides primarij Fundamento inh«ventes : Chriftum Apoftoli ec Prophete, fuper illos, Nos edificaté (umus. Maldonatus in Matth. ic. pag. 342. And again Multi in eodem Fundamento Lapides funts fummus & prim lus eft Chriftus , e: preter illud, Fundamentum Alind nemo poteft ponere 5 faper ilud autem, ei: 2 alia funt, que conituntar, Fandamenta : nam ce Apoftoli ce» Prophete Fandameptum Appellescur (ed ipfo (immo Angulayi Lapide Chrifto Fefue Eph, 2.20. Maldonat.in Matth. 7.24. p. 178. CX) Tov mimevarar Tesldrwv Tov ueyay. Hebr. 13.20. Cy ) “Agyerviuays i Pets (6) Ad 20+ 28. —(xJohnio. 27, (4) John to, 15. | K and. —— ms Ad oie fist) A Ga PhS Ps ” vps £55) 50 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull ¢ ¢ ) Rev. 15:3» and he ever had, and {till hath a Magifterial and Imperial power over it, to rule and govern it; He is (¢) King of — Saints. QYis true, the Prophets and Apoiltles are called Foundations and Founders of the Church; Thofe of the Fudaical Church, before our blefled Saviour’s Incarnation ¢ thefe of the Chriftian Church, after it. But the Power, and. * the Authority, the Prophets or Apoftles had, ( even the - €d) Hebr. 3.5.6. Maons tv otn@s ut famulus : Chriftus 6H rev cinovs fuper domum, ut Filins & Dominus. . Ce) 2Cor.4 5. Cf) chrifias Pe- trum Univer fi fideli- um Generis Caput Conftituit—— nt qui Et Succeffit 4 Eandem Plane Toti-- us Ecclefie Pote(taq tem babere voluerits. Catechifmus Tri- dentinus Part. 1. Cs. To. §§- F112. & pracipue. §, 13. pe. m7. Edit. Parif, 163 S 2. The Apoftles. Cz) Matth.10.1. 2.3. &c. Mark. 3- 4. Lok. 9.1. &O Ch) Paulas Apo- folus non ab bomé= mibus nee per boris nem, Gal.t.t. ode anrons segvoSey » &c. Dominus eum wocavit celitus,ho-. mine non wus Ad- minifiro. Theode- . wetinloc. Now Pe tro. Cuma Eftius in lo-. ereatelt of them ( AZfes, or Peter ) was only AGnifferial., the Authority of Servants, deriv’d from our blefled Sayvi- our, andexercifed under him. So the Apoftle tells us-— (d) That Mofes was faithful in all his Houfe y (i.e. inthe Ju- daical Church ) As aServant, but Chrift as a Son, over his Own Houfe , whole Houle Are We, &c. So inthe Chri- ftian Church , the Apoftles ( all of them) were Prime and Principal Minifters, from and under Chrift, to call and buildthe Church. ‘They were Servants of Chrift, and ( for his (e ) fake ) of the Church: they had A4izifterium, but not Imperium: Neither Peter, nor any other, had that vaft Monarchical Supremacy over the whole Church, which is) — ( not without great Error and Impiety ) pretended to;. > when they blafphemonfly fay That Peter (f) was our bleffed. Saviow?s Succeffor, and’ ( by him) Conftituted the Head of the. Univerfal Church, with the very. fame Power our bleffed Saviour had, But this they fay only, without any ovine or Probability; and fo tranfeat cum cateris errori= ws. yy Be 2. But although we fay, ( and have evident Reafon and Authority for it.) That our blefled Saviour was the one and only prime and chief foundation and founder of the Church, and all the Apoftles ( Peter as well as the Reft ) Superftrutti- ons in refpect of him; yet we know and acknowledge, that ( both in Scripture and Antiquity ): they are called Founda tions.and Founders of the Chriftian Church in refpect of the Churches, call’d, Converred, and Conttituted-by them; but all Equally fo, Pererwasno more a foundation than Paul, or James, or Joh. For, 1. They wereall zmmediatelycal?d by our (g ) bleffed Saviour, without any dependence (hb )- . upon Peter, orany body elfe, (-as.is Evident in the Te) i = againft Queen Elizabeth. Si felf ) And this is generally confefs’d by the Popifh Com- '_-mentators, even the Jefuits, fuch as Tirinus, Adenochius, ec. I fay, all the Apoftles had this zvmedzate calling to their Apoltlefhip, from our blefled Saviour, except Adathias 5 and he was not chofen by Peter (who neither knew nor had any fuch Supremacy, as without allreafon, is now afcribed to him ) but the ( ¢ ) Colledge of the Apoffles, and confent ofthe faithful there prefent. Andthough alearned Jefuit, ( zealous for Peter, andthe Popes Supremacy ) would have Peter to be the (k) Direttor in that bufinefs (the Elettion of Matthias ) yet he cannot deny, but it was done by the com- amon (1) confent of-the Apofiles and Brethren. 2, As the A- poftles all of them, ( Adathias excepted ) had their ca#Im- mediately and Equally from.our bleffed Saviour, without any dependance upon St. Peter ; fo they had their Commiffion emmediately from him, and init, the very fame Power, e- qually given toall.. The fame power given to any one, ( e- ven St. Peter) was given to everyone. This is Evident, 1. From thofe plain Texts where their (#.) Commiffion and Apoftolical Power is giventhem by our bleffed Saviour, 9 before the Refurrection; whenthey were fent to the ( #) Jews only; andthe very fame Power equally given to all. 2. And from thofe other ( as clear and plain ) Texts,where- in (after the Refurrection ) they had commiffion and Au- thority given them by our blefled Saviour, to preach 10 ( 0) “all Nations; where it is As my Father fent me, fo Lfend you, and Go ye, ec. All equally fent, no difference or di- {tinction of the Perfons, as to any Priviledge or Prece- dence, no Degrees of Power more or greater inone, than every one. Their Commiffion and Authority givenin it, was the very fame,. and equally given.to all the Apoftles. ~Thefe Truths are fo evident in the-Text, that fome fober Popifh Writers do both profefs and induftrioufly prove them. Franc: AViforia, ( prime Profeflor of Divinity at Salamanca in Spain, and ( as they efteemed. and called him ) an(p) Excellent and Incomparable Divine) propofes and proves thefe two Conclufions. 4. All the (q) Power the » Apoftles had, was ( by them ) received immediately from Chrift. K 2 2. All (i) Matthias a Collegio Apoftolorum fattus eft Apoftoluss /ta Eftius in Gal. IIs (k ) Hee omnia facta funt divigente Petro, qui totius O- peri fuit Choragys. A Lapide in Cap. 1. AG. Apoft.p.s7. Co}. 1.C, C1) Apoftolic.- terique fideles Com- muni confenfu Nomi= narunt duns, 8ece A Lapide, ibidem. ( m ) Matth.10- T. 2. 3. &c. Mark. | 3-13. 14.15. Luk. I (n) Matth. 1o6 6 §-6. Co ) Matrh, 28. 18.19.Mark.16.156 £6. John. 26.22.23. (p) Francif. A Vittoria. SS. Theol. Salamanticenfis A- Cademia, in prima- tid Cathedra Pro- fefloveEximio & In- comparabili. tta ha- bet Libri fui Epi- graphe feu Titulus. (4) Omnem Po- teflatem, quam Apo- fi oli babuerunt,reci- perunt Immediate a Chrifio. ViGoria Preledt. 2. De Po- teft. Ecclef, Cones 3+ P+ 84. ~~ Objervations on the Pope's Bull 52 (r) Apoftoli Om- neshabuerunt egqua- lem Poteftatem cum Petro. Ibid. Conc. 4. p. 85. Cf) Quod fic In- telligo; quod quili- bet Apoftolus habact Poteftatem Ecclefia- (ticam in toto Orbe, ce» ad Omnes Aitus ad quos Petrus ha- buit. Ibid. — () Non loquor de ilis Aétibus, qué fPectant ad folum famnam Pontificem, ut Congregatio Generalis Concilij. {bidem. 2, Allthe (x) Apoftles had Equal Power with Peter: And then he Explains his meaning thus Cf) That every A- poftle had Ecclefiaftical Power in the whole World, and to doe- very At, which Peter had powerto do. But then ( to pleafe the Popeand his Party) he Exeepts thofe Acts which were pro- per and belong?d (t ) ‘peculiarly tothe Pope, as Calling of aGe- neral Council, But this is gratis dictum, without any pre- tence of proof, or probability from Scripture, and evident- ly contradictery to the known practice of the Chriftian World, after the Emperors became Chriftians, who alone (and not the Pope ) call’d all the Ancient Councils; as is. fully proved by alate and Learned (4 ) Sorbox Dottor. («) Vid. Hift.Conc. Gene- ralium, per Ed. Richerium Do&. & SociumSorbonicum. Colen. 1680. where he clearly proves, — i the firft Eight General Councils were call’d by theEmperors. : §. Butto proceed; That place in (x) AZatthew isurg- (x) Math.16.19. Cy) Cap. Solicit. 6. Exrra De Ma- jor.& Obedientia. vid. Baron. Tom. ¥1.ad ann. 1076.§. 25. 26. (x) Cap. unam Sand.1.De Major. & Obedientia. Ex- travag.Com (a) Beliarm. de Pont. Rom. ] 5.c.7 §. Item; & §. fic enim. (2) Conc. Late- ran. fub Leo. Io. Seff.11. apud Bini- um.Tom.9. p,153- A.B. (¢c ) Hénoratus Faber Societatis Jefu, libro cui Ti- tulus Una Fides,UniusEccle- ed inthe foregoing Objection, to prove the Monarchical Supremacy of Perer I give unto thee, the Keys of the Kimgdom of Heaven, and whatfoever thou {halt bind on Earth, fhall be bound en Heaven, @&c. NowthatI may give a fhort and diftinét Anfwer to this place: I confider, 1, That this Text is generally urg’d (though moft Imper- tinently ) to prove Peter’s and the Popes Power over Kings and Emperors. So (y) Innocent, Ill. Cites it to prove, that the Emperor is fubjett to the Pope. To the {ame purpofe Pope Boviface. VII produceth it, in his Impious and ( as tothe Nonfence and Inconfequence of it ) ridiculous ( z) Extravagant; which( 4 ) Bellarmine approves, and Leo. X. and his (6) Lateran Council (which they call a General one) Innovates and Con- firms; and yetalate (c¢ ) Jefuit, exprefly tells us,( and you may be fure, with the (4) Approbation of his Su- periors ) Thatthe Keys were given Only to Peter. Thefe, and many more, quote this place to the fame pur- pofe. fie Rom. Delingz. 1657.Cap.19. Cujus Lemmaeft; Claves Regni Celorum Duntaxat Petro Date juerant. Cd) Prodiit dittus Liber, cumfacultate Superiorum, & Privilegio Cefarto. 2. It againft Queen Elizabeth. 53 2. Itiscertain ( and (¢ ) confefs’d ) that our bleffed Sa- vionr inthis place of Adatthew, doesnot Aétually give St. Peter the Power ofthe Keys (be what it will) but ( pro futuro) promife that he will give it. For it is in that Text, didea, dabo, Iwill give, not I have given, or do give; and therefore they muft fhew fome other place in Scripture, where that Power isactually given to Peter, and that to himalone ; elfe, (if it be given to the other - Apoftles as well as to him) it will be impoffible to prove his Prerogative and Supremacy over the other Apoftles, from that Power, whichthey have as well as he. (¢) Daboait,nor do; promittit, non dat.Luc, Brugenfis in Matth. 16. 19. Ita etiam Faber Stapulenfis in di- Gum locum, ut-8£ alij. Vide Catenam Gracorum Patrunt in Matthzum a Ni- ceta Serrarum E- pifcopoColle&am;, & a Balth. Corde- rio Jefuita Edita Tholof. 1647. & ibi Cyril. p. $48. ubi ait, Chrifium Claves Petro promififfe. Matth. 16. 19. Sed non dediffe. Joh. 20. 22, 23: ‘O78 Sips xptess Ww itis "Avasdowws Bes ITE > I ~ ¢ » .~™ \ e U | ee 4 >~ im, ALLETE TVG ee hy10Vs AV TYAY AONTE TAS heuapTias, Apbey as avTos, Kew . But itis certain, that the Power of the Keys ( be what it will) was ¢ by our bleffed Saviour ) afterwards given to all the Apoftles, as well, andasmuch, asto Perer. So it evidently appears by St. (f) A@srhew, in the place cited. Where our bleffed Saviour fpeaking to all his Ditciples, as well as Peter, hath thefe words Veri- ly I fay untoYou, ( *tisall (g) ofthem he fpeaks to ) whatfoever you {hal bind on Earth, {hall be bound in Hea- ven 3 and wharfoever you {hall loofe on Earth, {halt be loofed in Heaven, Here his Promife made before to Peter , Chap. 16. 19. is made Goodto him, andthe Power of the Keys given him; but 7cismanifeft, that it is ( inthe fame time and place ) equally givento all the Apoftles,. as wellas to Perer, Their own Authentick Offices, now and heretofore in Publick ufe in the Church of Rome; do atteft thistruth- In one of which, they are taught to Invocatethe Apofties in this Form (hb) Orate pro eo Omnes Santhi Apoftoli, Quibus a Domino data eft Poreftas Ligand: & Solvendi. The Power of Binding and Loof- ing, (and fo the Power of the Keys) was given to all the Apoftles, as well asto Peter. This the (i) Manual of the Church of Salisbury acknowledges, that the Power of binding and loofing, was given to Paul as well as Peter 5 and further (f) Matth. 18> 18. Ca) rhs xadis Tlerpw mreapeaye, 8C Petro dedit Claves cum Ligandi Fote- ftates eam vero Po- teftatem tradidit & Di(cipulis Omnibitse Procop. in Taiz Cap. 61 & 713, 716.Potefatem tri- butt Apoftolis. Hie- ronym. in Matth. 18.18. fo even the Popifh Commenta= tors upon that place; Menoehius. Lue. Brugenfis,&e. (h) Proceffiona- Je juxta Ritum Ee- clefiz Romane re- ftitut. Parif. 1663. p> 205, In Cont mendatiene Ani- m2. phage (2) Mamuale di- dum. Lond 1934 P+ 725 54 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull —-) (k) | Quilibet Sa- — terdos eft Vicawius Petri PaulisOce Abid.p.73. ; cy Miffale di- -€tum MS. In For- mula Abfolurtionis. Pp. Prt. 112. _(m) Apud Ead- ¢Merum Hift.Novo- rum,per Seldenum lib. a. pag.27. (n) Apud G. Ferrarium DeCath. Eccl. Divinis Offi- lis Romez.1591-p- 39. in abfolat. plu- Fali & p.go. in Ab- folut-fingulari.Col, nA. B. ‘(0 )CatechifRo- aman. Parif. 1635. Part.2.c. 11. De 10.Symboli Artic. §. 4.6. Dominus E- pifcopis tantum ec Sacerdotibus banc Poteftatem dedit.Et Idem. habemus §. 9» Tbidem. { p ) Pontificale Romaaum. Romz. 1611. p. 52 De Ordinat. Presbyte- tl. (9). Joh. 20.22. © 23. AccipeSpiritum Sankumguorum re=- milferispeccata, re- snittantur eis, & quorum vetinueris, retenta funt. further adds Ck.) That every Prieft is Vicar of Pem ter. and Paul, and ( Vice Petri Pauli Ligat & folvit ) binds and loofeth in their fiead and place, The (1) Ancient MS. Mifjal belonging to the Abbots of Evetham, fays the very Jame thing ; So does ( m.) their St. Anfelme: andthe Old (2) Ordo Romauus exprefly fayss That the Power of the Keys, or the Power of binding and loofing, was (by — our blefled Saviour ) given to all the Apoftles, and (in them) to all their Succeflors. Vide Bandinum, Lombar- dum, &c. Sent, Lib. 4. Dif. 18.19. and the reft there. Their Trent Catechifm ( publifhed by Pope Pim. V. ac- cording to the Decree of the Tremt Council) affures us, That every ( © ) Bifhop and Prieft has the Power of the Keys given him by our bleffed Saviowr. Hence itis, that in their Roman ( p) Pontifical, in their Ordination of a Prieft, this Power of the Keys, of remitting and retaining fins, is Siven to every one Ordain?dto that Office, and ( which may {eem ftrange ) 2 the very ( q ) fame words our blefled Sa- viour ufed, when he gave that Power to Peter and the ‘other Apoftles. Nor is this all, Their Oecumenical Council of Trent approves and (by aSynodical Defini- tion and Decree ) confirms all this; and fays further , That our (r.) bleffed Saviour, before his Afcention, left All Priefts His Vicars, as Prelidents and Fudges 4 who By the Power of the Keys {hould Pronounce Sentence of the Remiffi- on and retaining of Sins. And this they there prove out ofthis very Place ({).of Matthew, fcom which they would (and generally endeavour to) prove’ the Popes / t ) Ab- Solute Monarchical Supremacy, And Power to depofe Kings and Emperors. To omit all other Inftances (. which are too many ) fureI am, that Pope Juzecent. IV. builded his Power to Depofe the Emperor Friderick, upon this (1) Chri ftus Afcenfurns in Calos, Sacerdotes fui Ipfius Vica- véos reliquit, tanquam Prefides ac Judices, ad ques omnia mortalia crimina deferantur; quo y ¥ Pro Poteftate Clavium, remiffionis & retentionis Sententiam pronuncient. Concil. trid. Seff. 143 De Peenirentia..c. ¢. (f) Matth. 16. 19. Conc. Trident. Ibid. « 6. (t) Sun- anam Abjolutamgue Poteftatem , Supremum Caput , fiemmumque Paftorem Luc. Bragenfis inJocum Miatth. 16. 19. one againft Queen Ehzabeth 55 one Text — (#) We (faith that Pope) being Chrift?s V1- ' car, and it being faid to ws, in the Perfon of Peter 4 whatfo- ~ ever thou {halt bind on Earth, fhall be bound in Heaven, &c. do Depofe thar Emperor, and Abfolve all his Subjects from their Oaths of Allegiance,@c. From the Premiiles , and ~ Authorities above-cited, I think 7cis Evident, 1. That inthat Text, Adath, 16.19. The Power of the Keys, was only promifed; but not actually given to Perer. 2.When jt wasreally and (de fatto) given him, AdZatrh, 18. 18. jt was as well, and asmuch givento all the other Apo- ftlesasto him: as (befides what is aforefaid) is atteft- ed,and exprefly affirmed by Pope (x) Gregory the Great, - in his Book of theSacraments, publifhed by Hugo At- | nardus, a Learned Benedittine Monck;, where Pope Gre- gory (and heas Wife and Learned, and as Infallible as thofe who follow him) teaches them to pray thus; O God, who haft Committed the Power of Binding and Loofing To the Apofles, Gc. He knew not (it feems) any Su- - premacy given to Perer by our blefled Saviour, when he gave him Poreftarem Clavium, The'Power of the Keys; feeing the fame Power was given to other Apoftles, who never claim'dany fuchSupremacy. 3. Laftly, I defire _ then to know, by what Logick they can prove St, Perer’s Supremacy over all the Apoftles, for having a Power - (the Power of the Keys)which every A poftle had has well as He. Cu ) Nos chriftz Vices ténentes, iw terris , Nobifque in Fetré Perjona, di= Lum fit, Quodcun yy Ligaveris, (9c. Jm- petatoremPrivamus, ce Subditos a Fara~ mento frdelitatis ab- folvimus. Apod Bi- nium. Conc. Tom, 7. Part.2.p.35 40. _(%) Vide Sacra- mentarium Grego- rij Magni, per Hu-- gonem Menardum Pari. 1642. pi fre In Vigilia SS. Petri & Pauli. Where they pray thus----. Deus, qué Ligands: Solvendique Licen= tham Tus Apoftolis Commi fifti,oc. Bar-- laam de Primara Pap2. lib.2. confef- feth that the Keys: were given to Pe- ter & uy aurs oye, &co: Sed non illt (oli, fed Part cum ipfo Dig- nitate, umicurque é& duodecem. And then he proves it from Matth. 18.18. and Joh: 20. 22.23. The Learned Dan: Fhttivs cites this, In Notisad Originem. Part. 2. p. 46, Cole ms but neither gives, nor ih) pretends to give any Juft Anfwerto it. Only he fuys————— Barlaamuni corrupit ¢nnye~ x Céum. This was eafily faid, and Barlaam might as eafily have an{wered,. Dodiflimum _ Huetium corrupit éapds duzxite 4. There is ove place (y) more (and but one) wherein the _ Power of the Keys is actually given to Peter ; The words -are thefe AAs my Father fent me, fo fend lyon, And _ be breathed onthem, and faid; Receive the Holy Ghoft ; whofe foever fins ye remit, they are remitted, and whofe fins «ye rerain, they areresained, Where, 1. It is certain and Ei ielere ob , ‘con= (7) Joh. 20. 215 22.23 OOOO 56 Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull (2) V id.Catechif. Trid.part. 1. Cite §.4.et-loca in Mat- gine notata, in E- dir, Parif. 1635+ Pe 1.29.8 Ibid. §-9 Pe 132.8 part. 2+ C 5* De Pcenit. §. 12-P> 309. 310. & Ibid. §-55:p- 339-340 & Conc. Trid. Seif 14- De Foenit. c.5-8 5- (a) Remittuntur visy vere Cm veipjd Fudicio meo Patrif- que Coeleftis, Soluta fant in Calo 740° modo loquitur Mate 16.19. Luc. Bru- genfis in Joh. 20 23.Comment. Tom 4-p-134. Vid.Cate- nam Grec. Patrum an Johan. per Cor- derium,ad Joh.20- 23.p.439. and dm- monius there. (b) Ego, filius Dei, perfunttus Vi- cibus meis, mitto equal Authorita- tein Mundum uUni- verfum, Vos , quos creaus Apoftolos me- Ss Ordino vos Succeffores meos----~ Quod ait Euthymi- us, Chryfoftomum fe- cutus —— Apoftolé Sanquam Legati ac Vicari; Chrifti,fufti- nentes Perfonam ip- fius abfentis. Luc. Brug.in Joh. 20.21. Comment, in 4.E- Pang. Ton.4-p-17 2. confefs’d, That though the Power of the Keys, be not here | exprefly nam’d, yet to retain and remit here in Fohn fig- | nifies the very fame thing, That to bind and Joofe in Adat- thew, where only the Power of the Keys isnamed. This the Trent Catechifm, and the Trent Fathers themfelves muit, and doacknowledge, (as will manifeftly appear by the Places cited inthe (z) Margent ) and the moft Learned Commentators on this Place in fohn, allowit, and tell us truly, (4) That remitrere herein John, isthe very fame with folvere, to loofe, in A4atthew , and fo re- tinere here,the fame with ligare in Matthew, 2.Andcisas certain, (from the exprefs words of the Text) and the undoubted meaning of them ) that the Power of the Keys is here given equally to all the Apoftles, as well as Peter’, For fo the words of their Commiflion, J fewd you (mine Apoltles) and he breathed on Them; (his Apo- ftles ) whofe Sins ye ( my Apoltles ) retain, &c. The Authority and Power here mentioned, is (without di- ftin@ion or difference of Degree) equally given to all ; to Fames, and Fobn, and Fude, as wellas Peter. 3.Nay mores it is (6) Confefs’d, and pofitively and truly affirm’d, by a very Learned Popith Author, That all the Apoftles (aswell as Peter) are by this Commiffion Vicars and Succeffors of Chrift, and have the Power of the Keys (to bind and loofe, retain and remit fins) equally given tothem All. _ Now, if this be true, then it will inevitably follow, Thatallthe Arguments they ufually bring to prove the Pope’s Monarchical Supremacy (even over Kings and Emperors) becaufe he was Chrift?s Vi- car, and had the Power of the Keys given him ; I fay, All fuch Arguments, from fuch Topicks, will not only be inconfequent, but indeed altogether imperti- nent and ridiculous. -For if this Argument be good and concluding, Ihe Keys were given to Peter, and he w the Vicar of Chrift: Ergo, He # the fole Supream Monarch of the whole Church, Then this will be as good and conclu- ding Every Apoftle (as well as Peter) was the Vicar of Chrift, and had the Keys given him: Ergo, Every Apoftle Oy ag againft Queen Elizabeth. 57 was fole Supream Monarch of the whole Church, And then _ (by this wild Logick) we fhall have Twelve or Thirteen Perfons, and every one of them fole Supream Monarch of the whole Church. ‘That the Power of the Keys, was by our bleffed Saviour, givento All the Apoftles as wellas © Peter , feems to me evident by the Premiffes, and that all of them (as much and as well as He) were Chrifti Vicarij, Chrift?s Vicars, may be as evident, and muft be confefs’d, even by our Adverfaries; unlefs they will de- ny the plain Truthof Scripture, and their own received Principles. For, 1. Our blefled Saviour tells us As my (c) Father fent me, fo fend I you. Chrift was our great (4) Apoftle fent immediately by his Father,fo that he was Legarws & Vicarius Patrws, his Father?s Vicar and Ambaffador (as St. (¢) Ambrofe fays). And our blefled Saviour fends his Apoftles, as his Vicars and Ambaffa- dors. SothefameFather tells us, in the (f) fame place, and St. Paul fays as much of (g) himfelf and the other Apoftles —— He hath committed to us the Word of Re- conciliation, now thenWe are Ambaffadors, for Chrift , as though God did befeech you by us; we pray you in Chrift?s fread, All the Apoftles were (by our bleffed Saviour ) Com- miffion’d and fent as his Ambafladors, what they did was in Chrifi?s ftead and place. They were his Vicars, and what they did was as his Deputies, Vice-Chrifti , fupplying his place. Thus (b) Lyranus, and the Later- linatory (i) Gloffator, (andthey no Lutherans) Explain that place; fo the Famous Bifhopof Paris, and Father of theSchool-men, Peter (k) Lombard, fo Pope (/) Gre- - gory the Great ; nay the Jefuites (Jxftitura Socierar. Fefn. _ Tom, 3. pag. 262. 263. acknowledge their Superiors (though they be neither Popesnor Apoftles) tobe - carios Chrifti, Chrifl’s Vicars. And that I may neither trouble the Reader, nor my felf with more Teftimonies; Their own Authentick Offices, which have been, orare approved, and publickly ufed in their Church, exprefly fay the very fame thing; That the Apoftles ( All of them as well as Perer) were Chrifi?s Vicars; particular- L ly, (c) Joh.ao.24. (a) Hebr.3.1, . (€) Deus erat in Chrifto, quafi in Vi- Carto G™ Legato. Ambrof. in 2 Cor. 5-19. Explicat.Ame br f cap.16. (f) Deus pro chri- fto Vicarios dedit Apoftolos, ut pro ipfo predicarent reconcia liationem. Idem \b. (8) 2Cor. 5.19 20 (h ) Obfecramus pro Chrifto; i.e. Loe co Chrifti, cujus fu- mus Minijtri, Lyra- nus in loc. 2 Cor. $20. - - C1) Minifterium reconciliationis de= dit nobis 5 i.e. Via cartis Apoftolis.And again, Legation: fun- gimur pro Chrifto; 1. €. Vice-Chrifti. (k) Dedit quof- dam Apoftolos, i. es Vicarios Predica- tionisfue.Lombard. in Eph.4 p.171.8 rurfus in 2 Cor. 5. 19.20. Le '¥* Mini- fterium reconcilia- tions nobis Apofto- lis, Vicari ts Chrifti. ‘p-125. Col.E. (1) Vide Johan. Lanoium Ep. Tom, 6P.192. ee RE ee Rive rt ard Se ate ee Ae CO Ie TNS, a 4, Fi ok Wa ee é a a bie kee ee hontai Ad UA ; y eT . y 3 te ¢} we I ies : - ‘ ' ~ t re ae : << ‘ . 7 fi 7> 288 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull — eae | See : (m) Vid. Miffal. Roman.ex Decret. Conc. Trid. reftitu- tum, Pij 5. fuilu E- dir.Clement.8.Au- thoritate recogni- tum; Antv. 1619, Inter Praefationes Mifiz fine notis, p. 219. ubdi in Prafat. De Apoftolis , Sic Orant _ A guum eft Te Domine Suppliciter exorare ,- ut gregem tuum, P a- flor etevne, non de- feras 3 fed. per Apo- flolos tuos, coutinna protechione Cufledi- as 5 ut gifdem Recio- vibus gubernaturs quos. operts Tut Vica~ ‘dos eidemContulifté preeffePajtores Hane Oraticnem itfdera plane .verbis con- ceptam, habes: in Miffahi fecundum u- fum - ¥ork ,. inter Prafationes Miffa- Jes, in Calee Tom. 1.&in Miflali fe- - this. ly, the prefent Roman (m) Miiffal, as does manifeftly ap- pear by the place quoted in the Margent. Thisthen be- ing certain, and (by our Adverfaries) confefs’d, That every Apoftle (as wellas Peter) was Chrifi?s Vicar, and had the Power of the Keys given him by our bleffed Savi- our, at the fame time, and in the very fame (n) words when and wherein they were given to Perer - I fay, this being granted (asitis, and maft) it will be abfotutely impothible for them to prove any Superiority in Peter (much lefs a Monarchical Supremacy) over the other Apoftles, from his Tithe of Chrafi?s Vicar, or the Power of the Keys, both whichevery Apoftle had as well and as muchas:'He, unlefs you will fay , That very Power which only makes Peter Equal to the reft, makes him their Monarch and Superior. Sure I am, if this Argu- ment begcod (andthey have no better) Peter is Christ*s Vicar , and has the Power of the Keys: Ergo, he Supe- rior to John. Then this will be good too—— Feba ts _ Chyifi?s Vicar , aud has the Power ef the Keys: Exgo, He But enough (if not teo much) of For the Arguments they bring for the Popes Su- premacy) drawn from his being Cbrz/?’s Vicar, and ‘ha- ving the Power of the Keys, are fuch.as rather deferve pity, or fcorn., then any ferious Anfwer, were it not that their greateft men (for Place and Learning, even 2s Superior to Peter. (0) their Iufalbble Popes in theit Authentick Bulls) per- 1 guadum ufum Ecclefix Salisburienfis. Inter Frafationes Miflales.. And Guil. E/tiusthe Learn- ed Profeflor and:Ohanceilor of the Univerfity of Doway, exprefly approves, and. confirms this, inhis Comment on 2Cor. 5. 20. Peftquam Sublatus eft Chriftus in Calum, Nos (Apaftoli) Ue Linus VicesGerminusinterra. Deus igitur primus Author, Chriftus. Minifter principalis, Nes ( Apo- ftalé) Minifvi fecundarij, atqueVicariz, A Deo Chrifto Mii. (a) Matth. 18.18. Job. 20. 212+23- (0) So Pope Bonzf.@. urges that Place, Matth. 16.19. Quodcunque Ligaveris,erc. Cap.unamSarciam. 1. De Major. & Osed.. Extrav. Commun, And Innocent. q. jaftifies his Depofing the Emperor, (as is aforefaid) from thofe words ——— Quodcunque Ligaveris,and ghe Power given.to Peter and the Pope by them. Binius Conc. Tom. 7. part. 2. p. 854. Edit. Parif, 1636. AmndGreg. 7. cites the fame Place, to the fame purpofe. L1b.8-Epift-21. And thefame Gregory grounds his Excommunication of the Emperer Henry the Fourth upon the power of” tae Keys. Mili off Poteftas data Ligands in Caloe Tera, Hee ideo Fiducia FretusHenvico toti- ws Regni Teatonecorum <> Italie gubernacula contvadico, & Onnes. Chriftianos a vinculo Juramenti, quod {roi fecere, aut facient,abjolvo. Barontus Annal. Tom. 1%. ad Ann. 1076,§§ 25. 26. ‘petually Java> ‘ bos 4 { sete ttn oe een | Se eee ~*~ ‘7+ fc iV ae ole ee ee A UC aa < ‘i againft Queen Elizabeth. 59 . petually urge them, to prove the Pope Superior to Kings _ and Emperors, and to have (what Pope Piws the Fifth in _ This Impious Bull againft Queen Elizabeth pretends to) Powerto Depofethem, and Abfolve Subjects from all Oaths of Allegiance and Fidelity. The Premiffes conti- dered, I think it is evident, and (I doubt not but) Impar- tial and Intetligent men think fo too: i yz. That every Apoftle, as well as Peter; was Chrifi?s Vi- “car, and had the Power of the Keys Committed to him , by our bleffed Saviour, and that Jmmediately without Any aependence on Peter, or any other, Sure lam, that Car- — dinal Cufanus (though a zealous Aflertor of the Pope’s Supremacy } was convine’d of this: Truth (as to ‘St. Pauw, and fo he might for the Reft) and does 2” Termi- _ nis acknowledge it. He fays, Doar borh Peter and Paul ' were (p) Ecclefie Principes, Princes of the Carholick Church; That they (both of them) bad the ( q) Power of the Keys , power to bind ard loofe; and both of them had it (7) Jin- mediately from our bleffed Saviour; That as Peter was (f) Primate , astothe Fews , fo Paul was Primate as to _ the Gentiles; and fo, that (in this Primacy) Peter was not fubject to Paul, nor (t} Paul to Peter, but each of them had that Primacy Immediately from Chrift,. without any dependence oneachother. And this Cufanus there _ proves out of Ambrofe, Auguftine and Hicrome. (p) Petras c& Paulus ambo Princi= pes. Catd. Cafanus Epift. 2, De ufu Communionis ad Bohemof. Operum, p- 836, Edit. Bafil. 1565. (4) Nec Myfteria caret, Romanum Ponte tiftcem. Authoritate Petri & Panli Li« Lave & Solvere. {- dem ibid. (t) De wrinfque tam Petri inter Fudeos, quam Panli inter Gentes Primatu,y Im mediate a Chrifto utrique collate. -And this he proves, out of Ambrofe on Galat. 2.7. who {ays the famething. Idem: ibidem. (f) Potuct utérque ubique Ecclefias fundare, tam in ciy- — cumcifione, quam preputio; Licet Principalis commifio cum Primatu, Petri fuerit in Circumcifone y do Pauli in Preputio. Idem ibidem. Ct) Nec in boc Alter Alteré Suberat, fed Ambo {ub _ Chrifte immediate. Idem ibidem. 2. And as every Apoftle, as well as Peter, was Vicar of Chrift, and had the Power of the Keys , fo it appears by the Premifles, and is confe{s°d by our Adverfaries ( in the Pla- ces before cited) that all of them transferred that Ti- tle and Power to their Succeflors ; fo tha every Bilhop,: | ae and ee Ae AR ee ee oR ee ee Ry 0) eg oa ee aE ee ee i i Si A ee ee ee ee Pe ee ee ee a ee ee ec es gs ee vier a oh Sana a vag” a \ ; 4 is) i ¥ os + 7 * ig! : fg wer + OM fk - A> of : » ¢ 1 é et See ae i eal 60 Obferuations on the Pope’s Bull | (u) Cyprian lays, That the Bilhop is faudex Vice Chrijli,and chat the Bifhops , Apostolis Vicaria Ordinatio- ne fuccedant. This Rigaltius obfervess And adds, Ecce E- pijcopos,evo jam Cy~ priani , Vuecarios chrifti, Rigalt. Ob- fervat.ia Epift. Cy- pr.p. 73. Anda I ttle after, Epifcopus eff Det Sacerdos, & Vita- rius Chrijti. (x) synodus de- clarat Epi{copos, qué én Apoftolorum /o- cum — fuccefferunt. Conc. Trid.Seff.23. De Sacrament. Or- din.c.4. (y ) chrijtus Af cenjurus, Sacerdotes fui Ipfins Vicaréos reliquit,ot. Conc. Trid. Seff. 14. de Poeni:.c.s.de Con- feifione. (x and every Prieft, after the Apoftles, is Chrisi?s (u) Vi- car, and has the Power of the Keys. Whence it evi- dently follows, that the Bifhops of Rome (notwithftand- ing their great noife, and groundlefs pretence tothe contrary) are nomore our bleffed Savioui’s Vicars, nor have any mere Power of the Keys, then any, (I fay again, then any) other Bifhop inthe World ; the Pope and Bifhop of Rome nomore then the Bifhops of Roan and Rocheffer. For their own Oecumenial and ( with. them) Infallible Council of Trevt, affures us of two things. 1. ThatallBifhops are («) Apoftolorum Succef- fores, Succeflors of the Apoftles. 2. That our blefled Saviour, when he was about to Afcend into Heaven , (Cy) left Sacerdotes (that (z) is Bifhops and other Priefts) his Vicars, and gavethem the Power of the Keys, to bind and loofe, to remit and retain fins. To conclude this. Point ; If the Pope and his Party, have no better ground in Scripture, (then the Places above-mentioned ) to prove and fupport that vaft Papal Supremacy, they moft vainly and irrationally pretend to; the whole Fabrick muft of neceflity fall. It being impoflible that fo vait a Superftruction as their Popifh Monarchy fhould be fo fuftain’d, by fuch Reafons which arefo far from being Cogent, that they are alcogether Impertinent. ) Vid. ibid. c. 6. de Minift, Sacramenti Poenitent. where it is evident, that by Sacerdotes, c. 5- all Bifhops and Priefts are meant; And that it fhould be fure that they are meanr, in the Index of that Council thefe words are exprefly fer down,— Sacerdotes funt Vicarij Chrifli. And refer to the 14. Sefl. c. 5. before cited. In Edit. Conc. . Trid. Anty, 1633. Objet. Well; butif thefe will not prove (what they are pro- duc?d for) the Pope?s Supremacy ; other Texts they bring, with as much noife and confidence as they did the former, and (if that be impoffible ) with lefs Reafon or Confe- quence. For Inftance,they cite (to prove the Pope’s Supre- macy over the whole Church, even over all the other Apo- {tles) Fob. 21. 15,16,17. Pafce Oves meas, Feed my Sheep- | And s' “y i. a> ] ny ell Ce at | tie Se eee a ee i iN GS a, Sees de Werle oe x, t "i -againft Queen Elizabeth. 6X “And tell us; — (4) That our bleffed Saviour leaving the World, did Create Peter his Vicar, and higheft Prieft , and Prince of the Univerfal Church, which be had promifed before, Matth. 16. 18. and now perform'd that promife. And again(they fay) ——(b) Ft appears from this place, That Peter ( and his Suc- ceffors Popes of Rome) is Head and Prince of the Church, and that all the Faithful, even the Apoftles are made Subjeéts to him, to be fed and ruled by him, This place is urged by Pope Jn- nocent the Third to the like (though God knows little) pur- pofe: who would have us underftand by thofe words, Feed my Sheep; that our bleffed Saviour (c ) meant al his Sheep , all good Chriftians, they were none of our bleffed SavioursSheep,xho would not acknow- _ bedge Peter and the Popes of Rome to be their Masters and Pa- fiors. And (to name no more) Pope Boniface the Eight in- deavours to prove, that our blefled Saviour by thofe words, Feed my Sheep, mzant univerfally all bis Sheep (d) — be- caufe be does not fay fingul arly thefe or thofe, but generally Feed my Sheep: And from this Place fo Expounded , they would prove Peters, and fo the Pope?s Monarchical Supremacy over all Chriftians, eventhe Apoftles, Kings, and Emperors. T hat be might fhew,(fays that Pope) rar. (a) Chriftus in Calum abiturus, hic faum Creatum Vicae rium defignat ac Summum Pontificem creat Petram,Promi= ferat Christus id 1p- jum Petro. Match. 16. 18. Sed hoc loco preftat 5 eumque Principem & + afto- rem totins Ectlefie Conftituit. Corn. A Lapide in Joh, 21. 15+ p.546- (Cb) Ex hoc loce patet S$. Petrum (e% ejus Succelfores Rome Pontifices) eff Ca- put & Principem Ecclefie, Omnelque fideles, & jam Apo- ftolos ipti Subjici,c= ab eo pafci & regi dzbere. Idem. ibid.. p-347- Col.2. - (Cc) Ait chriftas Petro & Saccefforibus : Pafce Oves meas non diftingucns inter has oves e& alias: @& alienuma {uo ovilé demonftraret , qué Petrum Cr Sugceffores Ipfius, Magiftros non recognolceret em Paftore’. Cap. Solicit. 6. Extrav. de Majorit. & Obedientia. (Gd) Pafce Oves, inquit, & generalitér non fingulariter bas vel illas: per quod commififfe fibi sntelligitur univerfas. Cap unam San@ame 1. De Mayor. & Obedientia. Lxtray. Ccminun. Ita Tirinus Reliquique paffim, in Joh.21.15. 1. Were itnot certain, that there is no poffibility that a- ny man fhould bring a true and concluding Reafon to prove an.erroneous and falfe Pofition ; it would hardly be-credible that otherwife Learned'men, furnifhed with great Parts of Art and Nature , fhould bring fuch miferable Stuff, fuch mifapply’d and mifunderftood Scripture, to prove that great (¢) Article of their Popes Supremacy, which being a manifeft Errour, without any Foundation in Scripture or 111635. And this an Article of their Creed, (I mean their new Creed) to which they.{wear Anfwer, (¢) The Pope’s Supremacy con- fifts in this,that he is, Petri Succeffor, & Chrifté verus em legitimas in terris. Vicarius Catechil. Trid.Part.2. c.7.. 28, p.39 1.Edir. Pa- (al who have any Dignities, Cure of Souls, &c. Vide Bullam Pij Pap® 4, Super forma profef— ionis fidei in Corcil. Trident. Sef. 24- De Reformar, poft. cap. 12. Edit, Antyerp. £623. Pri- Eablet td pee Petes sve We. eo | be 0) A PL! vee MARIA Coby te Dre e sh id i+ po . Ch cent ae * 4 62 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull ii MF) Matthilo.2. Cg) Joh. 1, 405 41s 42» (bh) Catechif. Trid. in the place and §: Gion laft ci- téd, fays vaanus Pontifex eft Epi(coporum Maxt- thus 5 sdque Fure Divino. That’s the Lemma to that Se- ion. And then’tis added, That the Supream jJurifdi- étion of the Pope, Nullis Synodicis, ant Humanis Conftituti- onibus, {ed Divini- tus data eft. (1) Kal yae tH: - Ro- . Primitive Antiquity, I cannot blame them, for not bring- ing ( what they neither have, nor can have ) better Argu- ments; butthat they bring any at all, to eftablifithat , which they ought, and with evident and cogent Reafons, might confute. : Ped, 2. As Antiguity did, fowedo grant (all that with any Reafon or Juft ground they can defire) that Peter had a Primacy of Order ( but not of Power or Jurisdicti- on) amongft the Apoftles.. For the Evangelift naming. the Apoftles, (f) fays The First was Peter. : Fishkin Order, or Cifyou will) firft re/pettu vocations ; as firft call’d by our bleffed Saviour; not to be one of his Difci- ples; for fo Andrew was cali’d before him ( as-is evie dent in the (g) Text ) but in refpect.of his Call to be.” an Apoftle. For when, out of his Difciples he chofe ~~ Twelve to be his Apoftles, Matthew ( in the Place cited) faith ; The firft was Peter. So we grant to the Bihop of Rome ( what anciently was given him ) a Primacy of Order, and Precedency; before all the Bifhops in the Roman Em- pire; but not Fure Divino, by Divine Right ( which with- out all Reafon, ( 4) they pretend to) but by the Con- fent of the Ancient Fathers and Councils... And for this, we have the Synodical. Definition and: Declaration-of —~ Six Hundred and Thirty Fathers in an Ancient and res ceived General Council ; who faid——~—(2) That be- canfe Old Rome was the Imperial City , therefore the Fa- thers had rightly given Priviledges to the Epifcopal Seat of that City. Where it is evident, that inthe Judgment of — that great and good Council, Cand of the General Conn- cil of (k) Conftantinople too, which they there Cite. ) 1.. That the Priviledge and Precedency the Bifhop of Rome had, was not Convey’d to him by azy Divine Right (as they now pretend ) on a Christo vel Perro, fed & Patribus; it was the Fathers who gave them. 2. And the Reafon: Spivo, Kes Etenim Antique Rome Torono, quod urbs illa Imperavet, Fare Patres Privilegia dederunt. Conc. Chalcedon: Can. 28. Apud Bin. Tom. 3. p. 446. (& ) Conc. Conft. 1. Gan. ¢. apud Bin. Conc. Tom. 1. pag, 661. Epifcopus Conftantinopolitanus habére debet Primatis Honorcm Poft Romanum Epifcopum, quia Civitas ika eft nova Roma. why againft Queen Elizabeth ie > i ' iy he . —_ oa at hal cis - thePope, was, that Constantinople fhould have Equal Privi- i why they gave him fuch Priviledge, and Precedency, was not becaufe he was Chrifi?s Vicar and St. Peter’s Succeffor , ‘but becaufe Rome was Urbs Imperialis, the great Metropolis of the Roman Empire, 1 know the Popes Legats in that Council, did whatthey could to hinder the paling that Ca- ‘non, and Pope Leo out of it, ( when the Canon was pafied ) didoppofe it, as much as he was able, but invain. For the Canon was Syzodically paffed, by the Concurrent Con- fent of the whole (/) Council, (the Popes Legats except- ed, which was acknowledg’d by the (m) Judges, and then (.”) Confirm’d by the Emperor, and:Received into the Codex Canonum Ecclefie Univerfe. That which troubled teges with Rome ( Precedency only excepted ) even in all Ecclefiaftical bufinefs, and that { by the Canon of that great (Council, and Confirmation of the Emperor ) the Patriarch of Conjtantinople foould have fo vaft a Territory under his Jurifdiction, to wit, Three whole, Diocefes, ( Thracica, A- fiana, Pontica,) morethan ( by any Law of God or Man ) the Pope ever hadunder him. And ’tis here obferveable, that although this Canon ( giving Equal Priviledges to the Bihhop of Confiantineple, asto him of Old Rome ( Preceden- cy only excepted ) abfolutely deny’d that Monarchical Su- premacy and Jurifdiction over all Patriarchs, ( which the Popes were then nibling at, and have fince openly own7d_) yet Leo in his Epiftiesto the Co) Emperor, (p) -Avatolt- uy (4) Pulchoria Angufta, &c. wherein he writes fierccly againft thisCanon, never pretended (as afterwards, ana now they do) That the Bifhops of Rome had by Divine(x) Kight, as ( Vicars-of our blefled Saviour) 4 Sxpream Furis- dittion over all Bifhops and Patriarchs in the wholeWorld : but complains of Avnatolins ({ } his pride, ( Catalina Cethegum ) (1) Vid-Biniury Conc.Tom. 3.Edit. Parif1536. p. 461. 8¢ p. 464+ Emroyo~ Trot SConzuy, av7y Sryerhee Lie > TRUTH MLVTES AS 2OUSYs TAU Te mL FY LECT HES Kee (m) Of eydoFo- allot” Acnoy]ig a- mroy darn dderreau- gulesy. meV ]4 i Su vod Q- ewe war bi- nius Ibidem.p.46 3: E.F..& 464. D. (2) Vide Edi-- Gum Valentiniani & Marciani. Ibid. P 47994772" Arey= tes Totyyy, &c. U- niverfi ideo..gux & SynodoChalcedonen- fi ConSsiituta funt , Cuftodire debent. Ec vide ibid. p. 477; 478.Edidtum Mar- clani,de Confirma- tione Synodi Chal- cedonenfis, (€ 0) Binius ibid. Conc. .Tom. 3. ps. : ‘ - Oo. ; (p ) thid..pag. 479- (q) Ibid. pag. 481. (rv So Pope Nicol. 1. at That Primaztiés Sedis Romane non a + atribus, aut Imperialé Civitate, fed ach iffo z Beato Petro: Vid. Binium Conc. Tom. 6..p. 508. Cel. 2. F. Edit. Parif. 1636. & pag. $13. Col. 2. C.Sothe Trent Cate- chif. part. 2. cap. 7. §. 28. Papa Rom. Supremitum habet ——— Non ullis Synodscis, aut bumanis | Lonftitutiontbus, fed Divanitus, &c. See the Authorities they there urge for it, Bh 1635. J ) Apud Binium ubi fupra. pag. 479. E, Sa. p: 391, Edit. Pa- the i ll ai a eT, Ne ae el eo) a a ee if =a - a I 2”, - YP Oe TP Stee ——_ a 64. Obfervations on the Pope's Bull (t) Clementiam weftram Precor, Sedula Suggeftione Obfecro,z~¢. Ita Leo Papa in Epift Mar- ciano Imperatort, apud Binium.Conc Tom.3.p.481.Col. a.B. (u ) Confenfiones Epifceporum (even thofe in the Gene- ral Council at Chai- cedon he means) in irritum mittimus , ec per Authorita- tem Beatt Petri, Ge- neralé Definitione Caffamus. Leo Pa- pa in Epift.ad Pul- cheriam ,apud Bini- um. Tom. 3. pe “482. B. (x ) Tt was in terminus Confirm’d inthe fixth Gene- the Violation of the Nicene Canons,.and the wrong done to the Patriarchs of Alexandria’ and Antioch, To talk of fuch a Monarchical Supremacy then, as the Pores have fince pretended to; Pope Leo neither did, nor durft, it was a Doctrine unheard of in thofe purer times 5 and had he challenged it then, as due to him by Divene Right, as he was Chrifi’s Vicar, he would have made himfelf Odious , and (having no ground for fuch a Challenge ) ridiculous to the Chriftian World. But when ( notwithftanding all his Legates could doin the Council, or he-out of it) the Canon pafs’d, by the Unanimous Confenr of the Council, and was Confirm’d by the Imperial and Supream Power ot the Emperor ; ( forthe. Pope does Petition and (+ ) Sup- plicate to him as his Superior ) though the Pope in apri- vate Epiftle to Pulcheria Augufta ( with great Infolence, and without any ground ) pretends to (w) Caflate and null that Canon by the Authority of St. Pster, ( who never had any fuch Authority to Null any Juft Imperial or Synodical Contftitutions ) yet that Canon was approved, received, and (as de Fure it ought) Obey’d bythe Eaftern Churches , boththen, and ever ( ) after. When thefe Pretenfions of the Pope and his Legates prevailed not, nor were regard- ed by the Council, or Emperor, or the Eaftern Church ; other Arts were ufed at Rome, to conceal that Canon ( which they could not Caflate ) from the knowledge of the Weftern Church, And to this end, 1. They Corrupt the Codex Canonum Ecclefie Univerfalis (the moft Authen- tick Book, next to the Bible, the Chriftian Church has , or ever had } (y ) Diony/fius Exiguas aRoman Abbot, be- gins that Impious Work; and in his Latin Tranflation of that Code (amongft other things ) leaves out that Eight and twentieth Canon of the Council of Chalcedon, and(z) — ral Council at Conftantinople. Can. 36. And the fecond General Council at Con/taatinople. Can. 5. gives thefame Precedence to the Bifhop of Byzantium, which the Council of Chalcedon does. (y) Dionyfius Exiguus Abbas-Romanus fub Juftiniano, Circa An. 540. as Trithemius, or 520 as others. (x) So Hicdor. Jac. Merlinus. Parif. 3535. Codex Canonum vetus Eccl. Romanz. E- dir. 2. Mogont. 1525. dein Parif. 1619. Editio Latina prifca Canonum, Apud Juftell. Bibiioth. Tom.1-p.300.S0 Pet.Crabb. J overius. J oh.Sichardus.Poft Opera D. Clement. Parif.1568. &c. others “= =” againft Queen Elizabeth. 65 others of the Popifh Party, follow him. 2. They Corrupt the (a) Canen tt felf; and by putting in other words in their falfe Tranflation, they make it contradict the Greek Canon, and the certain Senfe of the Council that made it. So in Gratian, the Corruptions of this Canon, are thus ‘Hicis rebus magnificetur ut illa, exe. So Gratianin the Old Editions, as isC (2) Can. Reno- vantes. 6. Lift. 22. Petimus,ut Conjlan- _tinopolitana Sedes Similia Privilegiz, que Superior Roms habet ,accipial, Non tamen in Ecclefta= onfefs’d. Vid. Cor- pus Jur. Can. Cum Gloffis. parif. 16 12. & fine Gluffis. Parif. 1618. & ibi Notas ad hure Canonen. 1, For tse wpeoCea ( equalia Privilegia ) inthe Original Greek ; Grattan has Similia Privilegia, like, but not equal Priviledges. 2. For QpeoCuripz “Paun, ( Senior Rema) Gratian has Superior Roma Old Rome mutt be Superior to Mew Rome, or Conftantinople, if Forgery and Falfification of Records can do it: for better Grounds they have none. 3. For, © te mis "Exnanosasiveis, etiam in Ecclefiaficis magnificetur utilla. Gratian impudently reads, xox ta- menin Ecclefiafticis, &c. But notwichftanding all that Pope Leo or his Legates coulddo, andall their other Indirect Arts afterwards, this Eight and twentieth Canon of the Council of Chalcedon was received inthe Chriftian World, and long after Con- firm’d by General Councils, not only by the Sy#odus 6. Ge- neralis, which was held Azne 6%1. (of which a little be- fore ) But the Eighth General Council under Pope darian Il. about the Year 870, gives that (6) Precedency to the Patriarch of Constantinople, which the Canon of Chalcedon before gave him; And this acknowledged and referred into the Body of their (¢ ) Canon Law, inthe beft Editions of ofit, Revifed and Corrected by Pope (4) Gregory XIII. this an approved Council at Rome. Ibid. Pari, 1612. & 1618. M (b) Definimus née minem Mundi Pe- tenth, quenquam qué Patriarchalibus prefunt Sedibus, ix honorare precipue fanétifimum Papam Senioru Rome; de- Enceps autem Con~ franténopoleos Patri. artham, deinde A- lexandria, c. Ita Synodus. 8. habi- tafub Adriano Fa- pa. Can. 21. And (¢) Gratian. Can. Definimus, 7. Dift. 22. Vid. Glofiam » (4) Vid. Bullam Greg, 13. dat, Romz. 1. Julij 1580. Juri Canonico prafixam. Edit. And a 4 a a pay — e oe oe se yeh Leet LON NN ROE E EE oe See ee OnE EL TBM ho) RIS, Pol eke ie tn er ar ah ee ne ; a hf! PENT Tiley, Oe es ea Sea - y r%) i , ——" 66 Gb{ervations on the Pope's Bull (¢) Ta xvetw t- _ ouly tres bare Tos peyise Ag- syiepel x, Olnepe- hie Tae Ader ave In Epift. Sy- ned, 8, ad Adriz- bum. Apud Binium Conc. Tom. 7. Part. 1. p.984. And *tisto be obferved, that this Syzodus 8. was Subfcribed — by the Pope or his Legates there, and was then, and {till — is approved and received at Rome: Nor need we wonder at it, For whatit did, was carried chiefly by the Popes Au- therity, who was by that Council, bafely and fervilly flat- ter’d 5 they calling him Ado Ce) Holy and Occumenical Pope, and Equclto the Angels, &c. This Title Oecumenical, the Pope took kindly then, though his Predeceflor (f ) Gre- gory the Great abhori*d it, as Antichriftian. Butto return to the Odjection. Cf) Vid. Greg. Maj, Regift. 1.4. Epift 3.2, & 34. 36. 38- & 1. 6. Epift. 30. & 1. 7. Epift. 30. pag. 220, 6g) Salvator No- fer Petrum fue Po- teflatis. Vicarium prefecit, uUni- wirfi Fidelium gene vis Caput G+ Pafto- yim Conflituit, cum eli Oves fuas paf- ss gendas, Verbis Am- pliffimis Commenda- wits ut qui ei face ceffit, Eandem plane 3. And here before I give a Particular and Diftin@ An- fwer to this Place of Fohn, ( Feed my Sheep) on which they commonly (and vainly ) build the Popes Supremacy ; I fhall crave leave, a little to explain, the nature and mea- fure of that Power which they give the Pope under the name of hisSupremacy. Amd herethey fay, Zhat our blef- fed Saviour gave his own Powerto Peter, made him his Vicar , Head and Paflor of allthe Faithful in the World; and that in moft ample Words, when hebad him, Feed bis Sheep, and that it was our bleffed Saviours Will, that all Peters Succeffors fhould have the very fame Power, which Peter had ; (fothe Trent (g) Catechifm tells us ) And this is that Plenitude of Power by which they Erroneoufly and Impioufly Depofe Kings and Emperors, and ( as Pius V. does, in this Bull, we are now fpeaking of, againft Queen Elizabeth) abfolve their Sub= jects from their Oaths of Allegiance, and fworn or natu- ral Fidelity. This premifed, I fhall proceed to a direc ( and I hope.a full and fatisfying ) Anfwer to that place in Fobn, Feed my Sheep, &c. And here I confider, | Totius Ecclefie Regende Fotefatem babere voluerit. Carechif. Trid..ex Decreto Conc. Trid. 2: _ Pio 5, Editus. Part. r.c. 10. §. 13. p- 117. Edit. Parif, 1634. Vid. N. Rigaltij Obfervat. Ga- leatam, Notis fais 19 Cyprianum prafixam. i Be is a THe op. That s sig. ss ie oe N vi. J Bee ty ee ere ‘ at at: t ‘ r again/t Queen Elizabeth. ee 7 1. That ifthe Supremacy was firft given to Peter, in thofe | - words——(h) Pafce Oves, Feed my Sheep, (as iscon- (h) John 2t.19: fefs’d, and by our Adverfaries pofitively affirm’dinthe 1% Objection ) which was after our bleffed Saviours Refur- rection : then it isevident he hadit not before: It being impofflible he thould have it before it was given him. And then it will as Evidently follow, that all thofe places in the Gofpel, fpoken of, or to Perer, before our blel- fed Saviou’s Paifion, are Impertinently urged to prove Peter?s Supremacy, which he had not till after the Re- furrection. And yet Innocent Wi. Boniface VIM, and o- ther Popes in their Bullsand Papal Conftitutions, the Canonifts, School-men, and Commentators ufually Cite many places in the Gofpel ( befides this, Pa/ce Oves ) to provethat Perer had the Supremacy before our bleffed - Saviour’s Pafflion;, whichhere they Confefs was not gi- ven him till after the Refurrection. That they do urge (i) Vide Epi- . 93° pt many fuch Places is known to all Learned men, vers’din tomenCanon. &c thefe Controverfies; but if any man doubt of it, and de- -per Greg.De Rives fire SatisfaG@tion, I fhall refer him to what a Learned Po- Capucinum. Lugd. pith Writer (and Capucine ) has faidin the (7) Margent, hy Tratt.’ de where he tellsusy how many places are Cited for the Su- here for Toss premacy. , Supremacy, he cites Matth. 16.17, 18, ro. Super banc Petram: e& dabo tibi Claves: Matth. 10.2. Primus Petrus. Matth. 17,27. Chri paid tribute only for himfelf and Peter. John 1. 43. Thou fhalt be called Cephas. John 21: 7,8. Peter alone caft himjelf into theSea. Matth. 14. 28. He calls Peter only to come to him} Et ita tunicnm fe -Chrifts Vicarinm defignavit. Matth. 18.21. Matth. 19. 27. Mark, 14.37. He faid ‘only to Peter, Simon fleepeft thou Others Cite for Peter's Supremacy, Luke 22 38. Here are two Swords. So Pope Bonzf.8. Cap. Unam San&am. 1. Exctrav.Commun. vide Gloffamn verbo, / Ceeleftis. Can. Omnes, 1. Dift. 22. Though their proofs from all thofe Places, ¢and they have - nobetter ) are not only Inconfequent, and Erroneous, but indeed Ridiculous, Vid. Tho. Campegium, Epifc. Feltrenfem, De Poreftate Romani Pontificis. Vener. 155. Cap. 4. §. O- — pus Paulo. 4. Pap dedicat. ubi loca hac & plura, ad probandum Papz Suprematum, vané ad- ducit, & ridicule explicat. vid. etiam Bellarmin. De Romano Pontif. lib. 1. cap. 10, 11, 12. 8 inde ad cap. 24. Inclufive. ; 2: When our blefled Saviour fays, Pace Oves, Feed my Sheep, and Feed my Lambs; he ufeth two words —-— mbucive ad Booxs. Both which words the vulgar Latin M 2 renders, ee aes ee 68 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull | (k)*Tiscertain, and confeis’d, that qo Lady @ fignifies * torule. Kings are call’d qpptves Act @y, populi pafto- res. So Mentlanus & Agamemnon ufually in Homer, and in Hefychius srotmuay Baotus-And qor- Hiv ALDV» xO Tov WegaTuv And the Glofl. ve- teresin Caice Cy- rilli, rospaty@ » pecora pafco, and molpakva &r &y- Spam, Rego. (1) ad. 20.17. Tes mresCureges Tis exnanotas. The _ Presbyters of that Church. (mn) A& 20.4.6. (a) Verf 28.cap 20. molmatresy THY "Exnanojar, &C. (0) I Pet. 5, 2. miuciveTe 7 ey U- PAV Tol nvkoye Cp)épifcopi(lays that Carechifm ) fingulis Epifcopati- bus prepopti funt,ut CaterosEcclefie Mi- niftros, e& fidelinm populum Regant, eorum faluti fumma curd Profpiciant 5 andein Sacris Lite vis Paflores Ovium f pe Appellantur.C2- rechif. T rid.part.2. £ap.7-§ 26. p.389, 390. Editionis Pu- $l, 1635, renders, Pafce, feed my Sheep and Lambs: Now their 4 - Commentators on this place, ( to very little purpofe ) make a great ftir and pudder to fhew ( what (k) none denys ) that woipaire fignifies to rule and govern. But let the word fignifie what it will, in the Civil State, yet in the Ecclefiaftical and Scripture Senfe of the Word , where our blefled Saviours Lambs and Sheep ( that is the Faithful ) areto be fed, every Bifhop and Presbyter — (as well as Peter ) are moméves, Paffores, and may and ought #:patrev, to feed the Flock of Chrift. So, 1. St. Pawl tells us, (/ ) who from AGletum, fends for the Pres- — byters of Epbefus, ( Ufay Presbyters, for Timothy, who was — their firft Bifhop, was with Paul at (m) Milerum, and fo was none of thofe he fent for ) and when they came, he exhorts them to take heed untothemfelves, andthe Flock, (n) To feed the Church of Ged, Gc. where St. Paul (when he bids the Presbyrers feed the Church) ufeth the very fame word our bleffed Saviour doth, when he bids Peter feed his Sheep. 2. So (0) Peter himfelf (who little © dream7d of any Supremacy given him by thofe words, © Feed my Sheep) writing to the Afiatick Difperfion of the Fews, and Exhorting the fewifh Elders, ( or Presbyters) toadiligent Care, 7m feeding the Flock, he ufeth the very fame word to them, our blefled Saviour did tohim, © moiuavele ( fays he) Feed rhe Flock; he thinks it their ~ duty, as well ashis, to feed our blefled Saviour’s Sheep. And that which further, and ( ad: hominem ) more ftrong- ly confirms what I have faid (in this Particular) is; That our Adverfaries grant (though in Contradiction to the Senfe meny of them give of thofe words, Feed my — Sheep, whenthey would build the Popes Supremacy up- — on them ) that the word sssmaie, both as it fignifies to rule and feed, and fo the duty of ruling and feeding ‘our blefled Saviours Sheep, is fofar from bemg Peculiar to — Peter, or proving his Supremacy, that it isthe Duty, not only of Perer, but of every Bifhop in the Chriftian World, both to rule and feed our bleffed Saviou?s Sheep. This © the ( p) Trent Carechifm exprefly afhrms, That all mae P| LC againft Queen Elizabeth. 69 a U2 (aswell as Peter) arePaftores, Paffors to Rule as well as Feed the Flock, and Sheep of our bleffed Saviour, and to prove this, they Cite the Two very (g ) places which I (a little before) produced to the fame purpofe, whence it manifeftly appears, That even in our Adverfaries Judgment, ( when the Popes Supremacy is alittle out of their Head ) the feeding our bleffed Saviour?s Sheep, 1s not Peter?s Supream Prerogative, but a Duty required of svery Bifhop in the World. _ But this (though enough ) isnot all ; we have greater (and with them Infallible, and therefore undeniable ) Authority to confirm what I have faid, and Confutée our Adverfaries, as to their proof of Peter’s, or. the Pope’s Supremacy, from thofewords, Feed my Sheep. For their Trent Council ( which if the Pope fay true, was (7) Dz- vinely Infpired, and therefore Infallible; and ifhe donot fay true, he himfelf was not only fallible but actually falfe ) exprefly tellsus, That not only every Bifhop, but eve- zy one ({) who hadCure of Souls, was bound by the Law of Chrift in the Gofpel, to rule and feed his Sheep, by offering Sa- erifices for them, by preaching the Word,. Adminiftring the Sacraments, by good Example, by a Paternal Care of the Poor, and all other Paftoral Offices. And this is there proved by Texts, quoted in the Margent; which ( with fome others ) are the very fame with thofe F have (a little before) citedout ofthe (¢) Acts ofthe Apoftles, and (#) St. Peters Epiftle: Nor thofe only, but this very place of ( x) St. fohn ( on which they would build Pe- rer?s Supremacy ) is cited in the Margent, as contain- ing a Precept obliging ( not Peter only, but) Al, whe-had Cure of Souls, to feed Chrift’s Sheep. Now if thofe words, Feed my Sheep, contain Ppeceptum, a Precept, Obliging all Paftors to a Paftoral Duty ; them they do not con- tain ( what they pretend ) Donwm, a Donation of Su- premacy. | C4) A&.20.28. EX Pet. 5. 253. (t) Dominus Pa- tres Tridentinos Dé= vinitus Infptrare dignatus eff. Pius Papa 4. in Bulla fu- per forma Jura- menti profeffionis Fidei. ( €)Precepto Di- vind Mandatam eft Omnibus 5 quious Animarum Cura Commiffa eft, Oves Agnolcere , pro sis Sacrificium offtrre , verbs predicatione, Sacramentorum Ad- miniftratione,at boe norum operum Bre emplo pafcere, paupe- THM Chtam paternam gerere, (rin Cete- 14 Munia Paftora- lia incumbere —— ideo Synodus tos-ad- monet, ut preceptoe rum divinorsm Memores, in Judicio G veritate Pafcant & Regant. Concil. Trid Sef. 21. De Reformat. cap. 1, Edin Antverp. 1633. pag. 284, _ Cx) John 21. 15, 16. (t.) Ad 20. 28. A. But (#) 1 Pets. 2.- 70 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull — a Cy) That of Bo- nif.8. Cap. Unam Sanétam. 1. De Ma- trav.Commun. And that of Innocent. 3. Cap. Solicitz,6. ex- ra eodem Titulo. Cz) Maldonat. fpeaking of Matth. 28.19. where our bleffed Saviour gives Commiffion to all his Apoftles ——- Go ye there- — fore into Al the World, ce. He fays thus Non fi- 4. But Pope Boniface the Eighth. and Pope Innocent bhi Third, in their before-mention7d ( y) Conftitutions, tell us; that by Oves meas , Our blefled Saviour means, 44 his Sheep, All Chriftians in the World; Becaufe he does not fpeak fingulariter of thefe or thofe, but generaliter of his Sheep, Whence they, (and many afterthem) con- clude, That our blefled Saviour Committed all his Sheep Univerfally to Perer’s Care, fo that even the Apoftles , (being his Sheep.) were committed to Perer?s Care, and by Confequence, he became their Paftor and Superior. Certainly they who reafon at thisrate., and fo irration- ally, may poflibly be fit Paftors to feed Sheep and Ox- en, and fuch other brutifh Cattle , but furely not tofeed Men and Chriftians. For, 1. Feed my Sheep, (as all know, unlefs they be fuchas thofe two Popes were) is an indefinite Propofition: and thenany Novice or young Sophilter in the Univerfity, could have truly told them, That Propofitio indefinita in materia Contingenti, (as this evidently is) «guivalet particulari. When we fay men are young, or wife, or learned , we mean, not all, but fomearefuch. Sohe who fays, Chrifi?s Sheep are to be fed by Peter; muft mean fome of them are to be fed by him, pro loco & tempore, ashe had place and time to meet withthem. It being impollible he fhould feed them (<) all. There were many thoufands of our blefled Savi- -our’s Sheepywhom Peter never did,nor could fee,nor they hear him: And certainly his gracious Lord and Mafter would not tye himtoImpoflibilities. 2. When they fay, (which is evidently untrue) that by thofe words---Feed my Sheep,allthe Faithful are meant, and are committed to Pe- eri poterat ut finguli omnes terra partes peragrarent, Genté(que omnes docerent 5 néque erat neceffari- £60 fuarim Ovinm curam ile dedit. Lbid. §.62. ° um, Quid enim erat Opus, ut Omnes a fingulis, modo Omnes ab hominibus, alie ab aliis docerentur. Maldonat. in Joh.2 1.15.16. &c. §.65.p.1889.E. This he fays, and truly. But then he fhould have confider’d, that if it-was impoffible for every oneof the Apofiles to teach all the World; thenit will be impoffible for any one. Impoffible for Peter to feed all Cftrift’s Sheepiin the whole World: and yet this he indeavours to prove —————Quicunque intra Ecclefiam evant, Petro palcendos tradit. Dicit enimpafceOves, non has, aut illas, fed pafce Oves meas. Onninm (ters 2 pl ible itn aes Tie db Peat oP ae le again{t Queen Elizabeth 71 ai - poets ' a . te?’scareand charge; and therefore the (4) Apoftles _ themfelves (being our Saviour’s Sheepas well as others ) _ are part of his Charge; and under his Jurifdiction. This _ they fay indeed ufually, but (miferably miftaken) only fay it. pana or Reafon for it. _ bleffed Saviour, is (to hiswhole Church) the only (4) For they neither have, nor can have .any juft Foritis certain, r.T hat our High Priel, the (c } Prince of all the Paftors , and the Grand (Ad) Shepherd of the Sheep, and as King, has Im- perial Power to Rule and Govern them. 2. It is cer- tain, the Apoftles ( from and under him) are Paffores and Shepherds, as well as Peter, to feed the Flock. But their Power is A4niftertal, not Imperiak. Eventhe Apo- ftiefhip it felf is (¢) Ataxevfe, a Miniftery, and they Mi- - nilters of Chrif?, andhis (f) Church. Now though in refpect of Chrift the great Shepherd, they are Sheep, even Perer himfelf: yet (on Earth) they are Shepherds only, not Sheep, neither inrefpect of the Church, over which our blefled Saviour has fet them to be Shepherdss nor in relation oneto another. Paul, or Fames, or Fohn, are no more Sheep inrefpect of Peter, to be fed and ru- led by him, thenhe tobe fed and ruled by them: And therefore to fay (asour Adverfaries vainly do).that in thofe words, Feed my Sheep; Peter is Commanded to feed and rule the reft of the Apoftles, as his Charge , (who were Shepherds only, and Sheep to no Superior Paftor, except our blefled Saviour, And by their Apo- ftolical Commiffion (g) Equal to himfelf) is irrational ; without any ground in Scripture|, or purer Antiquity. There is another Metaphor concerning the Apoftles,and _ their feeding and building the Church, which may illu- ftrate this bufinefs, All the Apoftles ( as well and as much as Peter) arein Scripture call’d Foundations of the Church, converted, fed, and confirm’d-by them. In refpect of Chrift, our blefled Saviour, (who is the only prime and principalfirm Rock on’ which the Church is built) they are (all of them) Superftruttions ; but in re- fpe& of the Chriftian Church, Foundations; and that with (a) Ex hoe loco (Joh.21.15.) patet Sancium Petrum( Evus Succeffores Ko- manos Pontifices ele Caput Uy Principem Ecclifie , Omnefqne fideles, etiam Apox figlos Ipft Subjici & ab ¢0 Pafci c&® Regi debere. Corn. A Lapide, in Joh. 21. TS: P- 547. Col, 20 (b) Heb. 4. 140 Tov “Apter ects (c) 1 Pete 5.4, "Ap X sol uny (a) Heb. 13. 20. Toy miueve tov Testa rwy Toy pee yVe ~ (e) A&. 1.17 256 (f) 2.Cor. 4.5. (Q) Hoc evant Ce- tert Apoftolé , quod fuit Petrus; Paré: Confortio prediti Honoris, & Potefta- tis. Cyprian.de Us nit. Ecclef. p, 208% Edit.Rigaltij Pajfo- res fant Omnes Apo-- tol, fed Grex tnus,. gui ab Omnibus un-- Animi Confenfzone Pafcatur:Pafce Oves' mas , belong’d ¢-- gually to all the Apoftles,as wellas to Peter,in Cypréan’s- Opinion, .as fhalf! appear anon Cee ee a ee Ob fervations on the Pope's Bull Ch) Nic. R igal- tius in Obfervario- ne Galeata, Notis fuis ad Cypriani O- pera prefixa. (i) Vid.Cypr.E- pift.67. p. 128.129 Edit.Rigaltij. & E- pilt.72.1bid.p.f42. in Calce di&z E- piftola,&c.8 Epift. 55:P-95- (kK) Singulu Pa- (Pore bies Ent (copis por- tionem gregis effe édfcriptam,quam re- gat unufauifques A- dius fui, five admi- niftrationis fue ra- tionem redditurus3 Non Rome, {ed in Ca- Lis, Non Cornelio,fed Chrifto Neo gat ( Cyprianus ) Ecclefie Romane ullas effe Partesin caufa Novatiani, peratta jamin Afri- 6a cognitione dam- maté. ( There lay no Appeal ro the Pope, as Superior to the Bifhops of Ajrica). Rigaltius in Notis ad Cypri- ani Epift. $5. p 95. & Notarum p. 77. 78. without any dependenceupon Peter, he is not the Fous- dation on which they are built, but both he and they im- mediately uponthe prime Rock and Foundation, Jeju Chrif? : So thatasthe Apoftles are’ Superftruttures in the Houle ef God (the Church) in refpect of Chrift, the prime firm Foundation; and none of them Superfirutures in refpedct of Peter: being neither built upon him, nor made Superftructions by him, by his Feeding or Ruling them: Sothey (and Peter too) are Sheep in refpect of our blefled Saviour, the great Shepherd of the Sheep; but not in refpect of Peter; they are Shepherds as well as he, and never committed to his Care or Cure, that (Cas hisSheep) he fhould feed and govern them: And as all the other Apottles (inrefpect of Peter) were Foundati- ons and Shepherds of the Church, co-ordinate with, and equal to him: So all other Bifhops, the Apoftles Succeflors,were equal to Perer’s pretended Succeflor (the Bifhopof Reme) and noway boundto give any Reafon of their Adminiftration to him, as to their Superior ; much lefs as to a Supream Prince & Monarch of the Chri- ftian World, asthe Canonifts, Jefuites, and the Popifh Party, do now erroneoufly and impioufly. mifcall him. This was Cyprian*s Opinion, in the Place but now ci- ted; And Rigaltius (a Learned Roman Catholick.) though he (4) feem to fay much for Peter?s and the Popes Su- premacy ; yetheconfefleth, (as upon a ferious Confide- ration of feveral Paflages in (¢) Cyprian, and the 4fri- can Councils, wellhe might) That Cyprian’s (k) Opinion was, That all Bifhops were equal, and were boundto give an Account of their Adminiftration to our bleffed Saviour only, and not to any Superior Bifhop, uo not to Peters Succeffor , the Pope, Nor isit any way probable, that a Perfon fo — excellent and knowing as Cyprian, fhould think other- — wife; feeing in his time (as.is notorious and well known to all whoknow Antiquity) there was no Patriarch or Archbifhop Superior (by any Law of God or Man) to the Ordinary Bifhops, (asmay, and when there is an Opportunity, fhallbe made good.) It is true, Ones b airy se eee againft Queen Elizabeth. 73 (if it be he, and not the Interpolator of that Tract ) fays, That the Primacy (1) was given to Peter, and that the Church of Rome was the (m) Principal Church. Now this Primacy and Principality Cyprian {peaks of, is, by me before, and now freely granted. 4 Primacy of Order - and Precedency, not of Furifaittion, or that Monarchical Authority, which (anciently was not pretended to by themfelves) they now contend for. And this Prima- cy, which anciently was allowed'to the Bifhop of Rome, was not from our bleffed Saviour’s gift, but the greatnels. of that Imperial City, Non a(n) Petro, fed a Patribus , (as the Canon of Chalcedon tells us.) And that which makes it more probable, that I have given the true fenfe of Cyprian, is, That Rigalius (a Learned Roman Catho- fick.) in his Diflertations and Notes on Cyprian, Explains | Oyprian?s meaning juftas I have done , reducing the Pri- | macy and Principality of the Roman Church, not from a- ' ny Prerogative given to that Bifhop or Church by our blefled Saviour, but from the greatne[s of rbat (0) Imperial City: And then citesthe Canon of the General Coun- “cil of Chalcedon, which in Terminis, and (when Tranfla- - ted) in plainExglfh, faysthe very fame thing I have - done. And indeed that Canon , made by Six hundred - and thirty-Fathers Synodically met, in a legitimate Ge- neral Council, confirm?d by (p) Jmperial Edits , and re- ceived into the Codex Canonum Ecclefie Univerfe, does Authentickly and utterly overthrow that vaft Monarchi- cal Supremacy, whichthe Pope and his Party for fome Ages laft paft (without any juft ground) contend for. if any of our Adverfaries think otherwife, (as poflibly they may) I fhallmake them this fair offer ; Let them bring me any Canon, of any General Council ( of e- qual Authority and Antiquity with this of Chalcedon ) by which they can prove the Popes pretended Suprema- cy, (or any one Article of their own new Trezt Creed.) And forthe future, 1 fhall acquiefce,and they fhall have my Thanks and Sub{cription. N 6. Pius fait Petrus, (1) Cyprian de Unitate Exclefix, p-208.apud Ripa'= tlum. Hoc érant ¢. - tert Apojloli, quad Pari coafortioprediti ho~ noris & poteftatss 5 fed trimatus Petro datur. (m) Cypr.E pift. §§- ad Cornelium, p95 Ad Petri Ca- thedram, CP ad Ec- clefiam principalem, unde unitas exoyta eft. (n) Ard 7 Bae ThASL CAV THY ROALD &e. Quid urbs illz Imperaret, Patres de- devant Fréviligia, Conc. Chalcedvn.’ Can.28. (0) Ad Ecclefiam principalem | Id eft, in turbi principalé conftitutam. Rigal- tius ad Epift.Cypr. 5$-p.78. Notarum. (p) Juftin.Conit. Novel. 115. ¢.3 §. 14. Greco Lar. Ludg.1571. p.746§. & Novel.Conft.131, c- I. ibid. p. 1055. where the Empe-- ror {ays say yap mevespnuzwy*® SC. dittarum quatuor Synodorum dogmata, ficut Sanitas Strip- turas accipimus, e Canones ficut Leges Obfervamus. es ee a eee te wee sh 3? Pam oe La ea 74 Obfervations on the P ope’s Bull Objerv. 6. (q) Chrifius €4- tholicam Exsclefiam uni foli in terres Apoftoloram principe Petro, Petvique Suc- ciffvi Rom. Pontifi- ci, in poteftatis pita nitudine tradidit gabernandam. Bulla dicta in prin- clpio. (r) Chriftus Pe» trum univerfi fide- dium generis Caput et Pafterem conjté- tuit, cum ili Oves fuas pafcendas com- mindavit, ut qui ez Succeffiff:t, Eandem plane totins Ecclefice regende poteftatem babere woluerit. Ca- techif. Trid.part. 1 De 9.Symboli Art. §.13. p. 117. Parife 1635. ({) Cum in Petri Cathedra fedeat , ut Petri Succe(for,Chri- flique Vicarius in tervis, Uuniverfalé Ecclefie prefidet: t- - bid. part.2. Ce 7 §: 28, P39 Je Ira - 6. Pius the Fifth in his Bull fays further (q) That our bleffed Saviour committed the Care and Charge of the Uni- uerfal Church, with atlenitude of Power to govern it, to one only, that to Peter the Prince of the Apofiles, and His Suc- Be Here I confider, , 7M: 1. That although it be certain, (from Scripture, and eyvi- dent TFeftimonies of pure and primitive Antiquity) that Peter never had, nor Executed any fuch Monarchical Supremacy over the other Apoftles, and the whole Chri- {tian Church, as is now vainly pretended to; yet 7cisas certain, that the Pope (and his Party )cry up,and magni- fie St. Perer’s Power, that he (as his Heir and Succeflor } may poflefs the fame Power. For this they fay, ( and without any juft proof, fay it only ) That tt was our blef- fed Saviour?s will, that Perer’s Suceef[or fhould have (r) the very fame Power Peter had; and this becaufe he was (f) Chrifi?s Vicar, (though every Bifhopinthe World, (as fhall, God willing, appear anon) be Chrifi7s Vicar as well, andasmuchas he) and fase in Peter’s Chair, as bis Lawful Succeffor. st a lfas , But admit,(dato non ConcefJo) whichis abfolutely untrue, That Peter had fuch a Supremacy and Monarchical Pow- er (as they erroneoufly pretend to) yet it might be Per- foual, to himfelf, and forhis Life only, (as his Apofto- licak Power was; asto that part of it, which was pro- perly Apoitolical) and not Hereditary , to be transfer- red to any Succeflor. So that the Hinge of the Con- troverfie will be here, and our Adverfaries concern7d to provetwo Things. 4. That Peter’s Power (be what it will ) was. not Perfonal, but Hereditary, and to be Tranfmitted to his Succeflor. 2, And that the Pope and Bifhop of Rome was his Legal Succeffor. For if they donot, upon juft Grounds, make both thefe good , good night to their pretended Supremacy. For the firft,; Thatthe greateft Power-St. Perer and the Apoftles had, was Extraordinary and Perfonal, not to be “Tranf{mitted to any Succeflor (what Power they did tran& mits ‘adaint Queen Elizabeth. 75 a mit, I fhallanon thew) will be Evident , in thefe Particu- jars. : I. Peter and the Apottles, had Vocationem a Chrifto Tmme- diatam. Our blefled (t) Saviour cal’d them all (ex- cept Adatthias ) immediately , as is evident from the Text. And, furelam, that the Pope cannot pretend to fuch an immediate Call. . The Apoftles (every one as well as Peter) had a Power given them todo Miracles, to Caf? out (u) Devils , and heal all manner of Difeafes and Sickneffes, Nor can Peters Succeor (whoever he be) pretend to this. . The Jurifdiction, which was by our bleffed Saviour gi- ven to every Apoftle, (to Fames and Fohv, and Paul as well as Peter ) was Univerfal; the whole World was their Diocefe. Not that every one could poflibly be in every place, but where ever any of them came,they had Authority to Preach, Adminifter the Sacraments, Cor- {titute and Govern Churches. So Paul did at (x) Anté- _ ochand Rome, as much, and (y) more than Peter ; though they pretend that Peter alone ( and not Pax!) was firtt Bifhop of boththofe Places. ‘That every Apofltle ( as well as Peter) had Univerfal Jurifdition and Authority over the whole World, is in Scripture evident by the Commitflion our blefled Saviour gave them (z) Go and teach all Nations, baptizing them in the Name of the F a- ther, Son, and Holy Ghoft: Teaching them to obferve what- Joever I have commanded you. And again, (4) Goye ento allthe World, and Preach the Gofpel to every Creature. Here I obferve, r. That the Apoitles in their firit Mit fion, were fent tothe (b) Fews, and themonly. But now their Commiffion is inlarged ; andthey are equally fent (every one as much as any one) to all Nations ( {ays Matthew) To all the World, (nie poy dravre, meiony oinendole as (c) Enfebiws explainsit) fays St. AZark; Idem Furifai- Skionis Apoftolice ¢ Orbis Termini ; The whole World was their Diocefe; every ones Jurifdiction extended fo far, and Perer?s could not extend no further. 2. For the Perfons they were to preachto, they were Exery ALan 7 N 2 tie (t) Marth. 10.1, Mark 3.14. Luk, I 9. I (4) Ibid. Matth. 10.1. (x) It does nor appear In Scrip uve that Peter ever was at Antioch, fave once,Gal 2.11. But Paxl Was many times, and long there,and conftita- ted that Church. See A&. 11. 26. AG@.14.21.28. 44. 15-35- ACL18. 22. 22. C ¥) Paul was there two whole years, At. 28. 20, writ them -a long and excellent Epi- ftle;but "tis certain Peter never writ to them,nor can it aps pear from Scriprure that he was ever 2 weeks, much lefs 2 years, at Rome. Where St. Paul is byOrgen,faid to be (next Chrift) pri- musEcclefiarumFyn- dator. Orig. contra Celfum, l. 1. Pp. 49. Graco-Lat. (x)Mat. 28.19.20. (4) Mark 16.15. (6) Mat.10.5.6. (¢)Eufeb.1.3, De- nionftrat. Evang.p. 136.and he has our B. Saviour’s word for ity Mat.24. td. SYGAN TH GLABUEVEt® 7, ae Te ALA Pee eS A ae ee eer Te ee ae ve ee a ee ee ee rere to ee et eee eed on os , ha | ' bane Pe v 2 . 5 cS . c Obfervations on the Pope's Bull the World. tis waouxifloq, toevery Creature, (every Rae tional Creature, who (if Infancy and Infirmity hinder? not) was capable. They were to Convert Pagans, and make them our blefled Saviour’s Difciples and Sheep, and then feed them, withthe Word and Sacraments: MaSu- mvourey (fays Atatthew) Convert, and make them Difci- ples, and then Baprize and Teach them to obferve whatever I have Commanded you. Thofe words, Feed my Sheep (on which without any Juft Reafon, they would build Peter’s Supremacy) contain only an Indcfinite Propofition, which (as evcry one whounderftands Logick , muft confeS) is only equevalent to a Particular, But here the Commi fion, given by our blefled Saviour, (toevery Apoftle as well as Peter) is exprefly Univerfal ; Preach to every Crea , ture: thatis, Feed All my Sheep, This is a Truth fo e- (dj Franc. Vi- vident, that a Learned (4) Roman Carholick confiffeth and oria, Reledt.The- fully provesit. Only (to fave the Popes and his own ol.Lugd.1587- Re- Credit) he fays, Tbar ta call General Councils belong?d on- let. 2. de Poteftare ; Feclefiz Conc. g. 2) t@ Peter and the Pope, by their Supremacy , and not to any p.85.where he tells other, Butthisis, gratis dittum, and an evident untruth. ws, Apofloli Gmnes — For the Pope (by no Law of God or Man) has , or ever <a i had Power, to callany General Council: And for many ots/ta > we : : Qui i fit Itelige; 8S never-pretended toit, which I only faynow , and quod Quilibet Apes (when there isaconyenient time) can and will make it ftolorum babuit po- (€)Good. Inthemeantime, I think cis certain, either teftatem Ecclefafti- 4, That by thofewords, Feed my Sheep, (on whichthey pirat tad aed build the Popes and Perer?s Supremacy ) our blefled Sa- quos Petrus habuit, . Viour gave Pererno Supream Power tocall GeneralCoun- Non tamen loquorde - éllis AGlibus, qui speétant ad folum Summum Pontificem , ut eft Congregatio Generalis Concili}, And this he there proves ; as to their Power over the whole world , and to Ads 5 only (and he dared do nootherwife) he excepts fome few, to whichno Pope, for many Ages, pretenc- ed. Inthe prefent Roman Breviary the Univerfa} Surifdiét:on of Paul (as weli as Peter) is ac- knowledg’d; Paul an Apoftle, Predicator veritatis per univerfum Mundum. In Fefto Cathe- drz Petri Antiochia. Febr. 22. (e) A Learned Papift, Dcétor of the Sorben ( newly come to my hand) has faved me the labour, and ex profeffo, and data opéra proved, that all the Hight firft General Courcils were call'd folely by the Emperors: The Popes did indeed (as he evidently proves) fometimes Petition the Emperors, to call a Council at fuch a time or place; but they were always both call’d and codfirm’d by the Emperors. Vid.Edm. Richer.D. Sorbon: in Hift. de Conc, General. Colon. 1680. TUL ea cils,. again|t Queen Elizabeth. 77 as +1 cils, that by them he might feed his Sheep: Or, “9, Thatthe Apoftlesand Primitive Chriftians in their ‘ times, knewno fuchthing. For, 1. When a Coatrover- ' fre arofe at Antioch, about Circumcifion , they fend not - to Peter , as Supream Head of the Church, defiring him ~ tocall a Council; but to rhe (f) Apoffles and Elders, Had they known and believ’d, that Peter had been Invefted with fuch Power and Supremacy, asis now pretended ; it had been Civility and Duty in them, to have fent to him in the firft place; But they fend to the Apoffles and Elders; without any notice taken of (what they knew not) Perer’s Prerogative. 2. It neither does, nor can appear, that Peter call’d that Council. 3. Nor didhe (as Head and Prefident of the Council) fpeak (g) firtt ; but the Queftion was much difputed, before Peter fpoke any thing. 4. Nor did Peter (after the Queftion was debated) give the Definitive Sentence; For ’cis evident (b)in the Text, That fames the Lefs, Son of Alpheus , and Bifhop of Ferufalem, gave that Definitive Sentence , which both Perer andthe whole (¢) Council acquiefc’d in. 5. Nor did Peter fend his Legats to Aztioch, to fignifie what he, and the Council had done, but the( k.) Apo- {tles and the whole Church chofe and fent their Meflen- . gers. 6. Nor.arethe Letters fent in Peter?s Name, or any notice taken of any Primacy or Prerogative of his, above the other Apoftles,; No, the ’Easypagt is, (1) The Apoftles, Elders, and Brethren fend Greeting. 7. Nor was ~ that Decree publith’d Tothe Churches in Perer?s Name, as made or (#) confirm’d by him, more than any other _ Apoftle. 8. Nay, the Apoftles fend Perer on a (7) ' Meflage to Samaria (and he obeysand goes) which had ~ beena ftrange piece of Prefumption, had either he or _ they known his (now pretended) Monarchical Supre- macy. 9. So far werethofe Primitive Chriftians , from knowing or acknowledging the now pretended Monar- ~ chical Supremacy of Peter, that even in the Apoftles _ times and Prefence,, they queftion and (0) call him to az Account for bis Agtions. \Msangiveym , Difceptabant adver- (f) A&. 1502. (gy A&15.7. « (b) A&,. 15. 19 20. 21. (i) AG. 15.226 (&) Ibidem. (1) Ad. £5. 236 Vide dictum Ed- mundum Richeri- um D.Sorbonicum, in Hift. Conc. Ge- neralium, lib.1.c 136 § ¢-pag. 401. Edit. Colon. 1680. Ubi ex Card. Alliaceno, & Concilio hoc A- poftolico Ad. 15e. demonftrat.Petrum Primatum (qualens Jefuire vellent ) non habuifle , fed Primatym illum Monarchicum ab Hildebrando, feu Gregorio 7. retro- dudum. Ibid. §.2. S. | (m) A&.16.dp (7) 4&.8.14, (0) AS 11.2.3 98 ’ | Obfervations on the Pope's Bull ¢b) Petrus Apo- flolorum Primus, ras tionem reddere Ec- cleffe Cogitur, mec tndigne fert, quia non Dominum fed Minifirum Ecclehie fe agere foiebat. Fe- rusin AQ. 11.2. (c) Impij autem Pontifices Nunc nec AbEcclefia argui,aut in Ordinem cogivo- lant, quale fint Deo- mini non Méxiftre. Tbidem. (d) Si Papa ine numerabiles populos fecum ducit, prime mancepio Gebenne CH. Hujus Culpas redarguere prefumat mortaléinm nulus : quia Cunctos ipfe jus dicaturus, 2 nemine cht Fudicandus; nie’ fit a fide devin, Can. fi Papa. 6.. Dift. go. (@) Gal. 2.41, 12,13,14- ‘(f) 2Corstr.g, & 12. verf. 11. (zg) Gal. 2.9. (h) Locus hic non derogat prerogative Petri,quitotius Ec- clefie Rector & Pa- flor Conftitutus, eti- am ipfis Apostolis Major & Superior fait. Eftius in 2 Cor. 12.11. C2) Qui Apoftolus jus illum (fays the vulgar Latin ) tazquam valde offen fi — expoftulabant ( {ays Chrylostom. ) And honelt Fobn Ferus ( a Roman Catholick,) tellsus , (6) That he was Com- ped to give a Reafon of his Atlions to the Church ; nor was Peter offended at it, becaufe he knew that he was not a Lord, but Minifter of the Church... But now Cas (c) Ferws there goes on ) the Cafe is alter’d ; for wicked Popes, ( as. though they were Lords and not Mi- nifters ) will not be Queftion’d for any thing, or reprov'd. Had the Canon Law been then in force, (which his pretended Succeflors have approved, and by their Supream Autho- rity publifh’d ) he might have told thefe who Queftion’d him, (a) That he was to judge all men, and none bims nor was he tobe reprov’d by any mortal man, though by his Impie- ty and ill Example, he carried thoufands to Hell with him. 10. Nay, Ste Pax does not only (¢ ) queftion St. Peter’s Aétions, but to hisface, before the People publickly condemn them, and that juftly ; for (he fays ) be was to be blamed : which he neither would, nor indeed well could have done, had he known Peter to have been fo far his Superior © as to have ( by Divine Inftitution ) a Monarchical Jurif- di@ion and Powerover him 11, Laftly, St. Pas! him- felf tells us, ( f) That he was in nothing Inferior to the Chiefeft Apoftles; not to Peter, Fames, or Fohn, whom (g) elfewhere he reckons the chiefeft. 1 know they fay, That Paul veas equal to Peter as to his Apoftolical Office, but Inferior to Peter, as be was.(h) Supream Paffor over the Apoftles, and the whole Church, But this is gratis di- éum, and indeed a begging of the Queftion, and taking that for granted, which never was, nor ever will be proved. However, ’cis certain, 1. That every Apoftle (aswellas Peter.) had an Univerfal fupream (i) Authori- ty and Furisdiftion, in any part of the World, and over any Chriftians wherever theycame. 2. Thatthis large- nefs of their Jurifdiction, was Apoftolical, and Perfonal to themfelves, whichthey neither did, nor could tranf{- eft; Summam habet in Omnem Ecckefam Potefatem. Bellarmin. De Rom. Pontif. lib. 2, Cap. 12. in Refponf. 3, & Obed. 2. mit -againft Queen Elizabeth ed =—— mit to their Succeflors,; whofe Jurifdiction was limited to fome City and Territory, and that particular Place , the Care and Charge whereof was conimitted unto them; as Ephefus was to Timothy, aid Creet to Titws. 3. Our Adverfaries confefs this, ( as to allthe other Apoftles ) but for Peter, they fay; He (k) tranfmitred bis Suprema- cy and Univerfal Furifdittion over the whole Church to bis Succeffor, and that by the Inftitution of aur bleffed Saviour , and Divine Right. Wf they could prove this, the Con- troverfie were atan end, we would acquiefce, and ad- mit (what upon undeniable evidence we deny) the Popes Supremacy. Butthisthey neither do, noris-there any poflibility they ever fhould prove. For there is not one Syllable in (2) Scripture, of Peter?s Succeflor, or ofwhat Power he received from him: and nothing but Scripture can prove our blefled Saviour?s Inflitution, and Divine Law, whereby Peter?s Supremacy is tranfmitted to his Succeflor. The truth is, that Pius V. inthe be- ginning of this his Impious Bull, and other Popes many ' (m )timesintheir Bulls, Breves, and Decretal Conttitu- tions, and their Writers generally, take it for granted, that our bleffed Saviour gave Perer the Supremacy over the whole Church, and to bis Succeffors after him: And when (2) fome ofthem, fometimes go about to prove it, the Reafons they bring, are fo far from: Senfe and Confequence, that they may deferve Pity and Contempt, rather than a ferious Anfwer. But when: Reafon will not Convince, they have other Roman Arts to Cofen / men into aBelief, that what was given to Peter, was likewife givento the Pope his Succeflor 5 and that is Ca- monyft other ways.) by corrupting the Ancient Fathers with falfe Tranflations. So when Chryfoftom had faid, That the Power of the Keys, was not given to Peter only, tut to the veft of the Apoftles: Pet. Poffinus adds , Succeffors ; and renders it thus —-— ‘he Power of the Keys was not gi- Ck): Succefio ex Chrifté Inftituto, & Fure Divino of , quia ipfe Chriftus Piftitait in Petro Pontificatum, injre fem Mandi duratu- THM, ac bdeo quicnn- que Petr ofucceditya Chrifto accepit Pon- tificatum. Bellar+ min, dicto lib. & c: § vt autem. (1) Romanum Pon- tificem fuccedere Pe- tro,non babetar ex~ prejjetn Scriptures y. (no, ‘nor Inplicité neither) tamen fuc~ cedere aliquem Pe- tro, deducituy evi- dentey ex Scriptu- ws, illum autem ef~ fe Romanum Pontifi- combabetur ex tra< ditione Apoftolica. Bellarmin di@olibs 8 cap.§.Obfervan- dum Fertio. (m)¥id.Cap.So- lita. 6, Extra. de Major. & Obedien= tia. & Gap. Per ve- nerabilem. 13. Ex- tra. Qui filni fue legit. & Cap.Ad A- poftolicx.2.DeSenrs: 8& re judicata, in 6. - & Cap. pro Human. 1. De Homicidio, in 6. (n) Vid. Tho Campegium Epifc. Fel- trenfem , de Poreflate Rom. Pont. Capp. 13,14. & Bellarminum de Roman, Pontifice, lib. — 2. C. 12s &xCs. yen a 80 a Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull Co) Ov nova XE ro Ilérey T87 Sedweirert Sc+ Nor id Petro uni Succef- foribu(que fais refer vatum.Pet. Poffinus Jefuita , ~ Catena. Gree. Patrum jn Matth. Tom. I. p- 2 Qe ene Joh. 20.225 22. Mn) Vid. Pet. de Marca de Concor- dia Sacerdotij & Imperij. Tom.2- |. $C. 10. §. 2-P-3 5% Pet. Crab. Conc. Tom. 1. pag. 945° Col.2. The words are thefe;wnde San-~ étiffimus & Beatif- fimus Papa, Caput wniverfalis . Eccle- fie, Ot. (7) Abfunt a Contextu Grxco, werba illa,Caput 4- niverfalis, 8c. loco didto,in margine. ({) Vide Indi- cem Librorum Pro- hibirorum Alexan. q+ juffu Editum, Roma, Ann.1664. verbo, De Concor- dia Sacerdotij, &c. P 29. & p.352. ubl extat Decrerum Congregationis } u- dicis, in quo dam- natur hic Petri de Marca Liber. ven only to Peter And His (0) Succeffors, &c. where Chry- |g Softome ( whom he Tranflates ) has nothing of Peter?s Sac- -ceffors: but truly and plainly fays ——That the Power of the Keys was not given only to Peter, but to the reft of the A- poftles, when our bleffed ( p) Saviour told them, whofe fins ye remit they are remitted, and whofe fins ye retain, they are retained. Soin the Epiftle of Pope ( g ) Leotothe Bi- fhops of France, and of his Legat Pafchafinus about the Condemnation of Diofcorw, inthe Council of Chalcedon, thefe Words occur in the Latin Copies The moft holy and moft bleffed Pope Leo, Head of the Univerfal Church : Where thefe words Head of the Univerfal Church , are notin the Greek Copies; ( as that Learned Archbi- fhop ingenuoufly and truly (rv )}-Confefleth) but (by Ro- man Arts ) falfly and bafely interferted, that fo they might by fraud ( what by no reafon they can ) maintajn, the Pope’simpioufly ufurped Supremacy. Andthat we may know, how unpleafing the publifhing of fuch things ( though evidently true ) are to the Pope and his Party at Rome, ( who are refolved, in defpight of truth ) to maintain the Popes pretended Supremacy ) this Learned Work of that great Reman Catholick Archbifhop (f ) _ isdamn’d by the Inquifitors, not to be printed, read, or had byany. He whoferioufly reads ( and underftands ) the Latin Verfions of the Greek Councils, Fathers, and other Greek and Latin Writers, may find an hundred fuch Frauds, to maintain ( what they know they have no juft Reafon for) their Papal and Antichriftian Ty- ranny: And their Indices Expurgatorij are Authentick Evidences, to Convince them of thefe UnchriftianPra- ctifes, to conceal truth, and cofen the World into abe- — lief of their pernicious Papal Errors. Nor isthis all, (nor the worft ) for fo defperately arethey fet upon it, that if their Intereft and the Papal Monarchy cannot o- therwife be maintain?d (as ’tis impofhble it fhould by — any juft and lawful means) they fpeak impioufly and — blafphemoufly of our bleffed Saviour. Thomas Campe-- gius Epifcopus Felrrenfis, in his Book of the Power of the Pope, — againft Queen Elizabeth. OI Pope, to Paul IV. faysx——(t ) That our bleffed Savi- our had not been a Diligent Father of the Family, to his Church, unlefsbe had left fuch a Monarch over bw Church, as the Pope, of whom heis there fpeaking: And he cites Pope Innocent, and Aquinas to juftifie it. Albertus Pighi- w is as high to the fame impious purpofe, and exprelly fays (u ) That our blefed Saviour had been wanting to his Church in things neceffary, if he had not Conftituted and left Juch a Monarch and Fudge of Controverfies. And a great (x) Canonift ( ifthat be poffible ) more blat- phemouily fays That our bleffed Saviour, while he was on Earth, bad power to pronounce the Sentence of Depo- fition, and Damnation againft the Emperor, ov any otber ; And by rhe fame Reafon, bis Vicar now can doit. And then he impioufly adds That our bleffed Saviour would not have fecmd Difcreet, unlefs he had left fuch a Vi- car, ascoulddo all thefe things, @c. So ifit be granted ( which is moft evident and certainly true ) that our ble fed Saviour left no fach Monarchical vicar, as the Pope ; then they are not afraid to accufe him of waar of Diligence and Diferetion, And this impious Glofs is approved and confirm’d by Pope (y) Gregory XIII. as (we may be fure ) what makes for his Extravagant Pewer and Papal Monarchy ¢ how Erroneous and Impious foever ) fhall not want his Approbation. Andthus much of the third Priviledge of the Apoftles, their Univerfal Furifdittion ; equally in them all, in Fames, and Fobhn, and Paul as much as Perer 5 andthis Jurifdiction Perfonal to all, and never tranfmitted to any of their Succeffors. (t) Now fuigé chriftus Diligens Pater-familias, fe non dimififfetr in Terra aliquem qué Vice fua pore lib- venive neceffitati- bus Exclefie&c. De Poteftat.Rom.?cn- tif, cap. 1. §. 3 pag. 2. . Cu) Chrefus: Bc- clefx Defuif] t nec de Neceffaris proj- pexiffet, Nife Aao- narshamaliquem & Judicem Conftituil- fet, &e. Vide Al- bert-Pighium Con- troveri. 3. fol. 7c, 71, 72s (x) Chriftus dum fuitin Mundo, de jure naturali,in Im- peratorem & Quof- cungue Alios Dépo- Gtionis Sententias ferre potuiffer , Damnationis ce Eadem Ratione Cm Vicarius ejus po- tet. Nam non vide- retur Dominus Dif- cretusfuiffe, nift u- nicum pojt fe Tale Vitarium reliquij- fet. Fuit autem ifte Vicavius Petrus: c& idem dicendum oft de Succefforibus Petri. Yra Petrus Bertrandus in Addit. ad Gloffas ad Cap. Unam Sandtam. 1. De Major. & Obed. Extrav. Commun. — ( y). Vide Bul- Jam Greg. 13. dat. Rom. 1. Julij, Ann. 1980. prefixam. Corp. Juris Can. Parif, 1612, & 1618. 4. Befides the Immediate Call ofthe Apoftles, their Power of doing Miracles, and their Univerfal Jurifdiction over all the World; they were ( allofthem )-$si@revser, Di- vinely Infpired by the Holy Ghoft, fothat they had In- O fallibility, tall * fie) 6 ee! “s *, s deell seet hs a) tia Fat Obfervations on the Pope's Bull 82 (z)Sic Omnes A- pojlolice Sedis San- éliones accipiende funt,tanquam Npfins divini Petré voce firmate int. Can. fic.Omnes 2. Dift. 19. And this the Glofs there indea- vours to prove, from afpurious & ridiculous, as well as impious Canon. Can. Non Nos. I. Dift. 40+ (a) The Jefuits in their Thefis pro- pofed in the Claro- mont Col. 12. Dec. Aon. 1661. Jmpu- dently and Impi- oufly fay , Chriftus ecclefie regimen pri- mum Petro,deinSuc- cefJoribus Commifit, ¢ Eandem auam babcbat Jofe,Infalit- bilitatem, Conceffit, quoties ex Cathedra loqueretur. And then Thef, 20. tells ws -——~ Datur /a- fallibilis Controver- favum Fudex,etiam Extract oncilinmGe- ncrale, Tum in Que- oe fallibility, fo far, as whatever they preach’d or writ — was Divine, and the undoubted Word of God... This — ~ Priviledge alfo was Perfonal, nor ever was Communica- ted to any. of their Succeflors. I know that the (z ) Canonifts and (2) Jefuits, (in the laft and worft of times ) would make the World believe ( without any thadow of rational ground ) that Peter transferred his In- fallibility to the Pope, and made him the Infallible Judge of all Controverfies of Faith, and Fact too. A thing fo evidently falfe, and without any poflibility of proof, that tisa wonder, that any fhould have the Confidence to aflertit, efpecially in Pars, the great Metropolis of a Church which conftantly does, and has deny7U the Popes infallibiliry and Superiority to a General Coun- cil. 2. Butthat which might forever filence this Irra- tional and Injuft Claim. of Infallibility in the Pope, is, that ( for Matter of Fact) none of them, (though they were {ometimes nibling at a kind of Supremacy ) for a-. bove a Fhoufand Years after our blefled Saviour, either did or dared pretend to Infallibility ; and if they had , they had made themfelves ridiculous. For, 3. It was notorioufly known, that feveral of their Popes were He- reticks, For inftance, (0) Liberiws, (¢) Honorius, (a) Vigilius, Gc. And for Herefie Condemn’d in General Councils, as isevident from the Acts themfelves, and has been demonftrated, not only by Proteftants, but by very Learned menofthe Roman Communion. 4. And he who ferioufly reads, and impartially confiders their Papal Bulls, Breves, and Decretal ( ¢ ) Conftitutions ; ftionibus Juris,tum frctz. Cb) Hieronymus de Scriptoribus Eccclefiaft in Fortunatiano. (c) Vid. Hift Harefis Monothli:arum, per Fran. de Combefis Dominicanum. Parif.1638.p.6 5.&c. 121.8, w' } contra Pighium, Baronium,&c.probat evidentér Hon: rium Synodo 6. damnatum. (4) Vid. D. Rich. Crakanthorp,in Vigilio dormitante. ¢¢) Let any man read thofe two Conftitutions before nam’d.1.That of Innocent 3.Cap. Solicita.6. Extra de Major. & Obedient.&c. 2. That of Bonéf.8. Cap.Unam San&am. 1. €odem Titulo. Extravag.Commun and if he have eyes,and will Imparti- ally ufe them,he will find what I fay,true.Or he may (with the fame fuccefs) read the Bulls and Damanattons of the Einperor Hen. 4. by Greg. 7.in Bull. Rom. 1638. Tom. 1. p. 49, 50, 51. And of Freder. 2 Ibid. p. 94, 95. by Innoc. 4. And the Excommunications of the fame Empe- tor, by Greg. 9- Ann. 1239. Ibid. in dito Bullario, Tom, 1. p. 89) 90+ @ and ld ia a againft Queen Elizabeth. and inthem how ridiculoufly they reafon, and prophane (rather than expound ) Scripture, will have abundant reafon to believe, that thofe Popes were fo far from In- fallibility, that their own Writings Convince them guil- ty of Grofs Ignorance and Folly. 5: Laftly, Allthe Apoftles were Fundamenta Ecclefie, Do- mus Dei, Foundations of the Church, or Houfe of God, (as has before been evidently proved from Scripture } and this was inall the Apoftles Extraordinary, and a Per- fonal Apoftolical Priviledge, to which, (as it was inthe Apoftles ) none of their Succeflors (no not the Pope, ). ever did, or ( with any reafon ) could pretend. And as this Apoftolical Priviledge, fo the other four before mention’d (1. Immediate Vocation, 2. Power to work, — Miracles. 3. Univerfality of Furifdittion. 4. Infallibili- tyin all things they preach’d or writ.) Ufay, all thefe Pri- ' vikedges, were extraordinary and Perfonal to the Apo- - ftles, andnever were tranfmitted to any of their Succef- - fors. And this being granted, (as of neceflity it ought ~ and muft) it will evidently follow, that Peter neither had, nor could have, that Monarchical Supremacy over the Apoftles and Univerfal Church, to which. the Pope and his Party vainly, and without any reafon or ground pretend. For that Papal Supremacy and Monarchy they pretend Peter had, ( according to their Hypothefis ) con- fifted principally, inthe Univerfality of his Jurifdiction over the whole Church, and his Infallibility, asa Judge, to determine Controverfies of Faith, both which every Apoftle had, ( asmuchand as wellas he) and therefore it was impoflible , that (in thefe refpects ) he fhould have any Superiority ( much lefs Supremacy ) over the other Apoftles, more than they over him; efpecially , fecing in Scripture, (tomen who have good Eyes, and will impartially ufe them) there is not one Syllable looks that way. Nay, feeing our blefled Saviour hath expref- ly determin’d the contrary. The Apoftles were difpu- ting and reafoning amongft themfelves, which of them fhould be greate/?: ( they had ve Infirmities and ambi- 2 tious 7 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull : —— ( f)) Matth. 20. 26, 27. (g) Tears Primus feu Prin- ceps,(pluseft quam efle Magnum) altis Omnibus Major (yet this the Pope would have). Luc. Burgenfis. in Math. 20. 27. (hb) Matth. 22. $, 9, 10, II. Ci) Galt. *# Joh, 1.4054 2,86C. tious defires). But our Saviour tells them-—-( fF ) Who- focver will be great among you ( though Peter be the man ) let him be their MMinifier , and whofoever will be ( g ) chief, let bim be your Servant, And again (h’) Be nor ye cal?’d Mafters, for one ts your Mafter, even Chrift ( not Peter) asd ye are Brethren , bur be that will be greateft a mone Yoit, hall be your Servant. The Apoftles had no ! Maiter under Heaven, buttheir blefled Saviour; itwas 7 of him, and him Only, that they learned the Gofpel, | and thar Immediately ; they had it not from (7) any man, nor one fromanother. Our bleffed Saviour was their only Mafter and Superior, and they his Scholars, fub- ordinate to him, and co-ordinate amongft them/elves. He tells them, that they are Brethren; Condifeipuli, School- fellows. Names which ¢ in themfelves, and in their Maite.’s meaning ) import Equality; efpecially as to any Jurifdiction one over another. There may be a- monegft Scholars of the fame School, and Brethren, an inequality, ( and fothere was amongft the Apoftles ) 1. In refpectt of Aze; fomie might be elder, fomeyoun- - ger. 2. In refpett of their coming to that School , fome might come before others, So Andrew: was firft call?d to our bleffed Saviours School, (before Peter *), 3. In. refpett of Natural Parts and’ Abilities, fome might have greater Capacities than others. 4. Juz vefpett of their Mafters Lave and Kindnefs, he might love one more than another, Soamongft the Twelve, fobx was the beloved Difeiple. Such inequality there was amongft them, and we willingly grant it. But tompfay, Cas the Pope, and many of his Party moft vainly do) that amongit thefe Brethren, and School-fellows in our B.Saviour’s Schoo}, Pe- vey , Cor any other ) had not only an Authority and Fu- rifaittion, but 4 Monarchical Supremacy,. over all the reft, this is fo contradictory to our blefled Saviour’s plain words, and the manifeft and undoubted meaning of them ; that were it not, that we know men may be fway 7d with worldly Interefts, and fometimes have ftrong De- hufions. to believe a Lye; it were incredible that any Learned ~ againfl Queen Elizabeth. 85. Col: 1. Tom, i pag. 4hle Terie Gen teed (wich {0 mech’ Confidence, and no Reafon) affert the contrary. To pafs by all Tefti- monies of Ancient Fathers for many hundred years, and many fober Papifts before Lather, ( who neither knew, nor believed Perer?s Monarchy over the Church and: his fellow Apoftles, his equals ) furel am, 1. That Francis (k) Lucas Brugenfis, a Roman Catholick ( in our days) eminent in their Church for Dignity and Learning, faysthe fame thing I have done (and on the fame Texts ) for the Eouality of the Apoltles, againit Peter’s pretended Monarchy. 2. Anda greater than he, (1 mean (1) Petrus de Marea Archbilhop of Paris ) convinced with the Evidence of the former Texts, and Truth, was of Opmion,. and has publifh’d it to the World, That our bleffed Saviour, at his Atcention, did not leave the Church eftablith’d in Peter, anda Monar- chy; But in an Ariffocratie, or the Colledge of the Apo- files. Inwhich Colledge Peter was one, not Superior ( much lefsa Monarch) tothe other Apoftles, andthe Apoftles left the Government of the Church Eitablifh’d in the bifhops, and Ariftocrarical’; only hethinks, that both in the Colledge of the Apoftles, and Councils of Bifhops after them, there was ( for Orders fake ) to be a Prefident,; (nota Monarch, for that was Inconfiftent with Ariffocratie ) And (if this will content them ) we will grantit. Becaufe we do know, that the Ancient Church allow’d the Pope the prime Place and Prece- dency in Councils, (for Orders fake) atid that nor by any Dirine Right, ( which was not in thofe days, fo much as pretended to) but becaufe Rome was the () Impc- rial City, and Metropolis of the Roman Empire , the greatnefs of the City ufually giving grearnefs and Pre- cedency. (& )Matth 23.9, Onnes autem wos fratres eftis. Ory witich words, Lu-. Brugenfis faith thus Qata fratres fungs, Neminem in aiios = Magifterio funzi Concedit —.. Fratres non Magi- fri Alii: in Alio:--- oftis Condifcipulé,n — mo in aliwum proprie agere potelt Magi- ficam.- Nallus elio- Yun Magifteriam mereatur , fe habere- vos Omies merito debeatis Condifcipu- los. Chriftws Solis Omnium Magisier agnofcendus. Ira Le Brugenfis Com- mientar.ing Evang. ad 23.Matth. 8. p. 3.51.vid, Hieronym: in Gal. 2.1. ubi di- cit Petrum,Paulum, &:reliqus Apofto- los fuiife aquales. Cl) Sed quia Ec- clefia regenda eff jexta unitatem, ne- ~ ceffarinm fuit,, Inftitui ab Apoftolis modum quendam Communionis inter Epifcopos , fecundum Exem- plam, AChrefto datum in Inflitutione Collegij Apoftolici; quod wniverfum Ecclefie Corpus repre- font abat 5 Ideoque prelcribenda ab iis fuit forma regiminis, Aviftocratici nimirum, ita ut nius Prefideret. Pet. de Marca de Concordia Sacerdotij & Imperi), lib, 6: cap. 1. § 2. pag. 58: (m) Conc, Chalcedon. Can..28. Conc. Conftant. 1. Can. 5. apud P. Crabb, Conc. 86 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull —— (n) Buritis not only Pet.de March, burt even the Po- pith General Coun cils of Fifa, Cone fiance, and Bafil , and the Gallican Church and Sabon, and the Ancient Church fora thou- fand years after our bleffied Savi- our, which main- tain’d the fame Do- rine Marca did 5 as is evidently pro- ved by a Learned Sorbon Do&tor, Edm. Rechier. In Hift. Conc. General. 1. 1. Edit. Colon. Ann. 1680. cedency to the Bilhops ; fuch were Conftantinople , A- lexandria, Antioch, @c. \ know the Inquifitors at Rome have damned this Book of (7) Petrusde Marca, but this is no Argument , that what he has faid, is not trve; Grande aliqued bonum eft, quod a Nerone (ab Ingusfitoribus) damnatur. To conclude this Point, if our Adverfaries aflent not to this manifeft Truth, as (being contradi- ctory to their worldly Intereft and mifconceived Infalli- ble Pretenfions ) *tis probable they will not; I thall make them this (to all unprejudiced Lovers of Truth ) fair offer. Let them give me any one cogent Argu- ment from Scripture or Univerfal Tradition (and no- thing elfecan doit) whereby they can prove, the fol- lowing Pofitions, I will thank God and them for the difcovery, and promife hereby to be their Profelyte. The de. fign of the whole Book is againft the Popes Monarchical Supremacy and Infallibility. Vide didi lib. cap. 13. pag. 393. &c. x. If they can (by anyfuch Argument) prove that Peter (by Divine Right) had fuch a Monarchical Supremacy and Jurifdiction over the Apoftles, and the whole Church, (as is vainly pretended) I will yield the Caufe. But if he had no fuch Power, ’cis impofflible he fhould tranfmit the Power (he never had) to his Succeflors. . Let it be fuppos’d , ( which yet is evidently untrue ) that St. Peter had fuch a Monarchical Authority and Ju- rifdiction, even over the reft of the Apoftles, let them prove by any fuch Argument as is before-mention?’d; that it was not only Temporal , and his only for his life ; that it was not to have anend and period with his Per- fon. Forif it was, then hisSucceflor (whoever he be) can have no pretence to it. For *tis impoffible, that a- ny Succeflor, can have any legal or juft Claim to that. Power, which vanifh?d and ceas’d to be, with his Prede- ceflor, who podfefs’d it only for his life. 3. Admit ST Oe ne ed 2 — ——— yes 7 Saee Pee ans — SS > eee — _againft Queen Elizabeth BY Admit both thefe to be true, ( which yet are equally and evidently falfe ) that Peter bad fuch a Power,and that it was vot Perfonal, but to betranfmitted to his Succet for, feeing fuch tranfmiflion muft either be done by our blefled Saviour immediately, or (by Power deriv7d from him) by Peter, Let our Adverfaries make it appear , that either our bleffed Saviour himfelf, or Peter ( by Power deriv’d from him) did actually tranfmic that Power to any Succeflor, and I fubmit. 4. Laftly, Suppofeall thefeto be (what not one of them is.) true; yet unlefsitdo appear, that the Bifhopof Rome (and not the Bifhop of ztioch, ( where they fay Peter was Bifhop firft) was that Succeflor of St. Peter, to whom fuch Supremacy was tranfmitted , he can have no pre- tence to it. Forin this Cafe, Idemest non effe & non apparere. Let our Adverfariesthen make it appear, that either our blefled Saviour immediately by himfelf, or Peter (by Authority from him) did (0) tranfmit the Su- — (0) I knowthat premacy to the Pope, and we fhall be fatisfy?U , and ‘ome of them (e- thankful for the Difcovery. Andthis brings me to the i cad v* Learn- Second thing propofed before. rd Claritas ; : ; That our blefled Saviour did give Peter power to transfer his great Authority to his Succeffor, and only to him, not to any of the other Apoftles; But this they fay only, without any pretence of proof, And I commend their prudence, not to attempt impoffibiliriess Johan. Francifcus Bordinus - archbifhop of Avignion, has publifhed his Opinion, inthefe words Chrijtus tniverfale Totius Ecclefice Caput Petrum conflituit, qui fuas Vices in Terris ageret. - Quo quidem in Munere,cx fi dum viveret, Aquales (raark that) habuit ceteros Coapoftolos, Nullé tamen Eorum, quod 2 Do- mino accipiffent, jus per Succeffionem in alios transfevendi facultas fuit. Soli Petro id Promi ffm. Soli Petvoid Traditum, ut Petra effet, & poft Christum Ecclefie fundamentum. Ica Johan. Kran. Bordinus Archiepifcopus Avenionenfis, in Serie & Geftis Roman. Pontif. ad Clement. Papam $.. ad Annum Chrift. 34. Tiberi} 18. : i Ah + + 4 * Lr o “4 . ar - cs r we i 2. Thething next to be enquired after is, Whether, and how it may appear that the Bifhop of Rome w Peter?s Succef- Jor. Our Adverfaries fay, (and vainly fay it only ) that Peter was Supream Head (after our blefled Saviour’s Afcen- pice Petrus Rome fion) and Adfonarch of the Church; and from him, ( ure - em faam, Jubente . ; ; 3 . Domino, collocarvit. Succeffionis) the.Pope derives his Afonarchical Power and Benarm. de Rom. Supremacy 5, and that by the Injtiturion and (p) Command of Pontif.lia. ct. § t> | our ES 39 | Uibferwations on the Pope’s Bull (q) Probatur , Roman. Pontificem Petro Succedert, in ~Pontificatu Ecclefie Univerfe ex Divine Fure ct Ratione Succeffionis. Bellar- min. Ibid. lib. 2..¢. 12. §. Primum er-_ $0. Papain Petri Cathedra Sedet,fum- tun ib eo dignita- tu gradum, & Fun vifdittionis ampli-- tudinem, non Huma- nis Conftitutionibus, fed Divinitus da- tum agnofcit: eft Pater wniverfalis Ecclefie Petri Suz cefor, @& Chrifti Vicavius, (gt. Ca- techifm. Trident. our Bleffed Saviour, and {onot by Humane, but (gq) Divine — This is a Pofition of greateft Confequence; and ~ will require good proof. Nor is it poflible to prove the — Bifhop of Rome to be Perer?s Succeflor in that Bifhoprick, — Right. unlefs it firft appear that Perer was his Predeceffor in that See. Linws, Clemens ox Cletus cannot (with any Truth or Senfe) be faid to fucceed Peter, unlefs it appear firft, that he preceeded them. {tantly (with great noife and confidence) affirm , That Peter did preceed in the Bifhoprick of Rome ; but fure I a am, that hitherto, theyhavenot brought any, fo muchas fi probable ( much lefs cogent and concluding ) Reafon to — i prove it: nor do {think it poflible they fhould bring (what they neither have, nor can have) any true and concluding proof, to prove (whatthis is) an erroneous and: falfe Po- fition. And that this may motbe begg’d and gratu dittum , I thall offer to the Impartial Reader, thefe Confiderati- ons. Part, 2. cap. 7. §. 28,.pap. 301. Edit. Patil. 1635. (7) Bellarm.Lo- €is proxime citatis, fut 8 alij paffim.) And Pope Piys the Fifth in this his Ympious Bull. §. 1, Chriftus Ecclefam Catholicam uni [olé Petro Petrique Suce _ effort Romano Pon- tifici in potelRatis plenitudine Tradidit Gubernandam. 1. When they (7) fay, That Peter fix?d his Epifcopal | Chair at Rome, Fubente Domino: Let them fhewthat(f) Command, and there willbe anend of the Controverfie ; we will obey our blefled: Saviour’s Command, and the 4 Pope too. But thisthey have neither done, nor can: It being impoflible, they fhould fhew.that tobe, which ne- ver was, nor ever had any being. ere Extat. So A Lapide Confefless in Apec. 17. verf. 17. pag. 268.Col. 2.4. 2. Thatever Peter was at Rome, ( much lefs that he was Bifhop there, for Five and twenty years (as is vainly pre- - tended) cannot be made appear out of Scripture, or any Apoftolical or Authentick Record; and therefore that he was thereat all, (where he might be, as he was in — many other good Cities,andno Bifhop of any of ok 4 ras oC t Our Adverfaries (I confefs) do con- i (1) Nullum Christi, a deve, Decretum — ts pa paietek, oe ‘ic AR Want REAR SEE aie hes) oo ne DU ns rn es againft Queen Elizabeth. re muft depend folely upon human and fallible Tcftimonies , (I fay, Teftimonies certainly fallible, if not abfolutely falfé; which many Learned men have, and do believe). Now feeing the whole Papal Monarchy and [nfallibi- lity, depend upon Peter?s being Bifhop of Rome, and the grounds we haveto aflure us , that he ever was there, are fallible and dubious , and feeitig it is irrational (if hotimpolfible) that any confidering Perfon, fhould give a firm and undoubted affent to any Conclufion, inferr’d only upon fallible and dubious premiffes. Hence’ it evi- dently follows, That our Paith and belief of the Papal Monarchy and Enfallibility is, and (till they find better, and more neceflary premiffes) muft be fallible and dubi- ous. And here! defire to be inform’d how it comes to be an Article of Faith, in their new Roman Greed; That the Bifsop of Rome Vicar of Chrift, and (t) Peters Sacceffor ; which Article (with the reft in that Creed) they promife, (a) fwear and vow, to believe and profe/s moft Conjftantly, to their last breath, With what Confcience their Church can require, orthey take fuch an Oath, Maft conftantly and firmly ro believe, to their laft breath , fuch things,for the belief of which, they haveno grounds (if any) fave only fallible and very dubious, p(t vide- ¥UNT. (t) Romano Pon- tifict » Beaté Petri Apoftolorum Princé- ps, Succeffori, ac Chriftt Vicario, ve~ ram Obedientiam Shondeo ac juro. Vid. Bullam Pij 4. fuper orma Juramenti Profeificnis fidei , in Cone. Trident. Seff.2g. p. 452. E- dit. Anty. 1633. * (u) Hanc Catholicam fidem, extra quam nemo Salvus effe pote, quam in Prafenti profiteor, cs wp eandem nfquead ultimum vite [piritum conStantiffime retinerey Orce Spondeo, Voveo, Furo: bidem. 3. 1 know, that the Affertors of the Papal Monarchy (according to their Intereft) are very defirous to prove out of Scripture, that Perer was at Rome, and to that end produce thofe words in his firft Epiftl—(«) The Church which at Babylon falutes you: And by Babylon, they fay, the Apoftle meant Rome: And for this they cite Papias in (y) Eufebius , That by Babylon, Rome is figuratively tobe whderftood. So that (if this be true) Peser writ that Epitle at Babylon, thatisy at Rome ; and P fo (x) 1 Pet. 5.13. Cy) Primam fi- tr: Epiftolam Rome Scriptam ( oaoty ) aiunt, quam Petrus, Teomurcy Ba- Gur@ve, appellate - ‘Eufebius Hift. |. 2. C-1'§. p.5 3. B. Vae lefio.” ‘ ca : ’ pi F ' vy sie + re ree BB DA oa ae ae oe) Obfervations on the Pope’ sBull (2) Curiofefcifci~. . tabar (faid Papias) . a Senioribus , quid Petrus, quid Faco- bus, dicere folitief-. jent. Néquecx Bie bliorum Leétione , tantam me utilita- _ tem capere poffe Ex- iftimabam, quantam ex hominum viva voce. Eufeb.1. 3.c. 39.p.1 IT. (a) "Ex xugodb- cas aypaps, Ex Traditione non feri= pta habuit novas fo muft be at Rome when he writ it: And the proof of * this depends upon the Authority of Papias Bifhop of Hierapolis, and thofe who follow him. Now how hit- tle Credit is to be given to Papias in this, ( or any thing elfe) will manifeftly appear out of the fame Eu- febiws; whotellsus, 1. That Papias was much given to. Tradition, (2) inquiring (of the Elders who had heard: the Apoftles) what Peter, or James , or John, @c, had Said: thinking he got-lefs benefit by reading Scriptures ,. then by the talk of thofe who heard the Authors of them, 2. That he had by fuch (a) Tradition, ftrange Parables and Preachings of our blefjed Saviour, andother things very Fabulous: Such as the Herefie of the Mtillenaries, which he believed and propagated, That he thus err?d , by (b ) Mifunderftanding the Apofiles Dobtrine: For (as Eufebius — goeson) he was a man of very little underfianding, 4:..And yet (asthe fame Author fays) he was the occafion that , (c) moft of the Ecclefiaftical Writers who followed him.(Re- werencing his Antiquity) err’d with him, quafdam Servatoris parabolas c& predicationes 5, aliaque Fabulis propiora;.inter que Mile-Annorum Spatinm poft refurrectionem, fore dicit. Eufeb. ibid. p. 112. (b) Ita opinatus videtur Pa- pias, 0x male Intellectis Apoftolorum narrationibus. Fuit enim Mediocri Admodum Ingenio Predi- tus. Eu‘eb. ibidem. Lit.c. (c): Plerifque tamen poft-Ipfum EccleGafiicis Scriptoribus, Ejxl-- dim Evvoris occafionem prebuit, hominis vetuftate, Sententiam [uam tuentibws. Ibidem D.ita etiam, Nicephorus Hift. Lib. 3. cap. 20. pag. 252, D. | Objet. (d) Colon. Allo- br-1612. (¢) Parif. 1660. (f) Papias eadem aetate celebrus fuit 5 Vir imprimis difer- tus,@-eruditus, ac Scripturarum peri- tus. Euleb. Hift..2. €.36.Edit. Valefij, Sedin Edit. Chri- Mtopherfon. cap.3 5. Giz, 30. Lating. Nerfionis. Kknow, that in Eufebims (both in the worl Edition of him, by (4) Chriffopherfon, (f{ometime a Popifh Bifhop of Chichefter ) and the beft by (¢) Hen. Valefivs) we have a high Commendation-of Papias.; (f ) At the fame time (fays Eufebiws; as Valefiverendershim) Papias was famous , aman very Eloquent and Learned) ‘and well skilP'd in Scripture. But Chriftopherfon (his other: Tranflator) goes higher, (as u- fually he does when it makes. for the Catholick Caufe ) and in his Tranflation:fays more in Commendation of Papias, then isinthe Text : For he tells us, Thae- Papias (befides his knowledge of Scripture) was 4 man (g) ger- tainly, (8) Omnia aliarnm Artinm foientia vir plane difertifimus. Yoidem, againft Queen Elizabeth. a eel we tainly moft learned in the Knowledge of All Other Arts. Now if this betrue, then that Character | have given him be- fore, isnotfo; andthen his Antiquity (which was (4) great) and his great Learning, inall Arts and Sciences, as well as Scripture) confider’d; his Teftimony , that Baby- low , whence St. Peter writ, was Rome, will be more valid, and of greater Authority. In Anfwerto this; I fay, r. That all this Commenda- tionof Papias before mention, is fo far from having any Authority from Exfebius , that ’cis a plainForgery. Eufe- bius (as to this paflage) is evidently corrupted ; and this Commendation of Papzas (by whofe Ignorance or Knave- ry, I knownot) thuffled intothe Text, long after Exjebius his death. For, 2. Ruffinws (who Tranflated Enjebius his Hiltory above One thoufand two hundred years ago ) in the place above quoted , fays only thus About this time flourifhed Polycarpe Bifhop of Smyrna, 4md Papias Bi- Shop of Hierapolis. So the Printed Edition of (2) Kuffinus by B. Rhenanus ; and a very ancient and compleat MS. of Ruffinus (in my keeping and pofleffion) exactly (k) agrees with it ; and there is not one word of that Commendation of Papias, which isnow extant in Eufebius: And therefore ‘we may conclude, that anciently it was not there, but the Text of Exfebius (by fraud or folly ) is fince corrupted: $ For had it been in Exufebins when Ruffin Tranflated him, there had been no reafon he fhould have left itout. 3. And which is yet more confiderable , Valefins (a very Learned Roman Catholick) who laft publifhed Exfebius, Ingenu- oufly confefles, that of three or four Greek MSS. of Exje- bius, which he made ufeof in his Edition, not any.ove of them (1) had that Commendation of Papias;, and therefore he doubts not, but thefe words were (m} added by fome ignorant Scholiaft, contrary tothe Fudgment and Senfe of Eufebius. For “(fays (7) he) bow is it poffible thar Eufebius fhould call Papias a moft Learned Man, and moft skill?d in Scripture, who inthe fame (0) Book fays , be was A Rude and Simple Perfom, of ditum, Planéque Rudem ac Simplicem. Valefius ibidem. P 2 | ‘PRery ) Papias was a friend and famili- ar of Sr. Polycarpe. Eufeb.Hift.1.3.c.39 and Polycarpe {uf- fered Martyrdom Ann. Chrift. 167. Baron. Annot. ad Marcyrolog, Rom. ad diem Jan. 25.p. 81.Col. rt. Anfiy. (1) Quibus Teme portbus floruit Poly- carpus Smyrnxorum Ept(copus,c» Papias fimiliter apd. Hie- rapolim Sacerdotium gerens. Ruffin.|.3.c. 35-in Excufo Rhe- narci. Bafil.1 528, (&) In Cod. MS, Ruffini eft.|.3.c 32. (1) Totum hoc E- logium Papie deeft in noftris Codizibus, Valefius in Nor. ad 1.3. Eu‘eb, c. 36.p. ge (m) Not dubito, quin hec verba ab ‘Imperito Scholiafte adjetta funt, preter Enfebij mentem ce Sententiam. Valefius Ibidem. (0) Quomodo fie rt poteft wt Eufebius Papiam hie appellet virnm doctifimum , eH feripturarum pe- ritifimum, cum in fine Libri affirmat diferté, Papiam Me- diocri ingenio pre- (0) Eufeb. 1.3.c.39. Oblereations on the Pope’s Bull 92 3 Very Little Wit or Fudgment, And his Ignorance efpecially i appears (asin other things) in that _ He faysthat Philip, whofe Daughters were Propheteffes, was ¢p)EufebHiftl Philip the(p) Apoftleswhen the(q)Text,(had he read or re- 3.0.39.p 112.Vale- rj Edit. vide Nice- . (phor..3.:c.20. (q) AG. 21.8. Vid.Nicephor.Hift. lib.3.pag.252.C. ay Vid. Eufeb. Hift.|.3.¢.39 Hiero- nym.de Iiuft, Dud we.48. Nicephor.I 3. C200 _ (f) Joh-20.30, Bie & 2025. (t) Styne rene yass&c. Novas qual- dam Servatoris paz. vabolas ac predica- bEORES. membred it) exprefly fays, That it was Philip the Deacon. 2. Papias {aid, (and in his Writings publifhed his Opinion ) That hearing (1) Oral Traditions, was more profitable, then reading Scriptures), That is, to hear the Stories and Tales of private and fallible Perfons (and that in Mat- ters of Religion) was more profitable, then to read the Sacred Oracles of God, penn?d by Divinely Infpired In- fallible Perfons. St. Cf) ohn tells us, he had writ fo many and fuch things, as-were neceflary and fufficient to Salvation, yet left out thowfands of things, which he thought not neceflary. But Papias (with great Ig- norance and Impiety) preferrs the unwritten Tradition of thoferhings concerning our B. Saviour, which the A- poftles had omitted,as not neceflary nor fo ufeful as thofe thingsthey had writ. And foin Contradiction to. the Holy Spirit and St. Fobx (his Infallible Amanuenjis) calls. the Tradition of thofe unwritten things more ufeful, which they had omitted asnot ufeful at all. And this his. ‘Ignorance and want of Judgment further appears, 3. Becanfe Eufebins tells us, That he had (amongft bis Tra- ditions) (t) Strange and novel Parables and DoGrines of our bleffed Saviour, and-other things more Fabulous; and amongft them his AdiMenary Herefie, of which he was. Father, and (tothe infeétmg many others) did propa- gate it: And he fellto thofe wild Opinions chiefly by ‘his Ignorance and Mifunderftanding of Scripture; as Enfebius and Nicephorus tell us. And yet this fimple ~Perfon, and Arch-Heretick,. is the principal: and.prime- Witnefs Rame has, to prove that Batylow (in the Epiftle of Peter) fignifies Rome, and that Peter was there. For: other place in Scripture, they have none, and only PRa- -péas (and his Followers) forthat. ‘By the Premiffes, I think it may appear to Impartial Perfons, That feeing , Papas preferr’d Tradition (or fome mens talk before: the: againft Queen Elizabeth. os theScriptures) that he wasa man of very weak under- ftanding , and ert’d by mifunderftanding Scripture, that he writ Fables rather than Hiftory, and maintain’d the Millenary Opinion, which Rome now calls Herefie: 1 fay, thefe' things confider'd, his authority and credit isy, - (if any at all) very little; and yet cis all our Adver- faries have (his Followers Teftimonies being derived. from, and depending upon his) to prove out of Scrip- ture, that Perer writ that Epiftle at Rome, or ever was. there. Thisisa Truth fo manifeft, that not only (#) Proteftants, but moft Learned Roman (x) Catholicks, fay and prove, that Peter writ that Epiftle , not at Rome, but Babylon in Chaldea. And further 3, that he did not Write it at Rome , willbe evident from Scripture , and what their own moft Learned Author confeffes. For , 1, (y) Baroniustells us, It was writ, Anno Chriffi 45. 2. Tomake this probable, both he, Petavius , and o- thers, generally fay 5 That Peter went to Rome in the fe- cond year of Claudius; which was Anno Chrifti 44. 3.But this a very Learned Roman Catholick; evidently (<’) con- futes from Scripture, ard good Authorities; and plain- Hy thes, that Peter was always in Fudea or Syvia, allthe death of Herod Agrippa, which was in the fourth year of Claudius, and the Six and fortieth year of our bleffed Saviour. And therefore it was impoffible that Perer fhould. write that Epiftle at Rome, in the Five and’ for- tieth year of our blefled Saviour, who never came thi- ther till the year Forty fix, wnlefs they sho and they do fay things as impoflible) that he writ an’ Epiftle at Rome when he was not there. 4. Nay, tis certain from what Luke fays in the (a) Ads of the Apoftles, that Peter continued in Fudea till the Council met at fFerufa- tem about the Queftion concerning Circumcifion, and the Ceremonial Law. ‘Sure itis, that he was prefent at that Council; which was Anno Chréfti 51. fays (4) (a J) Staliger in Annotat.in Joh. 18. Si. Petrus Rome nunguam fuit: fed predicabat 7H di» amd Agias Cue jus Metropolis erat’ Babylon,ex qua fervi-- bit Bpifolam fuam Vid..Johan.Raino!-- dum contra. Har- tun ,&c. (x) Tamethi Vett- res) Exiftimaverine’ - Petrum vocabulo Ba- dylonis fignificaffe Urbem- Romam y pro=- babilis eft Scaligeré Conjecturas: qui ex ipfa Babylone fcrip- tama Petro pytat E- piflolam hancad Ju- Geos difperfoss Orc. Pettus de Marca, A rchiepifcopus Pa-- rifienfis. .De Con-- cordia Sacerd. & Imperij}] 6.c.1§ 4. P-59-Tom. 2. (y).Baronjus An-. nab Tom.i.ad Apn.. Chrift.4 5S. I 651 Je (x) Hec Senten- tia refelli videtur ex AGis Apoflolorum,ex quibusconftat Petrum,; in Judea ac Syria semper manfiffe,. ufque ad yltimum. Annum. Agripp.e,erc. Hen.Valefius i Notis ad cap.16.1.2. Hift. Ecclef. Eufeb-p.. 33-340 (4) AG rs,&c, (b) Baronius Annal. Tom. r.ad Ann. 54, §. 66. Baroniusy, 94 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull (:c ) Jn Chronico Alexandrino Conci- lium Hicrofolymita num refertur Anno Claudij 6. (Chri(té 48.)melius dixiffit. 9. Sic enim cunda egréegie conveniunt, ec. Hen. Valefius in Notis ad cap.18. 1.2.Hift. Ecclef. Eu- feb p.37.Col2.A. (d) Gal. 1.18. -(¢) Gal. 2.1.8.9 (f) They fay,he fate at Rome 25. “years, and that he was martyr'd Nero- nis 13. OF Anno Chriftt 68. fo that thofe'2s.years muft begin Anno Chrifti 43-And then duno Chrifli 1. he had date at Rome eight vyears, 4g) Pet. 1.2. (hb) The firft E- piftle of Peter was writ Anno Chriftz 45+ So Baronius ’ Aanal. Tom. 1..ad ~ Annp.45.§ 16. And the fame Baronius Apnal. Tom. 1. ad Annum Chrifti.97. %.1. tellsus, that » athe Revelation of St. Fobn was writ Anno Chrifti 99. that is, 22. years iter, sey Baronius, Bellarmine, and ot iecs, the Learned (c) a- lefius thinks (and gives his reafon for it, (more probable tome, then any brought for the contrary Opinions ) that the Council was held, Aszno Claudij 7. and Chrifti 49. take which Computation you pleafe, if St. Perer wrote that Epiftle at Rome, Anno Chrifti 45. he muft _ have writ there, feveral years before he came thither. - §- Nay, ’cis further Evident, (let that Council be when they will) that Peter was not at Rome, in the year 51. which Baronius mentions, but at, Ferufalem. For St. (d) Paul tells us, that three years after his Converfion, (which was about the year 37.) he went to JFerufalemto fee Peter, and found him there: And then (e ) fourteen years after, (which was about the year 51.) he went to Ferufalem again, and then found Peter there. Accord- ing to-our Adverfaries, Computation, inthe year 51. Pe- rer had fate Bifhopin Rome about (f) eight years; and yet St. Paul neither found, nor fought him at Rome (where he wasnot) but at Ferufalem, where he was, with the Jews, who were committed to his Charge and Cure. 6. Laftly, ’Tis evident, St. Peter writ that firft Epiftle to the Afiatick (g) Difperfion of the Jews, of which Baby- lon was the Metropolis: And fure it is, that when he fays, The Church of Babylon falutes you 5 he intended (as all men do, who write Epiftles of that Nature ) that they fhould know where he was, and who they were who faluted them ; which was impoffible for them to do, if by Babylonhe meant Rome. For at that time , Rome neither was, nor could be known to any by the name of Babylon, no Author (Sacred or Civil) having ever call?d itfo. ?Tis true, St. John above () Fifty years after , calls Rome, Babylon. But he writing Myfterious Pro- pheties, fpoke (to ufe Exjebius’s word) Tpowixarepey, u- fed many Types, Figures and Metaphors, to exprefs fu- ture things. But that Peter, who writ no fuch Myfteri- ous Prophetical PrediGions, but the plain Duties, and Promifes of the Gofpel, thould ufe fuch Types or Fi- gures, has neither truth nor any probability. Bythe — Premilfles, - i cr + 3 EME at ee againft Queen Elizabeth. 95. Se mamesenmnel Premifles, Lhope it may appear, that it cannot be pro- ved out of Scripture, that ever Perer was at Kome, 4. But letit be granted, that it could be proved out of Scripture (which is manifeftly untrue) that Peter was at Rome, yet thence it willnot follow that ever he was Bi- fhop there: muchlefs for Five and twenty years, as is vainly pretended. For, r. That he was Bifhop of Rome (or any placeelfe) there isnot one fyllable in Scripture ; and fo trom thence there can be no proof of his Roman Bifhoprick, And, 2. If it be granted. (which is evident- Wy untrue) that it could ( out of Scripture ) be clearly proved, that he was at Rome a longer time, yet hence it does not follow that he was Bifhop there : For he was at Ferufalem, Samaria, Foppa, Ge. (as is evident in Scrip- ture) and yet our Adverfaries neither do, nor (with «any fenfe or reafon) can fay, that he was Bifhopof all thofe places. 3. Jreveus (an ancient and an approved Au- thor) exprefly fays, (2) That Peter and Paul conftituted Linus fiz/t Bifhop of Rome ; Thar Anacletus fucceeded him, and that Clemens (after the Apoftles) was. the third Bs- fhop there, Afterhim, Eujfebrus{ays the fame thing;That afier the Ck) Martyrdom of Paul and: Peter ,. Linus was the firft Bifhop of Rome. And again, fpeaking of the Bithops of Rome, he fays, That (}) Linus was the firft, and Anencletus. (or Anacletus, as he is ufually call’d) rhe Second, Andthough Eufebius fay , That Linus was: (m) Primus poft Petrum , the firft Bifhop of Rome after Peter ; yet his meaning isnot, that Perer was Bifhop of Rome before him, as is evident by what he fays afterwards ; That Clemens (7) wasithe third: Bifhop of Rome, after © rhe Apofiles Paul and Peter; and by what Jreneus faid-be- forehim, That Clemenswas the third Bifhop of Rome af- ter the Apoftles. For if this-be good eonfequence Linus was firft Bifhop of Rome after Peter, Ergo’, Peter was Bifhop of Rome too. | Jebius, who both fay it) will be good ‘Confequence alfo; €lemens was third Bifhop of Rome after Paul and Peter 3: The truth. Ergo, Paul and Peter were both Bifbops of Rome.. Then this (in Ivevaus.and Ex-: Ci) Petrus & Paulus — fundantes Ecclefiam Romanam, Lino Epifcopatum tradiderunt. Succe- Git ei Anacletus, poft enm Tertio Loca ab Apoftolis Cle- mens. Irenzus |. 3. Cc. 3: (kK) Tis S2 “Par - paloy,8c.Poft Pane li Petrique Marty- rium, primus Eccle-- fie Romane. Epifco- patum” fufeepit Li nus» Evfeb.Hift.1.3, _¢ 2. vide Niceph. 1. 3.cap. etiam 2, A) AO Ko Mear@ 3 Primus fact Linus, fecundus Anencletus. Eufebi ibid. |. -3. (m) Eufeb.ibid. Ir3.c.4. rpar@s ered Tléreoy- (n)Clemens,uere Tlat‘Aoy x léresv- Tertius a Panlo@ Petro Rome Epifco- p#s.Euleb. loco di-- €to,c.21, vide Epi- phanium~ adverfus- Hzrefes,l.1. Haref.. 27. Carpocratiano-~ rum §.6.p:1075- 96 Ob erviations on the Pope’s Bull nl (0) Sciendum tft Eufeotum Apoftolos In ordine Epi{copo- rum minim: Nume- ware Hen. Valefius io Annotat. ad Hift: Ecclef. Eufeb. |. 3. 21.8 Norarum. pe $c-Col.2.B. _ Cp) Lib. 3. Cap. 2. & Cap. 21. (q) Gal.2.9. (r) Gal.2: 467-8, ©. : (f), Gal.2 7, f0) Unus & idem mibé Evangelium preputij, €y Petro Circumcifionis. cre- didit 5 me mifit ac Gentes, ilt mn pofuit in Judea. lerony- mus in Cap. 2, ad Galatas. d. (4) Verf8. - () Verto. © ~ (9,) AS Is. évie dent in the Aas of the Apoftles , and by his firft Epiftle ping (as Paes ays.) Ann.4s.Chri- fi. Annal. Tom. 1. ad Ann. 4s. Num, truth is, that neither Confequence is good. Jreneas and Enjfebius did indeed believe Paul and Perér Founders of the Roman Church, but neither of them to be Bifhops there; which 4 Learned Roman Catholick evidently faw, and publickly (0) acknowledges. By the way, let me obferve; That Eafebius in two places here ( p) cited, puts Pad before Peter: and not only Eufebias, (a falli- ble Author) but St. Paw himfelf puts Fames before (4) Perer. Nowif Eufebius or St. Pant had known and be- liev?d St. Perer to have been (what the Pope aid his Party, without any ground vainly Imagine) the Sapream Monarch over the whole Church and the Apoftles themfelves ; it had beerva great Affrontand Injury to St. Perer , and fuch an Incivility as St. Pad would not have been guil- tyof. 4. And ’cis yet more confiderable, what St. Paul {ays (rv) in the place laft cited , for there we have thefe things certain inthe Text, 1. That Perer was the Apoftle of the Circumcifion , the Jews were commit- tedtohim, as his (/) Charge and Cure, as the Gentiles to Paul. 2. It was our blefled Saviour who (t) Commif- fiord bothof them, and appointed them thofe Provinces; fornone elfe could. He only could affign them their Provinces, who gave them the Apoftolical Power to. go- vernthem. Peter (as our Adverfaries fay) was Supream Moarch of the whole Church, had no Superior but our bleffed Saviour, and fonone elfe to Commiflion him, . or Appoint him his Province. 3. Both of them till that time, had diligently, and (with great Succefs) effectu- ally labour?d in their (#) feveral Provinces, Perer amongi{t the Jews, Paul amongft the Gentiles. 4. By a mutual Agreement, they(x) confent and promife, Thar Peter (as he had (y) before, fo). for (2) the future, He fhonld go to the Fews, ara make them bis Charge and Cure, and Paul to Y the Gentiles. 5. And this Agreement was about the 46. vid. Eufeb, Hift. |. 3.¢. . where he fays ,that Perér/preach’d the Gofpel long to’the 4fatick Difperfion of the Jews, before he came to Rome; and Nicepborus fays fo too. (x) And ‘tis certain, that after the year 1. (of which we now tpeak) he took the Jews for his Charge and Cure: as is evident ftom his two Epiftles writ to th toaiés, Anhal.Tom.1.ad Ann.68.Nuim. 3. m, Ann.68. And the Confeflion of Ba- year ‘ anf ~< an é lm a PLANER LABS DO OO A TO Oe ane = againft Queen Elizabeth. — 27 ABD. 39S 9s year of our Lord 51. when (according to our Adverfa- ries Computation) he was, and had been Bifhop of Rome Eight.or Nine years. ther Peter (after thisconfent and agreement of the Apo- ftles) continued Bifhop of the Gevetles at Rome, (as our Adverfaries pretend hedid) or not? If he did, he con- tradi&ed his Commiflion, which our bleffed Saviour had given him, tobe the Apoftle of the Circumcifion, and neglected the Jews, whom he had (4) Concredited to his care, and Committed to him, as his proper Charge. For to take the charge of the Gemtiles and Fews too, was not only againft his Commiflion, but againft that So- Jemn Confent and Agreement of the Apoftles before- mention’d, wherein it was agreed and promifed, That Peter fhould go (not to Rome) but to the Circumcifion , and Paul tothe Gentiles. Nor can it be credible that Peter would a& in contradi@ion tohis Commiffion, and his Agreement fo folemnly made with the Apoftles. But if at the time of that Agreement, (which was Azno Christi §1.) heeither was not, (which is moft true) Bi- fhop of Rome, or then left it; then it evidently follows, That he continued not Bifhop of Rome for Five and twenty years, as is by our Adverfaries, ( with great confidence and no reafon ) aflerted. 7. And this is further manifeft, from our Adverfaries own Principles and Pofitions: Baroninms tells us, That Peter was (b) Bifhop of Antioch feven years; and at Rome five and twenty years: And for this he cites Eufebius his Chronicon. By the way, (concerning what Baronius {ays of Peters being Bifhop for fo many years at Antioch and Rome) Ob-- ferve, 1. That Exfebiws {aysindeed, that Peter (c) found- ed the Church of Antioch; and then, by our bleffed Savi- onr’s Command, (as they fay ) went to Rome. But fo far is he from faying that he was feven years Bifhop there, that he exprefly fays, That Exodius was the firft . (4)Bifhopof Antioch. 2.Whenhe cites Eufebius his(e) wnils evat Enodins, Idem in Chrenico, ad Annum Claudij 2. 2 6. I defire then to know, Whe- . (2) Gal. 2.9: me mistyTet, 8c. Petre Concreditum eft E- vangelinm preputif. (b) Quod fuaiat ad Ecclefiam Antio- chenam, hoc Anno (Chréfté 39.) Infti- tutam a Petro, ce Septem Annis ab to- dem adminiftratam, ec. Baronius An- ~ nal. Tom.1.ad An- num Chrift.39.§.9. (¢) Petrus Eccle- fiam = Antiochenam fundans, inde Ro- mam adiit.Eufeb.in Chron. ad Ann. Claud.1.And they fay he went to Rome, Our bleffed Saviour commande ing him (ote do.cum 9. Annos Antiochiae Sediffet, poftea juben- teChrifte Romam ve- nit. Longus A Co- riolano in fumma Conc. in Priacipio, in ferie Pontificum. (d) Tits ’Avzo- xeov "Exxanctass &c. Antiochene Ec clefie Epifcopus pri- (¢) Baronius ibidem, ad Chre- pene aise MAL 8) abi. J se preheat Lh A OO et EE ‘a \ 4 eee a > 98 Obfervations on the Pope's Bull . ~ (f) Allthat Ea- febius lays is only this ~—-- Tlezess. & xopuea tor Tv, ey Aynoxeda TpOoTHy Seucaswous Ex , > ‘p , ; xrnotay es Pemmy | amos xnpuTley ewafysasoy. Ad Ann. Claudlj- I (ge) The words ‘Baroninus cites , as being Exftbias his. words Ad Annum 2. Claudij, are in- ‘deed( part ofthem) Ad Anaum 1.Clau- dij: but the reft (Peter's being. five and twenty years _Bifbop of Rome ) are neither at thar, nor any other year. of Claudius. ch) Baronius An-. nal.Tom.1, ad AR- num Chrifti, 34. §, I. & 2. ai (z)Idem T. m.1. ad Annum Chrifti. 69 §.9s Chrenicon to prove that Peter was Fivesand twenty years Bifhop of Rome, andrefersus, to what Exfebius (f) fays ) ad Ann, 2. Clanaij. Vhe man (who underftood no Greek ) is miferably miftaken; as Univerfally he is, when he meddles with Greek Authors, unlefstheir'Tranflations — be true) for Exfebeus in his Greek Text, (as all’know, and may fee) hasno fach'(g) thing,as Five and twenty years; nay, hedoésnot fomuchas fay, that be was. Bi- Shop of Rome at all, muchdefs that he was Five end twen- ty yearsBifhopthere. ButtheLatin Copies (interpola- ted and corrupted, as thoufands others are by Roman Arts) deceived bim.. But to let this pafs; Baronins fays, That Peter was feven. years Bifhop of Antioch, and five and twemy of Rome. Sothat (in the whole) he was. Two and thirty years Bithop in Syréz and Italy, and took upon himthe Charge and Cure of. the Genrdles in thofe Provinces. Now our blefled Saviour’s Paffion and Af cenfion was (b) Auno Chrifti 34. to which if 32. bead- ded (the time wherein Peter. was Bifhop of Aztioch; or Rome) the Product willbe 66. So that fromthe Afcenfi- on of our blefled Saviour tillthe year 66, Peter had ta-. ken the Epifcopacy and: particular Charge of a Gentile- Ghurch;, and his (+) Martyrdom was 13. Nerons, that is; Anno Chrifti 68. or (as Baronius computes ) 69. whence (by thisitheix Account ) it evidently follows. that during ali the time from-out blefled Saviour’s Afcen-. fion tohis Martytdem (about two years. only excepted ) Péter was the Apoftle and Bifhop of a Gentile-Charchx. Which is, r. manifeftly untrue, and inconfiftent with. what is: faidvof -Perer inthe és of the Apostles, with his. Commiflion, in which the careof the Circumcifion was concredited to him by our blefled Saviour; afd: with: his Solemn Agreement with the Apoftles to go to the Circumcifion, as Paul was tothe Gentiles; And, 2: It is. without any the leaft ground in Scripture, by which, it neither does, nor can appear that ever Peter was at “Rome, fo much as for one Day, much lefs that he was Bi- Shop there Five Seventy years. Nor can it appear inScrip-- * 4 > -againft Queen Elizabeth, = gg ture,that ever he was. at Avtio-hfave(k) once;noristhere (&) Gal.2.11, any mention of any thing he then did there, fave that he 1s 43 && difflembled,and was juftly reprehended for it, by St. Paul ; whereas it is evident in Scripture, that St. Paxl was at Antioch for a whole (1) year at onetime, conftituted the (/) A&.11.25. Church there, confirmed them (m) afterwards in the (my Att14.22- Faith, and (n) ordain’d Elders to govern them, {tay?d (a) me ner there 4 { 0) longtime, and (p) continued there preath- (yp) A. 15. 35 éng the Gofpel; and yet (notwithftanding all this ) ifwe vid.Aé.18.22,23. will believe them; Peter was Bilhopthere, andnot Paul. re The truth is; thoughit be evident that Pau, as Apoftle, did all Epifcopal Acts there; yet *tiscertain, that nei- ther he nor Peter, was particularly Bifhop of that, or any other place. 3. It is utterly incredible, that Perer the Supream Head and Monarch of the Church (as they pretend ) fhould for Two and thirty years be Bifhop ; and have the particular Charge and. Cure of two of the greatelt Cities in the Roman Empive, and that while the Apoftlesliv’d; and yet none of them ( nor he himfelf) in any of their Writings, fhould fay one Syllable of it, - nor mention fo much as one fingle Epifcopal Ac& done by him, in either ofthofe Cities, in thofe two and thir- ty years ; #0 wor St.(p) Luke in the Adks of the Apoftles, — (?? Iconfels Ba- g ; } : .” yonius, and Hierom nor St. Paul; who liv’d long in Antioch, and longer ia -¢whom'he cites Rome, and had opportunity, nay (had it been trve) 2 ‘Commentariorun neceflity to mentionit. He had need of a {trong Faith, in Epift.ad Gal.lib. who can believe this; for my part, Credat Fudeus. Apella, %.cap.2-) tells us, ec. 4. And as for Peter?s being Seven years. Bifhop of nit oft 5 5 ee 4 sae hop of Antioch 5 8e Antioch, and Twenty five of Rome; it is further Confi- grenor well pleas'd derable, Thatthe greateft Patrons of this Popi{h Pofition, al- ° that Lukelefcit onc of his Hiftory in the A&s of the Apoftles. Nay they fpeak irreverently of him, and fay, That he lefc that, and many other things out of his Hiftory, by a Liberty or Licesce he took to himfelf. Hance cum tacuit Lucas, c& alia Multa Hiftoriographi Licentia Pretermifit. Frimuim Epifco- pum Antioche Petrum fuiffe Accepimus (fays Hierome there ) quod Lucas penits Omifite But Hierome (though an excellent Perfon ) had his Paffions and Errors, and in that very place , indeavours to juftifie Peter, as not to be blam’d , againft the exprefs words of St. Paul, Gal. 1.11. Lwke- writ by thedire@tion of the Holy Ghoft , and if he writ not all chat Hitrome ot Baronivs would have him, yet they fhould not Cenfure him. Vide Baronium ad Annum Chrifti, 39. §. 8 Q 2 though "7 rs AN da | Zeke: (4) Onuph, Pan- ¥in.in Annotar. ad Pilar. in vitis Pont. ad vitam Petri. (7) Ex his 9. pri- mis Annis, ufq; ad Initium An. 2. Jme per. Clandi} ,Petram: Judea nunquam ex effiffeexquo > Pana lo, apertiffimé Con- — fiat. Idem. Ibidem. UC) Petrus Crim ob Affixus eff novif- fimo Neronis Anny, Chrifti-vero.69sTbi- dem. (t) Baronjus Ane nal.Tom.1.ad Ans. 390.§. 85.9, &e. (4) Baronius I-- bidem. §, 13, (x) Baronius ]-. bidem.§.9.An.39. {y)} Ann. Chrift.. 69.Capitone & Ru- fo Coff. Petrus & Paulos Martyriun fubiere: . Anna). Tom.1.an Annum: 69.§.1.Neronis 13. (q) Vide Bellar. de Script. Ecclef: in Petro. Apoftolo; & Chronol. fue Part. 2. ad Annum 39). & 44. &ann, 69. 9,2, > Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull shough they agree in the Conclufion, thar Peter was fo long Bifhop at thofe two places, yer they Contraditl each other , and the Truth; and by their own Pofitions, (to fave their Adverfaries that Labour) utterly Overthrow and’ Confute that Pofition they endeavour to prove. This Evidently a pears inthis Cafe, asitis {tated by Oxuphrins , Baronius, and Bellarmine. , | 1. Cq) Onuphrius tells us, That Peter remain?d conftant~ ly in Judea , for Nine (x) years next after our bleffed Saviour?s death, that is till the year of Chrift 43. after this, be was Bifhop of Antioch Seven years; to the year of our bleffed Saviour §0. And then Five and twenty years: ~ he far Bifhop of Rome; that is, ( by his own Compu- tation.) till the year of Chrift, 75. So. that by this. Account, Peter was Bifhop of Rome, Anno Christi 75. ‘And'yet he there fays, That Peter ( [) died, Anno Chri- §#i 69. Andthen (by his Calculation) Peter was Bi~ fhop of Rome Six years after his death. 2. Barowius (t) {tates the Queftion thus. Peter came to An- tioch Azno Chrifti 39. and'was Bi(hop there (u) Sever: years., thatis, tillthe year of Chrift 46. And'then he - fays, that from Antioch Peter went to Rome, and far there Bifhop ( x) Five and twenty years; that is, till the year 71. And fo ( by his own account) Peter muft be Bifhop of Rome two years after he was dead = For the fame Baronius tells (y) us, that Peter died An- no Chrifts, 65. And though. this Account of Peters Epifcopacy at Reme, be not only Erroneous, ( but to all- Intelligent Perfons ) Ridiculous ; yet (z ) Béellar- mine maintains the fame Opinion, not only in Contra- diction to Onuphrinsy but to Eufebins, Hierome, Epi- phanius, &c. (a). whofe Opinions Baronius ‘endea- vourstoconfute. In fhort, as there is no ground in Scripture, that Perer ever was at Rome; fo that he was Twenty five years Bifhopthere, neither Scripture ( 4) Vide Baronium Annal.. Tom. 1. ad: nor le tk Ai te eR a i ee oe " “againft Queen Elizabeth Io! ~. §- aa ' nor purer Antiquity affords them any proof,. or proba- bility: Exjfebius his Greek Chronicon, bafely (6 ) cor- rupted in a Laten Verfion of it, about Four hundred years after our blefled Saviour, being that they mutt rely upon. Our Adverfaries had ill luck, when they made Peter firft Bithop of Rome, attributed the Supremacy to him, and ( that he might have it ) made the Pope his Succe(- ’ for. For had they chofen Paul in ftead of Peter, they might have had far more ( though not enough ) to prove ( and that out of exprefs Scripture ) both Paul’s Supre- macy, andthe Popes Succeflion to him. Forthefe fok . lowing Particulars ( every one of them ) may evidently be proved out of Scripture. 1. That the Romans were (cc ) Gentiles. 2. That Panl (by our blefled Saviour?s (4) Appointment ) was the Apoftle of the Gevtiles., Peter was not, but of the Ce) Fews. 3. Paul was two: whole (f) years at Rome, Converted, and Eftablifheda Church there ; but it cannot appear by Scripture, that Peter was ever there. 4. The Care ( wacwy ‘Exxanciay ) €g¢) of all the Churches lay upon St.Paul; no fuch thing in: Scripture ever faid of Péter. §. St. Paul made Orders and Conftitutions for the good Government of (4) All the Churches ( without any Authority, Leave, or Com- miffion from Peter ) no fuch thing ever faid of Peter, ei- ther in Scripture, or primitive and pure Antiquity. 6. St. Paul writ a Long and’ Excellent Epiftle to the Romans, Peter didnofuch thing. Hadthe Holy Ghoft in Scrip ture exprefly told us, 1. That ourbleffed Saviour had Ap- ointed, and Commiflion’d Peter to be the Apoftle of the Gentiles (and fuch were the Romans), 2. That heveas-two whole years refiding at Rome, Converting and Eftablifhing a Churchthere. 3. That the Care and Cure of Allthe Churches: lay npon him, 4, That he made Orders and Conftituions for the Government of All The Churches; 5. That he had: writ an Epiftleto the Romans, to Confirmthem in that Faith: he had preach’d amongst them: Vfay, had all thefe things beeninScripture exprefly faid of Peter, our erat | with (&) Vide Jof. Scaligeri Animad- verf, in Chronolo- gica Eufebij; Am- fielod.16 58. p.1896- (c) Rom: 1.133: Cd) A&.22. 2% Gal.27.8. (¢) Ibidem. Cf) Ak. 28.30). 31. (@)2Cor. rr 28. 1 Cor-7.17. Ch) "Ov]as ey’ mis “Exnanotass mious darken pas Chine Neéray- Ma dS deere yn; E= dictum, Conftitutiod So I ordain in all Churches. Verfio: vulg. frigid?é—_—. In Ecclefits Omni- bus doceo. 1 Cor.7o- 17. vide AC. 18+25- —_———, as. = > oe hie, oe ae A gp eee | an - L102 @ i Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull © Rabies: 4 ‘Cé)T confefs Bel- darmine would (out of Ireneus as he vainly thinky) per- fwade us,that both Peter & Paul were Bifhops of Rome. I- weneus(fays he )lib. 3.Cap. 3./1xit Cata- logum Romanorum Epifcoporum, & pri= ino locoponst.Petrum & Paslum De Rom. Pontif. lib. 2, Cap.4.§ 6.{renzus, Ck ) Series & eae Rom. Pen- tif. fic eff: Primus : aie ihdtitom gus a-Coriol. fum. ma Coacil.in Prin. in Serie Rom. Pon- tif. We have the very fame wordsin the Edition of Plz- tina, De vatis Pont. Col:A gripp. 1626. But Platina(bafely corrupted fince his death) hasno fuch | thing in the Old Edition, 1485. But to make our bleffed Saviour the firft Bifhop of Rome, is not only erroneous, but impious. 1. He never was at Rome. 2. Hewas not feat, fave tothe loft Sheep of the Houfe-of Ifrael, (notin Perfon ~ fure, not tobe a Bifhop of any Gentile Church). -3. There was\no Chriftian Church atRome 4: Our blefled Saviour remains a Prieftfor.ever, and cannot have any Succeffor: Heb: g..6. And therefore Bellarm. juftly denies our blefled Savie our to haye any Succeffor, becaufe he is Pontifex eternus. Bellar. de Script. Ecclef.in T.Aquina while he liv’d of which he.could be Bifhop. Pope was, and is his Succeflor. But feeing not one of faid of Paul, it.is Evident, that thereis far more reafon and probability (and that grounded upon exprefs Scrip- ture ) that Paul was Bifhop of Rome (and not Perer } and And yet our Adver- faries (2) reject .Pawl, and will have Perer their firft Bi- fhop (though fome. ofthem impioufly fay, our (k) blef- Jed Saviour was their first Bifhop) That St. Panl was not ~ Bifhop of Rome (notwithftanding all the former things ~ faid.of him, in Scripture) we believe and know, and ~ willingly grant. But onthe other fide, tofay, that Pe- ~ fo the Pope might be his Succeffor. ter was Bifbop of Rome, concerning whom no fach things are faid in Scripture, either in-exprefs terms, (as they are of Paul) or by Equivalence or any juft Confequence; this wefay, is very irrational. Forin things Moral or Hiftorical.( and of fuch we.are now {peaking ) which ~ are Incapable of Phyfical or Mathematical Demontftrati- on, the higheft prudential Motives and Probabilities will, and ought to carry the Affent. of all wife men: and therefore feeing it is deny’d (and juftly too ) that Paul wasever Bifhop of Rome, though the Probabilities, 4 - grounded on Scripture, that he-was fo, be far greater than Perer can pretend to;.for our Adverfaries to fay, thar Peter was Bifbopof Rome, muft be, and is, evident- ly irrational. If the, great probabilities we have that ~ Paul was Bithop of Romedeferve not our Affent, certain- dy wecannot rationally. conclude fronmfar. lefs probabili- ties that Pecer wasfo. ve eed . 7 “762 eye 331 ‘ ee wee . b y ’ = with great noife and. ‘confidence would (and with far — more reafon and probability. might.) have afferted Perer?s _ Supremacy, aad his Roman Epifcopacy, and that the } all thefe is faid of Peter, and every one of themexprefly _ if a ‘again 2 thlies Elz pa 103 * But when they would magnifie the Pope’s Power and Su- Pe '44 }.. premacy,, (having no better Arguments ) they make ufe * his See, and of fome Priviledges which they take (or mi- 4. The Bifhop of Rome in'many Stories and Canons, ‘is es alled (1) Apoftolicus. if \hica, and Cathedra Apoffolica, ) tri. 4. Vicar of Chrif. 5. That our bleffed Saviour gave: "him the Keys of the K ingdom of Fleaven, &e. 3. He iscall’d Succeffor Pe- mate. Damnatur Apoftolicus, [ue Or fraterne falutis negligens. _~ Iconfefsthat thefe, and many fuch (#) Particulars have i been urged, and (as pertinent ) flood upon by feveral Popes.in their Bulls, their Decretal Conftitutions and E- piftles, and generally: by all their Party ;°efpecially the . Clergy (Secular and Regular ) whofe great and principal Intercft itis, to maintain the Papal Supremacy =: for if that fail, they irrecoverably falk with it. In fome Centuries i paft, while grofs Ignorance and Tyranny, benighted and overaw’d this Weftern Part of the World, fuch Arguments did their Bufinefs, For few could, ‘and ( the danger being ter Luther arofe, and Learning reviv?d, alli knowing and they did ( or could) bring from ‘fuch:Topicks,.. were not only Inconfequent, but indeed impertinent and ridiculous. That this may not be gratis diftum, ¥ fhall indeavourto make none of thofe Honorary Titles or Priviledgesdo, or can afford any juft ground of that Supremacy, and: Papal Mo- et spieouda ae now.fo earneftly contend for;. And here m It is tobe obferved; that the word Apoftolicus, which ( for fome Ages laft patt ) the Pope has Affumed, and his __ of feveral Honorary Titles given to the Bifhop of Rome, and. 4 ~ fiakerather) to be peculiar to the Popes, fuch as _thefe. - 2. His See is call’d Sedes Apofto-" if tr inthronixat us nox eft Papa vel Apoftolicus, fed Apoftaticus. &,Can fi Papa very great ) few, or none, durft Anfwer'them.. But af-' ’ impartial Perfons did fee and know, that allthe Arguments: “it appear by. plain Inftances,. (and Ihopeeffect it.) that. Object, C1) Apoftolicus non nife aCardina- libus inthronizan. dus. Gratian. Dift. 79. Part. 1.8 Ibi- dem. Can. 1. Ali- 6. Dift, 4. in Lem Anfiver. (.m ) Bellarmine gives us a Catalo- gue of fifteen fuch Papal Tides;which: are thefe - Pa-: pa, Pater Patrum,. Chriftianorum Pon tifex,jummus Sacer= ADS, Princeps S4ctre- dotum , Vatarius Chrifti 5 Caput Ec-. clefie, Fundamen- tum Ecclefie,Paftor Ovilis Domini, Pa-- ter & Doétor Om- ning Fidelinm, Re- « Gor Domus Dei, Cuftos vinee Dei ,. Sponfus ~ EccleGe Dei, Apoftolica Se- dis Preful, . Epifco- pus univerfalis, ex quibus Omnibus ee Singulis Aperté Col- ligitur Ejus Frimatys. De Romano Pont: lib. 2. cap. 344. 104 — Obfervations on the Pope's Bull — (n ) Cum Epifco- pus Civitatis fuetit demortuns, Eligitur alius,ce veniunt ad Apeftolicum cum Ea leéto,ut ex Confecret ifcopum. Alcui- mg Divinis Of- ficiis cap. 3 6. (0) Petrus de Marca de Concor- dia Sacerdotij & Imperij. Tom. 2. Hib.6. cape3. §-3+D> 6 7 ( p) Sequens a- tas abjtinutt Idem Ibidem, (q) The Arch- bifhop of Parés mext before cited, amongft the Apo- ftolical Churches (befides thofe I have named) rec- kons Alexandria, Ephefus, Ancyra, Cee vinth, Theffalonica; and he might have added Philippi,e~c (De Concordia Sacer hisFlatterers given him, as peculiarto himfelf, was And — ciently a Title given to all Archbifhops. So (7) Aj — cuinus Flaccus tells us, That when a Bifhop was Eleiled, they fent him, ad Apoftolicum, that he might Confecrate him. The Learned Archbifhop (0) of Paris, tells me this; and alfo that this wasthe ufe ofthat word inthe © Sixth Century, in the time of Gregorius Turonenfis, who — was made Bifhop about the year 572. but afterwards, — That Title was ( p ) appropriated to the Pope. Now — Idefire to know of our Adverfaries, how The Title, © being Appropriated to the Pope, does make more for © his Supremacy, than it did for the Archbithops, when — it was common to them all ? 2. That Rome wasSedes Apoftolica, and Carhedra Apoftolica, — Becaufe we are fure St. Paul ( though net as — But that Perer ever was there, nei- But it is, and ( by our Adverfaries ) muft be granted too; — That Fernfalem, Antioch, and other (q) Churches ( be- © fides Rome ) were Sedes Apoftolica, and Ecclefie Apoftolice, and eo Nomine, were of great elteem in the Ancient — Church, But the Bifbops of none of them then did, or © ceuld pretend to any Supremacy, much lefs to an Ec- © Clefiaftical Monarchy.: And why Rome fhould morethan — they, when our Adverfaries can, and will give (which — as yet they never did ) any Juft and Cogent Reafon, I — we grant. Bifhop ) fate there. ther wenor our Adverfaries are, or can be fure. fhall fabmit. (7) Tertullian alfo reckons the Apoftoli= d. 8 Imperij, lib. 7. cap. 4. §.7-Tom.2.p.224.) for Tertullian adds it in the place nextcited. (1) Age jam qui voles Curiofitatem melius exerceré in negotio falutis tua, ptre curre Ecclefias Apoftolicas, apud quas Ipfe adhuc Cathedre Apoftolorum fuis locts Prefidentut 5 apud . Ghas Ipfe Authentice Litere eornm recitantut, fonantes vocem, & representantes faciem mrs i Proxima eft Tibi Achaia, babes Corinthnm: Si non longe es & Macedonia, babes Philippos, aut Theffa- Jonicenfes. Si potes in | AJA hes 4 ee deinceps Apoftolicé Litulus Soli Sammo Pontifict attributus eft ab Authoribys, | ifiam tendere, babes Ephefum: fi autem Italie adjaces, babes Romam, cs Tertullian. de Prefcript. cap. 36. p. 338. Edit. Pamelij, 1662. cae againft Queen Elizabeth. 105 cal Churches, fach as Corimb, Ephelus, Theffalonica, Phi- lippi, Rome, @c, and tells us, That Cathedra Apoftolo- rum , the Chairs of the Apoftles were then in thofe Apostoli- cal Churches 5 That Bifhops prefided in them ; that if they had great Curiofity and Care of their Salvation, they fnould make their Addrefs to thofe Apoftolical Chairs and Churches. He fends them not all to Rome, and Peter?s Chir there : But (faith he ) of thou art near Macedonia, thou haft Phi- lippi avd Theflalonica to goto; Ifin Afia, Ephefus;, If in Achaia, Corinth 5 Jf thou art near Italy, thou balt Rometo Addrefsto. He knew no Supremacy or Infallibi- lity annex’d to Perer?s Chair at Rome, more than to Pauls at Corinth, or Philippi. He directs them to that Apo- ~ f{tolical Chair and Church which was next them , and Judged that fuficient, without going to Rome. The Bifhop of Rome in thofe days, pretended to no more Su- premacy or Infallibility in the Apoftolical Church and Chair at Rome, then the Bilhop of Ephefis or Corinth, in the Apoftolical Chairs and Churches of thofe Cities. . If Sedes Apoftolica, and Cathedra Apoftolica be a fufficient ground to infer and prove Supremacy; then either all fuch Churches muft be Supream, ( which is impoilible ) or none at all, which is certainly true. 3. Butthey fay 5 The Bifhop of Rome és Peter?s Succeffor, and on this they principally and generally ground his Supre- macy, as derived to him, ( J) Jure Succetfionis, and (t ) Jure Divino too; by Divine Right and Succefion, Now if this be true; ifSucceflion to Peter carry Supremacy withit, Then feeing they conftantly fay, 1. That Peter was (u) feven years Bifhop of Antioch before he was at Rome. 2. And that (x ) Euodius was his Succeffor there. (f )Ecclefiz Rom. Specialins in Petro, Coli Terraeque retie net habenas. Gratle an. Can. Si Papa.6, Dift. 40c (t) Jus Succeffi- onis, Pontificum Req manorum in eo fun= datur; quod Petrus Sedem {uam, Fubente Domino, Rome Collo- caverit.Bellarm.De Rom. Pont. ].2.¢. Ie §. fh (uw) Ecclefia Ate tiocheta hoc Anno (Chrifti,39.) a Pe- tro Infbituta yo 7. Anis abeodem adminifirata. Baron. ad An. Chrift.39.§.9. Tom. 1. p. 269. Edit. Antverp. 1612. ( x) Baron. Ibid. §. 18. p. 272.and in their prefent Roman Breviary, Afitverp. 1550. They have aHoly-day for St. Peter’s Inftallment at Antioch; In Cathedra Sanéfi Petri An- tiochie, (fo they caliit)) sn parte Breviaris Hiemali, ad diem 22. Februdrij. Ana we are there told, that that Feftival was call’d Cathedra Petri; Quia Primus Apoftolorum Petrits hodie Epifcopatus Cathedram fufcipiffe referatur. Ubid. Le&. 3.p.760.Col, 2. And for this they cite St. Avguftin De Sanétis, Serm. 15. a known fuppofititius and {purius fcrap, unworthily father’d on St. Anguftin, z side R I | es FS i “—* - - “a=... | * . ~~ ee ee ee . = yy i Nee eN . aee e e ag $ a i 7) c . Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull 4 ' Cy)TIpar@- ov r@- ange TAY xg- Shea, &e. Hic primus Epifcopalem Cathedram capit , tumei Ante Ceteros Omnis, Saum ei in Terris Thronum Do- minus tradidiffet. Epiphapius adverf. Haref. 1. 3. Tom.2. Haref 78. §.7. pag. 4039. B. I defire toknow, why the Supremacy did not defcendto Enodius, his firftand immediate Succeffor ? For admit, | that Peter had fuch Supremacy, and that it was not Per- fonal, buttobe tranfmitted to fome Succeffor; ( both which are manifeftly untrue) yet feeing fuch Tranfimif- fion of his Supremacy, muft be done either, 1. By fome A& of our blefled Saviour. Or , 2. By fome Act of Peter , tran{mitting his Supremacy to his Succeffor at Rome, and not to Exodius at Antioch: it will concern our Adverfaries to fhew fuch At of our blefled Saviour, or Peter. For if they can, we will fubmit , and give the ' Canfe; but ifthey cannot,then feeing,dem eff non effec = non apparere ; they muft pardon our unbelief, ifweaffenr not to that,which they cannot prove.! fay, cannot prove ; there being not one fyllable in Scripture or Antiquity for Six hundred years,(I might give more )either exprefly af- firming, or from which it may (by good Confequence): be deduced , that either our bleffed Saviour or Peter did tranfmit fuch a Monarchical Supremacy and Infallibility tothe Bifhopof Rome, more thento the Bifhop of 4z- tioch, If any man think otherwife,let him give us good proof of the contrary, and we willgive him thanks and theCaufe. 2. Butadmit that the Pope fucceeds Peter , and really fits in Carhedra Petri, as his Succeflor, (whicl is evidently untrue) yet this will not prove his Monar- chical Supremacy ; if it do appear that any other Apo- {tle fuceeded our blefled Saviour (before Peter was Bi- flop any where) and by his own Appointment, fate in our bleffed Saviour’s Place and Epifcopal Chair, as his Succeflor, I fay, if thisappear, then as our blefled Sa- viour is far greater then Peter, fo his Succeflor will be greater then the Pope , and have a fairer pretence for the Supremacy, as our blefled Saviour’s immediate Suc- ceflor, then the Pope can poifibly have, as Peters. Now for this, let our Adverfaries confider what Epiphanins fays, Thus; (y) James the Brother of our Lord was the firft Bifoop, when our bleffed Saviour concredited and refignd tohim, before all others, bis Throne or Epifcopal Chair-on Earth. fii saves. = 7) oe avainft Queen Elizabeth. — 107 Earth, Andherelet it be confidei’?d, 1. Tharin Scrip- ture our blefled Saviour is call’d (z) 4 Bifhop, Univerfal Bifhop of the Church; with (a) Monarchical and Kingly Power. 2. He was in a particular and peculiar way Bé- fhop of the Fews; he had 7E#txoaky, a peculiar Over- _ fight and Cure of them. He was fent (in Perfon) only to (b) them: He conftiruted a Church amongft them, Ordain’d' Apoftles, and Seventy other (¢) Inferior Mi- nifters, whom he fent to Preach and do Miracles in Con- firmation of their Doétrine; he conftantly preached the Gofpel amongft them, and did all thofe Acts a Bi- fhop fhould doin his Diocefe.” 3. And Ferufalem being the Metropolisof the Jews, Epiphanius tells us, that it _ was (0 Earth) bis Throne, (Thronus fuus) his Epifcopal . Seat, or Chair ; where heufually was, preach?d and did Miracles. 4. He fays , That our bleffed Saviour chofe James. before allthereft, (even before Peter) and concre- * dited and refign’d to bim, Thronum fuum, hi Epifcopal Seat, and that James was Bifhop of Jerufalem, # attefted by alt Antiguty. And this probably was the Reafon , 1. Why Paul (d) names Fames (as Bifhop of Ferufalem) before Peter. 2. Whyinthe Council of the Apoftles , Fames (and not Peter) gave the definitive (¢) Sentence. So that thefe things feem to me certain, 1. That our blefled Saviour, though Bifhop of the Univerfal Church , yet he had a particular Epifcopal Cure, and Charge of the Jews, as his Father was King of allthe World, yet particularly of the Jews. (f) 1Sam. 12. 12. it was (2) Otoxpaza. 2. That Fames washis Succeflor in that Cure. 3. And (if Epipbanius fay true) our bleffed Sa- vieur himfelf appointed him his Succeflor. Let our Ad- verfaries (by fo good Authority) fhew; that Peter was - our blefled Saviour’s Succeffor, either at Rome, (asfome of them, before-mention’d, only pretend) or any where elfe; and (for my part) let them take the Caufe, O- therwife, if they cannot, then we may evidently con- clude, That if James never did, nor could pretend juft- ly to a Monarchical Supremacy over the whole Church, | R 2 though (x) 1 Pet. 2.26. (a) Rev. 17.146 & 19.16. (b) Matth. 60.6. & 15.24. Rom. 15. 3 | “() Luke 19.12. * (da) Gal.2.9. (0) A&. 15. 13 19.20, (£) God your King: (fo Samuel tells them ) and fo r Sam. 8.7. and cap. 10.19. ~ Cg )So Fofephus and Philo call the Jewifh Govern- ment, from Mofes to Saul. God was perfonally their King. 1. He himfelf perfonally did give them all theirLaws. 2.He perfonally fent his Vice-Roys, Mo- (es, Folbua, and all the Judges, 3. He received and per- fonally anfwered all their laft Ap- peals, whichare ¢- .vident Chara&ers that he was their Supream Power , their King. -. ” 108 Ch) Synodus a Spiritu Sanélo, que oft Spiritus Sapien- tie em Jntelletins Edotta declarat,&c- Cincil. Trid. Seft 21. de Communio- ne, cap.1. And yet what it declares there is moft ¢vi- dently untrue. Ci) chriftus 4 Terris Ajcenfurus ad * Calos,Sacerdotes fii ij fius Vicarios reli quit tanquam Pra | fides ac Fudices, ad quos Onnia Morta- lia crimina-deftrane tur.Conc. Trid Seff. 14. De Penitentia, cap. 5. De Confelfi oe ne. Vid. Aguinat, Par.3-Quaft.8.Art 6. in Corpore. (k) Aquin, 2. 2. Quatt. 88. Art. 12. Frelatusgerit Vicem Chrifti-. (1) 2 Cor. 2 10+ Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull | Oe though our bleffed Saviour?s Succeflor 5 much lefs may the Pope for fucceeding Peer, Q. E.D. : 4. But the Pope (they fay) is Chrifi?s Vicar, and that he is, or fhould be fo, we grant. But we further fay ; that many thoulands (befideshim) are Chrsft’s Vicars as well, and as much as he. This has been manifeftly proved before, Ifhallonlyadd; that the Irez+ Fathers (who, “fay they, (4) were in|pired by the Holy Ghoft, and fo furely Infallible) exprefly fay, and Synodically define , That our bleffed Saviour before his Afcenfion, lefe all Priefts his (i) own Vicars, to whom, as to Prefidents and Fudges , all Mortal fins were to be Confefs'd. And ( k) Aquinas, (and their Schoolmen) fay; That in the Church , the Bifhop is Chriff?s Vicar , and they prove it well, fromthe exprefs and plain words of the ¢) Apoftle; and they might have added alfo 2Cor. 5.20. And Heavy Holden, a Learned Sorbon Doétor , in his Annotations upon thofe Texts, fays the fame thing. And now if tobe Chrisi’s Vicar, give any ground or pretence to Supremacy, then all Bifhops and Priefts (who are confefs’d_ to be Chraft?s Vicars) may pretend toSupremacy as well as the Pope. And they being Chrifi?s Vicars as to the Power of Abfol- ving and Retaining Sins, (7) every poor Prieft has as much power to abfolve the Pope, as he him. So that any Argu- ment drawn fremthis Title, that he is Chrif?s Viear, to prove the Popes Supremacy,is not only inconfequent but impertinent, and indeed ridiculous: And yet upon thisground, and arother as infignificant , Pope Jznocent the Fourth, intheir General Council at Lions, ‘Excom- municates and Depofes the Emperor Friderick, Seeing (fays the Pope there) we are Chrifi?s (n) Vicar on Earth, (m) Si periculum mortis immineat,approbatnfque defit Confeffarivs, quilibet 3 OR daqui | bufcunque cenfuris & peccatis abfolvere. ‘fede tle mel Pape ; ae Chane ri 1652. De Sacramento Poenitentiz pag. 61. & 62. (n) Cam Wi Chrifti Vices teneamus Tirvis, Nobifque in Petri perfond dictum fit, Quodcunque Ligaveris,c. Memoratum Principem Om- ni Dignitate privatum denunciamus, Cr Sententiando privamus; Omnefque ei: Furamento Fidelita- tis aftrictos, & psramento abjolvimus 5 inhibentes ne quifquam de Cocteroté, ut lmperatori pareat; & qui ipfi favoremant auxilinm preftiterint, fint ipfo fatto Excommunicati. Cap.ad Apoftolice,2.Bx- ara de Sent. & re judicata, vid. Cap, Quanto 3. Extra de Tranflatione Epifcopi. and —- cohen a Si nee tt AL PT ELIOT LAE LE OE . } Y ~againft Queen Elizabeth — - and it was inthe Perfon of Peter faid to us, Whatfoever thou binds on Earth, fhall be bound in Heaven we declare and denounce the faid Friderick deprived of all bis Honour and Dignity, abfolve his Subjedis from all Oaths of Allegiance , and Excemmunicate all who {hew him any favour , or obey him as Emperor. And tothe fame purpofe their Trenr 109 Carechifm tellsus; (0) That the Pope has ( ty Divine Right, (not by any Human Conftitutions) that Supream de- gree of Dignity and Furifdittion, over the Univerfal Church, as Peters Succeffor, fitting in his Chair , and as Vicar of Christ. (0) Cam in Petri Cathedra Sedeat , {ammum in e0 Dige uitates gradum, non ulis bymanis confti- tutionibus, fed divia nitus datum agnof~ cit: Eftque Moderator Univerfalis Ecclefie, ut Petri Succeffor, & in terris verus Chri(ti Vicarius. Ita Catechif. Trident. part. 2. cap. 7. de Ordinis Sacramento, §. 28. vid. etiam Bullarium Ro- manum, Tom. 1. pag. 347.Col. 1. §. 6. where Alexand. Papa. 6, gives all the we/t-Jndies to the King of Spain, as Vicar of Chrift. §- But that which they prefs with moft noife and confi- (7) Part.t.cap.11.§.4s dence, is, That our bleffed Saviour gave Pever the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven. They feem to be in love with thefe words, Dabo Tibi Claves, cc. For in their (p) Offices, for only two of St. Perer’s Feftivals, they are repeated almoft Twenty times. But how impertinent this is, to prove any Supremacy (much lefs their Papal Monarchy) will evidently appear, in that this Power of the Keys, which they would appropriate to the Pope, was given tothereft of the Apoftles, as well as to Pe- ter (as is proved before) nay toevery Bifhop and Prieft in the World. For,1.fo their own Roman Breviary, pub- lifhed by the authority of Pope Pius the Fifth , and after- wards revifed by Clement the Eighth, and Urban the Eighth exprefly fays 5 for having told us, rhat our bleffed Saviour gave the Keysto Peter: it follows ; (q) That this power did pafs to the ober Apoftles and Princes of the Church, 2. Their Trenr Carechifm, having (r) {poke of the Power of the Keys; afterwards tells us , to whom our bleffed Saviour gave and concredited that Power before he Afcended into Heaven ; And it was Tothe (f ) Bifhops ana (p) Vide Brevi- arium Romanum , in Cathedra S, Pe- tri Antiochia. Fe- br. 22. & in F -{to Cathedra S. Petri qua Rome primum Sedet. Jan.18, Bre- bh parte Hiema- (9) Petro dedit Claves; tranfiuit quidem etiam in a- lios Apaftolos wis par test ates illivs, & in omnes Ecclefice Prine cipes. Breviar.Rom, in Fefto Cathedr. S. Petri Antioch. Febr. 22. Led. o. Part. Hiemali. pag, 762.Edit.Antverp, 1660. } Cf} Eam poteRatem Epifcopis & Presbyteris conceffit. Ibid. §.9. IJo Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull | (t) Joh. 20. 22. 23. () Pontif. Ro- tmanum jufilu Cle- ment. 8. reftitutum Rom. 1611. p. §2. AccipeSpiritum San- dium querum remife- vitis peccata, remit- tuntur eis; C quo- yum retinneritis, te- tenta {unt (X) Declarat Sy- nodus,falfas effe De- éirinas Omnes, que ad alios quofvis pre- ° ter Epifcopos, . & “Presbyteros,Clavium Miniftertum exten- ‘dunt.Putantes verba tla, quodcunque Li- ZAVE ISSCC ® Guo- rum yemiferitis pece cata, remittentuy , ‘erc.ad omnes fideles indifferenter ditta, ec. Concil. Trid. $eff.1g. De Poent- tentla, cap.6. ~ _(y) Matth.16.19. & Joh. 20.23. (x) Conc. Trid. Anty. 1633. p.152. and Presbyters. So that Catechifm , publifh?d according to the Decree of the Council of Trent, by Pope Pius the Fifth. And, 3. Their Roman Pontifical gives the Au- thentick Form how they Ordaina Pricft , in which the Power of the Keysis given to every Prief, inthe very — fame (t) words our blefled Saviour did give it to the A- poftles (#) Receive the Holy Ghoft , whofe fins you remits they are remitted, And whofe fins you retain, they arevetained. 4, Laftly,; The Trent Fathers are yet ¢ if that be poflible,) more exprefs ; For fpeaking of the Sacrament of Pennance and Abfolution, They (x y de- clave all their Opinions to be falfe and erroneous, who rbink that the Exercife of the Mimftery and Power of the. Keys , belong to any, fave the Bilhops and Presbyters; and yha think thofe words Whatfoever yon {hall bind on Earth ec. And thofe fins you remit fhall be remitted, Ge. to be Spoken indifferently to all tke Faithful, and fo think that any of the Faithful may bind and loofe, remit and retain fins, In which words the Council does (I fuppofe) Infallibly Deckare (at_leaft in our Adverfaries Opinion) 1. That _ thofe two (y)Texts (which are cited in the Margent of the (z) Council) are to be underftood of the Power _ of the Keys; though in one of them (that of Fobz ) the Keys be notrexpreflynamed. 2. That the Exercife of that Power of the Keys belongs To the Bifhops and Presbytersy but to none elfe; neither to Lay-men nor a- ny Inferior Orders. : | By the Premiffes, I think it evident, ( and confefs’d by our Adverfaries) that every Apoftle had the Power of the Keys, as well as Peter, and (fince they left the World ) every Bifhop and Prieft, as well as the Pope. Whence it further (and manifeftly ) follows; Thac tis impoffible that the Bifhop of Rome, or any of his Party, fhould (as they vainly indeavour) prove bis Supremacy from his power of the Keys, - which is common, and really poffefs'd by fo many thoufands be- ~yide bimfelf, For this is juft.as if stews fhould brag, thathe is far richer then Sempronius , becaufe he has Five hundred | pounds -* J a i <j _ ~ ame, s ») o— a aa —— - ae - ~~ — ho, rps m e- pe Pe a ee ee ety a « A et ae er = - i UE . o'eg . RS a ck el Sa ieee: 9 a en Nee Te nl (pale: EM ee aie = . Sia = eo. er 5 againft Queen Elizabeth. III ‘pounds per Annum, when Sempronius has an equal Eftate, and of the very fame value. Or as if Sejus fhould tay he had far greater Power then Czjus, when the Power given ‘them by the Emperor was equal and the fame. And yet fuch is the vanity and folly of their pretended Infallib'e Judges, that in their Bulls, and Papal Conitirarions, recei- ved intothe Body of their Canon Law, Dabo Tibi Claves , this Power of the Keys, is laid as a ( fandy and infignifi- cant) Foundation, on which they build the vaft and Infup- portable Fabrick of their Supremacy. I fhall inftance on- - lyintwo (though I might in many more,) 1. In that fa- ‘mous Decretal of Fenocent the Third (before cited) where- in he impioufly and ridiculoufly indeavours to prove, that the Papal Dignity, is as much (4) greater than the Impertal, as the Sun is greater than the Moon: And amongft other wild and ridiculous Arguments to prove his equally wild ‘and extravagant Pofition, he comes at laft to this, Dabo Tibi Claves, to the Power of the Keys, as the off known ground of hisSupremacy. 2. The fecond Inftance,is that of Pope Jamocent the Fourth, in his Impious Excommuni- cation and Depofition of the Emperor Friderick , (who had been before Excommunicated by his. Predecellor Gregory the Ninth) in the Councilof ZLiovs. It is (6) Extant in the Canon Law, and two things there prefix’J to that moft Impious Decretal. _ 1. That he depos’d Friderick inthe Cour- cil, for a perpetual (c_) memory of xt. And fo it ftands for a perpetual memory of his Antichriftian Pride and’ Impiety. 2. That the Pope can Depofe the (A) Emperor for lawful’ Cau- _ fes. And then, in thatImpious Decretal, he grounds his _ Power to Depofe the Emperor principally upon the Power of (e) the Keys; which (he fays) was givento. hint im Pe- lem c Lunam, tanta inter Pontifices t Reges, differentia cognofcatur. 2. De Sent. & re Judicata. In. &. ternam. (d) Papa Imperatorem-deponere pote ex canfis ligitimis. in Petre perfona dictum fit 5 (2) Vide Caps Solicic. 6. Extra de Major. & Ooedi- entia. Where the Lemma or Title prefix’'d to thac Decretal is thus Imperium non precft Sacerda- tio, fed fubest , cr ez Obedivre tenetur This he indea- vours to prove by feveral ridiculous Inftances; and then comes with Dabo Tibi Clavess quodcunque Li- Laverés, as a moft known ground of his Supremacy. Jl. lud tanquam Notiffi- muh omittamus,. quod Dominus dix- it Petro e in ¥etro ad Succe(Jores ipfiusy Quod cunaue Ligave-- ris, erst ligatum in’ Coelis,erc. Nihil exe cipityqué dixit quod= cungue, Cc. And a little before hetells the Emperor of Conftantinople, (to whom he writes ) Quanta eft inter So- (by Cap.ad Apoftols (c) Innocéntins Sacra prelente Concilio in“Memoriam Sempi-- (e) Cum a Chrifto Nobes uodcunque Ligaveris fuper Terram, Ligatum erit in Celis, Oc. Memo- ratum Principem, fuis Ligatum peccatis,Omni Dignitate privatum denuncé1mus, [ententiamus & pri-- vamus 5 Omnefque ei Juramente aftriftes, a Furamento perpetuo abfolvimus; Inbiventes ne quisquary {fbi de Caters ,tanquam Jmperators pareat. Pea ry Bian -— vat | ‘ ‘> es Obfervations on the Pope's Bull \ ] tery when our blefled Saviour faid,Whatfoever thou fhalt bind on Earth, fhould te bound in Heaven, @c. fo he, (and his _ Predeceflors and Succeflors generally for this Six hundred _ years laft paft) applies that Power of the Keys ( which is purely fpir:twal) to carnal and temporal ends, and impious ‘purpofes. And here it feems tome, confiderable , (and I believe will {eem fo, to pious and dif-interefled Perfons) (Cf) Vid.t. Bree that in-former (f) Roman Breviaries (as alfo in our Por- Viariam Romanums +/forium or (g) Breviary of Sarum; andin the(b) Miffals of : ts Salisbury and (4) Hereford, we have thisPrayers : highly commended ‘ s , by Clement the Seventh, and Paul the Third, and often printed at Paris, Ann.1536, A gain, Ann. 1537. and.at Lions, Ann. 1543. and at Lions, 16 46.and,1548. and againat Lions, Aon, 1556. and at Antuerp. 1566. and though it be the beft Breviary Rome has had this Six huudred years; yer “tis damn’d by Pius the Fifth, Bulla Rome dat. 7. Idus Jullj, 1568. 2. Breviarium Xomanum, ex Decreto Concilij Trident. Juflu Pij 5. Antverp. Editum, 1568. & iterum, 1534, (2) Portiforium Salif. Lond. 1555. Vart. Hiemait. io Fefto Cathedr.S.Petri, Fi br.22. ¢)) Mif- fale Secundum ufum, Sarum, Parif. 1355. eodemfefto & die. (7) Millale fecundum ufum Hereford Rothomagi, 1520. eodem fefty & die. ; . "; ee nw RS te See 1. Deus qui Beato Petro Apoftolo tuo, Collaris Clavibus Regni Caleftis, Animas Ligands arque Solvend:i Pontificium tradi- — difti ; Concede, ut Interceffionis ejus Auxilio, &c. O God, who by giving the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven to thy A- poftle Peter, haft concredited and delivered to him the Ponti- fical Power of binding and loofing mens Souls, grant that by the help of bis Interceffion, ec. Where-it is evident that, (in the fenfe and plain meaning of this Prayer and . ee Scripture too) the Power of the Keys is fpiritual, to bind Cahners mens fous, (if impenitent) and ( if Contrite and truly a <a in Penitent) toloofe them. I fay Jpivitual , for edificati- Fefto Cathedr. Pe- _ ON and faving mens fouls, and not temporal, for Depofing tri Antioch. Febr. © Kings and Emperors, and abfolving their Subjects from 22.p-739-8& parte their Oaths of Allegiance. cole baa ee 2, But this Doctrine wasnot pleafing to the Pope and his mz, Jan.13.ibid, | Party; And therefore in their late (k) Breviaries and pos. (1) Miffals, they have left out the word Animas, Souls. €/) Miffal: Rom. Antverp. 1619. in Fefto Cathedra Petri Romz, Jan. 18 p. 331. And they have the fame again in Fefto Cathedra Petri Antiochiz,Febr. 22. h and yt, “whe el obe we, Vil 2 le ee oh eee, again} Queen Elizabeth. ri3 and fay only, that God had given Peter Peter Power of binding and loofing, and not mentioning in that Prayer, what it was he had Power to bind and loofe. 3. But chat we may better know their meaning and reafon why they left out the word Souls ; it follows, a little af- ter in thofe late Offices .m) Tu es Paftor ovium , Princeps Apoftolorum , Tibs (n) tradidir Deus Omnia Reg- na Mundi; & Ideo Tibs tradite funt Caves Regni Celorum, They all agree, That the power of binding and loofing is (as they callitin that Prayer) Poztificium, the Pontifical or Papal Power, and havingtoldus, Tha God had given All the Kingdoms inthe World, to Peter and his Succeffors 5 theyadd, That Jdeo, Therefore he gave him Pontificium, the Papal Power of binding aud loofing , Superior to all Kingly (o) Power ; fo that they might, by it, Depofe Kings and Emperors, if they werenot Obedient to the Pope; for fotheir Popes (as appears before) have , #2 Theft, afirm’d, and (intheir Bulls, their Publick and Authentick Conftitutions)approved,and publickly main- tain’d that Doctrine; and (im Praxi) tothe fatal Mif- chief and Difquieting of the Weftern World , the ruin of many Princes, and fcandal of Chriftian Religion,im- pioufly acted according to it, and put it in prattife; when they had advantage and opportunity. | thefe words Tibi Tradidit, dc. 1 find in none till of late. By the Premifles, I hope it may (and does) appear, that all thofe Honorary Titles given to the Pope, Abe See ; ( Apoftolicus , Sedes Apoftolica, Cathedra Apoftolica, Peter’s Succeffor, Chrif’s Vicar, the Power of the Keys, Prince of the Apofties, ec.) having been. anciently given to ‘theufands. (befide the Pope) who never had, nor dream’d of any Su- premacy: Though in thefe late, and worlt Ages, they have been appropriated to the Bifhop of Rome, and (though old and innocent Titles) made ufe of, to amufe and de- ceive thelgnorant, to cover, and give fome colour and credit to new Errors, and made Arguments to prove (what (mn) Did. Brev. Rom Antv. 1660. in Fefto Cathedra Perri Antiochiz , Febr. 22. In Refp. poft Leét.4. p.760- — Parris Hiemalis. And that it might not be forgotten , (being a Dosrine that makes fo much for tae Papal Iaters eft) ic ts repeated again, in Fefto Pe tri & Pauli, Jan.29.° Partis zftivz, pag- 482.& in Fefto Pe. triad vincula. Ibid- p-54!- (2) Though f find the word Ani- mas eft out in fome of their ol- der ‘Offices; yet i re () The Popes Tribuual { th fay) is Supremus Fuftitie Toronus. So Pius the Fifth ia this Hie Bal, §. — dager ii eye ree? is ee! ee Obfervations on the Pope’s Bull up) Vide Ori- ginem Dialogo eontra Marcioni- tas Graco-Lat. rer Rad. Weftenium , p- 247. & Wefte- mij Notas, pag.230. 231. Per. Delalan- de Concil. Anti- quorumGal liz Sup- plemento, pag. 35. 36. 39. Baronium in Notis ad Marty- rologium Rom. ad Diem , Jan. 10. ¢. P: 35: Nomen Pa- pe tranfit-in Digni- -tatis Nomen, ut Cle- rick venerands-eo no- mine . Appellarentur. he never had) the Popes Supremacy; yet "tis evi dent that all fuch Arguments, drawn from fuch Topicks.,. are not onlyinconfequent, but (as I faid before , and ftill be- lieve) impertinent, and indeed ridiculous; and conclude a | nothing, fave that furely they who bring fo bad, had no ~ better Arguments. Pwo other words.there are ( Papa and Summus. Pontifex) now appropriate to the Bifhop of Rome, and as generally and impertinently ufed (as the for- mer) toInfinnate (what they can never prove} the Papes Supremacy. For many Learned men have evidently pro- ved (or confefs’d) that anciently, every Bifhop was called (p.) Papa, a Pope, and Summ (q) Pontifex too.. Baronius a moft zealous and partial. Affertor of the Popes Suprema- cy and Monarchy over Kings and Emperors.) has, in the place quoted inthe Margent, confefs’d (what without great Impudence he couldnot deny) that anciently every venera- bie Presbyter wasufually cali?d Papa, or Pope. _Afterwards. (he fays) the word Papa became common to. all the Bifhops,. though more particularly given to the Bifhop of Rome 5 and he further adds, That the name Papa contsnued common to Al the Bifhops, for Eight hundred and fifty years; till Hildebrand (Pope Gregory the Seventh) in a Council at Rome,, imrhe Lear-, 1073. decreed, That there fhould be but one. Pope ( meaning himfelf ) i# the whole World. Here we fee» that. Hildebrand. that Prodigy of (rv) Antichriftian Pride and Tyranny) appropriates the name Pope to himfelf and See, which had for Eight hundred years (he might have Poftea nomen illud cepit effe peculiare Epifcoporum, xfque enim ad’ Annum 80. Nomen commune fuit omnibus Epifcopis, inde peculiarins tribué confuevif[et Rom. Pontifici, & fequitur, p. 36. Gree gorias Papa 7. in Concilie Rome habito, 1073. Statust, ut Nomen Pape Unicum effe in toto Mundo, ere. (4) Nide Per. de Marca:de Concord. Sacerdotij & Imperij, lib.6.cap.13. § 3,. Toma. pag.i26s Col... So Raffinus calls Chromatins, Pontificem maximum. Vide Ruffin. Opufcula, Parif. #580. Epift.ad Chromatinm, Pontificem maximum, poftpag. 194, So Clemens Romanus ( one of , the beft and ancienteft Popes Rome ever had). calls every Bifhop ’Aoyseeeds; Summus Sacerdoss Clemens Rom Epift.ad Corinthios, per Patr, Junium, p. $3. Edit. Oxon. 1633. — (r) Pleri- que tum privatin tum publice, Hildebrandum Antichriftum predicant, Titule Chrifti, negotium An- bichrifté agitat in Babylonia in Templo Dei Sedet. Super Omne quod Colitur , extollitur , quaft Deus fit, fe evrarenom pofe gloriatnr,@m<. Aventinus Annal. Bojorum, lib. 5, pag. 352. & lib. 7 Pag -.47 30: 1 & faidi a ae Oke ere eFC ee ot ee ee eee oe VON TesCUle ae) oe ST e) eee hey ee againft Queen Elizabeth. I15 faid’ athoufand) heen commonly given to Bifhops and Pref- _ byters, as well as to the Pope. Now I defire to know - how this, or any of the aforefaid Honorary Titles or Pri- _ viledges, (which were common to all Bifhops, and ufually giventhem, for many Ages, as well as to the Bifhop of Rome)s can bean Argument or Ground of the Popes Su- premacy, which were confefledly no ground of any fuch Sepremacy in other Bifhops, who had the very fame Titles: and Priviledges, as well, and as much as he? Suppofe twenty Swans (poffibili pofito in effe, nil abfurdi fequitur) to have equal whitenefs, and the fame degree of that Quali- ty; To fay that any oneof thofe Swans was, by far, the whiteft Swan in the World, when as nineteen others were as white as that one: Or fuppofe twenty men of Equal Piety, all having the fame Degree of Goodnefs and Ver- tue; tofay, that any oneof them, was, by far, the molt pious man in the World, when nineteen others were as pious as he; this were certainly irrational , and ridicu- lous. And yet our Adverfaries reafon no better , when they fay, The Pope being Chrifi?s Vicar, and having the power of the Keys, basa Monarchical Supremacy over all the Bi{hops _ #n theWorld, when allthofe Bifhops are Chrift’s Vicars, _ and have the power of the Keys, as-well as he: But enough _ (Cif nottoo much ) of this. For were it not for the great noife, number, and confidence of our Adverfaries, fuch miferable inconfequent Reafonings, might deferve Pity and Contempt, rather than any ferious An{wer, 7. Having made fome Obfervations upon the ?Emypari, or Title and Preamble of this impious Bull; I come now to the Penal part of it, to obferve what Punifhments and Curfes are contain’d in it, andthe Perfons againft whom they are denounc’d. For although in the Title prefix’d to the Bull, *tis calld?, Zhe Damnation and Excommunication of Queen Elizabeth only; yet thoufands befides the Queen , are concern’d in thofe Curfes, (as will appear anon.) Here then is to be obferved, S zx 1, That ay -— | Obferey.75! Cibferdavionis on the P ope’s Bull Pe rt. That inthis Uncharitable Bull, the Pope Anathematizes (f) Flagitiorum Serva. Ita §.1.who they are who fj peak ill of Dignities , (which the Arch- Angel would not do of the Devil) St. Fude tells us, in his Epiftle, verf, 9. q poteftatis pienitudine declaramus prediftam s\izabeth Hereticam, & Hereticorumjautricem,Ante- and Excommunicates the Queen, as a Slave of ({): In- piety, as an (¢ ) Herersck , and a Favourer of Hereticks, and Cuts her ff fromth: Unity of Chrif’s Body, ~~ (t). Apopolice siamatis Sententiamincurriffe, Eféque d Chrijté Corporés unitate precifam. §. 3. Cu) Quin etiam infam pretenfo pre- Bick regné jUre,nec~ non omni & quocun- que T ominio, Digni- tate, Privilegioque privatam §.4. And again 5 Ditiam E- lizabeth. jure Regni privamus.