The Grand Sacrilege of the Church of Rome, Chapter 13
CHAP. XIII. The arguments of papists drawne from Councels answered, and retorted.
OVr aduersaries in this question, much boaste of the definitions of three generall Councells in fauour of their halfe Communion, The Councell of Ephesus, Constance, and Basil. Whereunto in generall we answer, first, that either these Councels approue not the halfe Communion, or they are not approued themselues. The Councell of Ephesus is an approued Councell, but it approueth not the halfe Communion; the Councels of Constance and Basil approue the halfe Communion; but they are not themselues approued, no not by the Romane Church, much lesse by the Catholicke Christian Church.
gGratian. dist. 50. In gestis Conciliorū, quotiescunque discors sententia inuenitur, illius Concilij sententia magis teneatur, cuius antiquior, & potior extat auctoritas.Secondly, wee are resolued by the Pope himselfe, that if Councells are at odds with one another, and their definitions irreconciliable, we ought to take part with the antient against the latter. This is our present case; two latter Councels to wit the Councel of Constance and Basil contradict many Councells more antient; by name, the Councel of Nice, and Calcedon, cited before. Ancyra, Canon 2. of Neocorsarea, Can. 13. of Africa, Can. 4. of Brachar. 2. cap. 1. of Ilerda Can. 1. of Toledo the 3. Can. 2. &. 7. of Matiscon the 2. Can. 2. Can. 4. of Toledo the 4. Can. 6. 7. 17. 57. of Toledo the 11. Can. 6. 11. of Cabilonum. Can. 46. 47. of Paris, lib. 3. cap. 20. of Wormes, Can. 4. 31. Therefore by the Popes decision, and that ex cathedra, wee may, and ought to embrace rather the whole Communion inioyned, or approued in so many ancient Councells, then of the halfe Communion, commanded to bee practised by the Laietie, vnderunder paine of a curse, in these latter, and fewer.
In particular, we answer to the allegations made by Hosius, Harding, and other Papists out of the Councell of Ephesus; that they tooke it vponupon trust of some ancient Schoole-man or Canonist, who thought it a matter of merit, to forge an ancient record for the good of the catholiques cause, and defence of the Romane Church. For neither in the Acts of the Councell of Ephesus, nor in any approued history is there any footstep, or print of any such constitution, as is pretended by our aduersaries to be made, for the halfe Communion, and that vponupon this occasion; hCaietan. in 3. part. Thom. q. 80. art. 12 Nestoriani p…ant sub specie panis corpus tant…m Christi esse, sub specie vini sanguinem, quia in morte Christi sanguis fuit separatus à corpore.Because the Nestorians held, that Christs body in the sacrament vnderunder the forme of bread was Cadauer exangue, a carkas without blood; In this fiction the Romanists sufficiently show (to vse the words out of Saint Hierome) that they had voluntatem, but not artem …entiendi; that they had a good wil to lye for the Catholick cause, but were not their craftsmasters. For they that hope to gaine credit by a ly, …ust build it vponupon some probable ground, or colour at least of truth, which here is wanting. For neither did the Nestorians maintaine any such error touching the sacrament, as neither had the Councell of Ephesus any reason thereupon, to hauehave prohibited the vse of the Cup to the Laiety. For what a consequence is this? The heretikes denyed any blood to bee in the body of Christ in the Sacrament; Therefore Catholikes and right beleeuers of the Laietie ought to be depriued of the vse of the holy Cup in the Sacrament. To coyne new Fathers is a vsuall practise, and therefore of no transcending merit: but to coyne new Canons of generall Councels, and to forge records of such antiquitie (as is the true Councell of Ephesus) can be no lesse then a worke of superarrogation. To the allegation out of the Councell of Constance, we answer: first, that it was no generall Councell. The Easterne Church of as large, or larger extent, then the Westerne, sent no Patriarch, or Bishop thither.
Secondly, this Councell is impeached by the Romane Church it selfe. Bellarmine de concil. cap. 7. k speaking of this Councell of Constance) saith, this Councel, so much as concerneth the i Hoc Concil. quantum ad primas sessiones, reprobatum est in Concil. Florent. & Lateranensi. In Hierarchi….first sessions, is disallowed and repealed in the Councels of Florence and Lateran.
Albertus Pighius is yet hotter against this Councell, saying, that it decreed against the order of nature, against manifest Scriptures, against the authoritie of all antiquitie, and against the Catholicke faith of the Church. What credit is then to be giuen to this erroneous, and perfidious Councell? Which both adulterated the Christian faith by heretical decisions, and brake their morrall faith by bloody crueltie, exercised against Iohn Hus, and Hierome of Prague, to whom safe conduct to the Councell, and backe againe was promised. If the Romanists themselues reiect this Councell in point of the Popes Supremacie, why may not we in point of the Sacrament?
Lastly, out of this very Councell wee may draw an inuincible argument against the halfe Communion.
The institution of Christ and practise of the Primitiue Church ought to sway more with eueryevery good Christian, then any constitution of a late Councell, neuer generally approued of by the Church of God.
But the Communion in both kinds hath the institution of Christ, and the practise of the Primitiue Church for it, as is confessed by the Fathers in this Councell:
Therefore eueryevery good Christian ought to communicate in both kinds, the prohibition of the Councell of Constance to the contrary notwithstanding.
To the allegation out of the Councell of Basil, our answer is the stronger, by how much the authoritie of this Councell is weaker, or rather of no validitie at all.
First, there lyeth against it the same exception, which we tooke before against the Councell of Constance; that none of the Bishops of the Easterne Churches were present at it, and in this regard it cannot bee held for an Occomenicall, or generall Councell.
Secondly, while the Fathers of this Councell sate at Basil, the Pope fearing least some thing might be done to his preiudice, called an other Councell at Ferrara: and • in this regard the Councell of Basil cannot be esteemed a generall, or totall Councell, no not so much as of the Westerne, or Romane Church.
Thirdly, the Acts of this Councell are repeated in the Councell of Florence, and Lateran. Pighius writes as bitterly against it, as against the Councell of Constance; and Cardinall kHuius Concilij nihil est ratum & probatum, nisi quaedam dispositiones circa beneficia. Cor. cil. verò ipsum reprobatur in Concil. Lateran. sess. 11. l Vasq. in 3. part. Thom. quest. 80. art. 12. disp. 215 cap. 3. Basiliense Concil. nullius est auctoritatis in hac re.Bellarmine writing of it, saith, There is nothing of this Councell ratified and allowed, but certaine orders, about benefices: the Councell it selfe is reiected, and condemned in the Councell of Lateran, Sess. 11. No maruell then, if Protestants account the decrees of this Synode, no better then drosse, when by the Roman test it selfe, they are proued to bee no good mettell. Wherefore as the Romane Oratour makes a Dilemma, touching Brutus and Antonie, being in Armes one against the other; if Brutus bee a preseruer of his country, Antonie is an enemie; if Antony be a Consul, Brutus is an enemie: so may we say of those two Councels of Basil and Lateran; if the Councell of Basil bee Catholick, Lateran is hereticall; if Lateran be Catholick, the Councell of Basil is hereticall.
Lastly, be this Councell of Basil, of what authoritie it may be, the Romanists loose more by it, then they gaine. For though the halfe Communion were after a sort established in this Councell, yet the Bohemians petition for the intire Communion was yeelded vntounto, and signed in this Councell; whence we thus argue against them.
If the Papists arguments drawne from danger of irreuerence, inconueniences, examples, or testimonies of antiquity, and pretended consequences of Scripture were necessary and concludent, the Councell of Basil could not lawfully grant to the Bohemians, and Morauians the vse of the Cup: but the Councell of Basil might lawfully, and did yeeld to the Bohemians, and the Morauians the vse of the cup: Therfore the reasons of the Romanists drawn to the contrary from the heads aboue mentioned, are not necessarie, or concludent.