A Retentive to Stay Good Christians, Chapter 16
The 16. Chapter.
THat the good Christian Emperours and Princes, did neuer Sander.thinke thē selues to be the supreame heads of the church in spirituall causes, but gaue that honor to Bishops, & Priests, & most specially to the sea of Rome, for S. Peters sake, as well before, as after the time of Phocas. A Priest is aboue the Emperour in Ecclesiastical causes. The othe of the royal supremacy, is intollerable. Constantine was baptised at Rome. Phocas did not first make the see of Rome head of all churches.
COncerning the supremacy of our soueraigne, which this traiterous Papist doth so maliciously disdaine, Fulke.although it be expounded sufficiently by her Maiestie in her iniunction, not to be suche as he most slaunderously doth deforme it, yet I will here, as I hauehave done diuerse times before in aunswere to these Papistes, professe, that we ascribe no supremacie to our Prince, but such as the worde of God alloweth in the godly Kinges of the old Testament, and the church hath acknowledged in the Christian Emperours and Princes vnderunder the new Testament.
First therefore we ascribe to our Prince no absolute power, in any Ecclesiasticall causes, suche as the Pope challengeth, but subiect vntounto the rules of Gods worde. Secondly we ascribe no supremacie of knowledge in Ecclesiastical matters to our Prince, but affirme that she is to learne of the Bishops and teachers of the church, both in matters of faith and of the gouernment of the church. Thirdly we allow no confusion of callings, that the Prince should presume to preach, to minister the Sacramentes, to excommunicate, &c. which perteine not to her office. But the supremacie we admit in Ecclesiasticall causes, is auctoritie ouer all persons to cōmaund, and by lawes to prouide, that all matters Ecclesiasticall, may be ordered and executed according to the word of God. And such is the true meaning of the othe, that he calleth blasphemous and intollerable. And as for examples of honor geuen to the Bishoppes by Christian Princes, which he bringeth forth, they deny not this supremacy, nor make any thing against it.
The first is of the Emperour Philippus, counted of some for the first Christian Emperor, although it be not like to be true, yet admitting the story written by Eusebius to be so. This Prince without due repentance, offered him selfe to receaue the holy misteries, & being refused by the Bishop of the place, tooke it paciētly, & submitted him selfe to the discipline & order of ye church. I answer, this example toucheth not the auctority he had in ecclesiasticall causes. For in receauing of the Sacramentes, the Prince differeth not from a priuate person.
But he pusheth at M. Nowell with a two horned argument, called a dilemma. If the Priest in these causes, be superior to yt Emperor, other causes be greater or lesser then these. If they be greater, the Emperour which is not supreame gouernor ouer the lesser causes, can not be in the greater, if they be lesser, then the Priest wc gouerneth the Emperor, in greater causes, must nedes gouern him in lesser causes. These hornes are easily auoyded not by distinctiō of the causes, but of the gouernments. The gouernment of the Prince is one, & of the Priest an other: this spiritual, the other external, & therefore no contrariety betwene them. For put the case, that Philippus had seene the Bishop prophane the sacrament, in ministring to infidels, or otherwise vncertainly behauing him selfe in his office, might he not iustly hauehave punished him, as supreame gouernour ouer the Bishoppe euen in those matters? I say not to doe them, but to see that they be well done, and to punishe the offendors. Neither is the meaning of the othe any other. And according to this meaning, M. Nowell, M. Horne and M. Iewel dare warrant the King to be supreame gouernour in all Ecclesiasticall causes, although it please M. Sander to say, the contrarie of them. Whose trayterous quarelling vponupon the wordes of the othe, ought not to trouble any mans cōscience, when the meaning is publikelie testified both by the Prince, and by the whole consent of the church.
The next exāple is of Constantinus the great, which in the Synode of Nice, when the Bishops had offered vntounto him bills of complaint, one against an other, without disclosing the contentes of them, he sayd, as Ruffinus reporteth lib. 10. cap. 2. Deus vos constituit sacerdotes &c. God hath made you Priestes, and hath giuen you power to iudge of vsus also, and therfore we are rigtly iudged of you, but ye can not be iudged of m̄e. For which cause, expect ye the iudgement of God alone among ye. Here M. Sander noteth, first, that he calleth them Priestes, whereby he woulde proue, they had power to offer externall sacrifice, which is a simple reason, for then all Christian men & women within the Scripture are called Priestes, hauehave the same power. Secondly he cōfesseth, they hauehave power to iudge the Emperour, for none can be greater then a Priest: In their challenge and spirituall gouernment, the Emperour meaneth, and not as the Popish church practised, to dispose the Emperour. Thirdly, that Priestes can not be iudged of mē. If this be so, one Priest can not be iudged of an other, and where is then the Popes supremacie, but he aunswereth, if one Priest iudge an other, it is Gods iudgement, and not the iudgement of men, because God hath set one Priest aboue another. O blockish aunswere: as though God hath not set one Prince aboue all his subiectes. You see howe Popish Priestes aduaunce them selues, to the honor of God, and withdraw their obedience from Gods Lieutenaunts on earth. An vndoubted note of Antichristians. You will aske me then, what sence these wordes hauehave, you can not be iudged of men? I aunswere either they are ment, as Sainct Paule speaketh, of the vprightnes of his conscience in doing of his office, which is not subiect to the iudgement of men, or else Ruffinus as he was a bolde reporter, frameth the Emperours wordes, accord…ng to that estimation which he woulde hauehave men to hauehave of the clergie. For it is certeyne by recordes of Constantinus time, that he did iudge Bishoppes and tooke vponupon him as supreame gouernour in ecclesiasticall causes, Maister Sander confesseth, he iudged certeyne Priests, or ecclesiasticall causes, but he did it as Augustine sayeth, Epist. 162. as one that would afterward aske pardon of the holy Bishops, at the importunitie of the Donatists: And as Optatus recordeth he sayd, Deschis. lib. 1. Petitis à me &c. Ye aske of me iudgement in the world, whereas I my selfe looke for Christes iudgement. And Augustine reproueth the Donatistes that they would hauehave an earthly King to be iudge of their cause. In deede the importunitie of the Donatistes was wicked who would so referre the matter to the Emperour, yt without knowledge of ecclesiasticall persons, who were only meete iudges in respect of knowledge in that case, they would hauehave ye cause decided. But the Emperour acknowledging his auctoririe appointed iudges ecclesiastical persons, first the Bishop of Rome Melchiades, whom he commaūded with other Bishops to heare the cause of Caecilianus, as Eusebius who …ued in his time writeth li. 10. ca. 5. And whē the Donatists appealed from the Bishops of Rome & his cōpanions iudgement, he appointed other delegates, as Augustine also witnesseth. Ep. 162.
But to leaue this cause of the Donatistes Eusebius in his life libr. 1. sayeth of him: Quoniam nonnulli variis locis inter se discrepabant, quasi communis quidem Episcopus à Deo constitutus, ministrorum Dei synodos conuocauit, ne… dedignatus est adesse, & considere in illorum medio. Because some of them in diuerse places were at variance among them selues, he as a certeine generall Bishop appointed of God, called together the synodes of the ministers of God, and disdayned not to be present, and to sit in the middest of them. And in lib. 3. He sheweth howe he gathered the vniuersall synode of Nice, as it were leading foorth the armie of God to battell. To this Emperour did Athanasius the great, Bishoppe of Alexandria, appeale from the synode of Tyre, where he was iniuriously handled, as both Socrates testifieth lib. 1. and the verie Epistle of Constantine him selfe vntounto that synode, commaunding all the Bishoppes to come vntounto his presence, and there to shewe before him, (quem syncerum esse Dei ministrum neque vos sanè negabitis, whome you can not deny to be a syncere minister of God) how sincerely they had iudged in that councell. Finally in the end of the epistle he protesteth, that he wil execute his supremacie in causes ecclesiastical. Omni virtute conabor ag…re quaten…s quae in lege Dei sunt ea praecipuè sine aliqu… titubatione seruentur quibus vti que ne que vituperatio ne que mal… superstitio poteris implicari dispersis vti que ac palam contritis, & penitus exterminatis sacratissimae legis inimicis, qui sub schemate sancti nominis blasphemas varias ad diuersos inijciant. I will endeuour with all my might to bringe to passe, that those thinges that are in the lawe of God, those chiefly without any staggering may be obserued, which by no reproofe or euill superstition can be intangled, when all the enemyes of the moste holye law…, which vnderunder a shape of an holy name, doe cast out diuerse blasphemies vntounto sondry persons, are dispersed & openly troden downe, and vtterly rooted out. Let this suffice to shewe what supremacie Constantinus did exercise in causes Ecclesiasticall. Nowe Maister Sander draweth vsus to see, what honour he gaue to the see of Rome.
First he taketh it for most certayne, that Constantine was baptised by Syluester, which is an impudent lye and forged fable, as is manifest by Eusebius, who liued in his tyme and after him, who knewe him familiarly, and affirmeth that he was baptised in his iorney towardes Iordane, where he had purposed to hauehave bene baptised, if God had spared him life. But this manifest testimonye of Eusebius, Maister Sander refuseth, becau…e he was suspected for affection to the Arrian heresi…. Beside that he was vniustly suspected, what reason is it, to discredit his story, who wrote at such tyme, as many thousands aliue could disproue him, for any affection to that heresie, whereto the baptisme of Constantine pertayned nothinge in the worlde? As for the stones and pillers of marble, in which any such matter is grauen, bearing the name of his baptistry except Maister Sander could proue, that they were sette vppe in his tyme, are simple witnesses against the historye of Eusebius, which lyued in his tyme. Nether the forged pontificall of Damasus, nor the writings of Beda. Ado, Marianus, Gregorius Turenēsis, Zonarus, Nicephorus late writers, following the fable of the Romish Church, are of any credit in respect of Eusebius, and the eldest writers of the Ecclesiasticall story, that agree with Eusebius that he was not baptised many yeares after Syluester was deade.
And concerning the donation of Constantine, it is too absurd for any wise man to defend, which hath bene so long before disproued by Laurentius Valla, no enemy of the Romish religion, although a discouerer of that fable. Agayne his forsaking of the citie of Rome, and building of Constantinople, is as great a fable, for although he bewtified Byzantium, and made it an imperiall citye, as placed conueniently to keepe the Orientall Empire, yet he forsooke not Rome, but still retayned it as the chiefe see of his Empire, so did the Emperours that followed him, vntill (after it was wasted by the barbarous nations,) they made lesse accompt of it. And therefore although Constans the Nephew of Heraclius could not conueniently remoue thether, yet he remoued frō thence what he thought good, by which it appeared he had authoritie in the citie, by the prouidence of God and not by chaunce, as M. Sander dreameth, that he was prohibited by Gods prouidence in respect of the Popes supremacie, or els the world should be gouerned by chaunce.
But leauing Constantinus the father, we must come to Constantius his sonne which was an Arrian, of whom Athanasius complayneth, that he had no reuerence of the Bishop of Rome Ep. ad Solit. vit. agen. nether considering that it was an Apostolike see, nor that Rome was the mother citie of the Romane Empire. There were other Apostolikes sees beside Rome, and the Christian worlde was larger then the Romane Empire, therefore this maketh nothing for the singular prerogatiue of that see.
But the noble Emperours Gratianus, Valentinianus & Theodosius made a law, lege 1. Cod. de summ. trinit That all their people should continue in that religion, as the religion which is vsed from S. Peter vntounto this day doth declare him to hauehave deliuered to the Romanes, and which it is euident that Bishop Damasus doth follow, and Peter Bishop of Alexandria a man of Apostolike holines. This law proueth, that the Emperours had authoritie in Ecclesiasticall causes. And that they ioyned the Patriarch of Rome with the Patriarch of Alexandria, not because he of Alexandria agreed with him of Rome, but because they both agreed with Peter, and Peter with Christ.
From these Emperours, he commeth to Bonifacius, who writing to the Emperour Honorius, and humbly desiring his ayde to appease the tumults of his Church, vseth these wordes. Ecclesiae meae cui Deus noster meum sacerdotiū (vobisres humanas regentibus) deputauit, cura constringit, ne causis eius quamuis adhuc corporis incommoditate detinear, propter conu…ntus qui à sacerdotibus vniuersis, & cl…ricis, & Christianae plebis perturbationibus agitantur, apud aures Christianissimi principis desim. The care of my church to which our God hath deputed my priesthood, while you gouerne the affayres of men, doth bind me, that although I am yet withholden by infirmitie of bodye, I should not be wanting to the causes thereof in the hearing of a most Christian Prince, by reason of the meetings that are held of all the Priestes and the Clergie with the perturbations of the Christian people. These words shewe, that the Emperour was supreame gouernour in causes Ecclefiasti…ll, for he writeth concerning the election of the Bishop. To whom the Emperour answereth making a lawe against the ambitious labouring for succession, that if two Bishops should be chosen, they should be both banished out of the citie. Con. To. 1. & dist. 97. I hauehave set downe the wordes at large to shewe the shamefull salsification of M. Sander, who setteth them downe absolutely thus. Mihi Deus noster mewn sacerdotium vobis res humanas regētibus deputauit. Our God hath appoynted my priesthood to me, whereas you doe gouerne worldly matters. As though he had denied to the Emperour, all gouernment in Ecclesiasticall causes, whē he flyeth to his authoritie in a cause Ecclesiasticall, and doth not onelyonly acknowledge him to be a conseruer of ciuill peace as M. Sander would hauehave it.
To Honorius he ioyneth Galla Placidia the Emperesse in her epistle to Theodosius, set before the councell of Chalcedon, Assirming that Peter ordayned the primacy of the Bishoply office in the see Apostolike. Thus wrote the Emperesse or her Secretary, and so it was taken in that time. The like sayth Valentinianus in his Epistle to Theodosius his father, that antiquitie gaue the chief…y of priestly power to the Bishop of the citie of Rome. And Martianus with Valentinian confesse that the Synode of Chalcedon inquired of the faith by the authoritie of Leo Bishop of the euerlasting citie of Rome. Adde hereunto that the councell it selfe confesseth Act. …. that Leo was ouer them as the head ouer the members. All these proue in deede a primacy of the Bishop of Rome acknowledged in those dayes, but not such a primacye as is now claymed. For the same councell and Emperours decreed that the see of Constantinople in the East should hauehave the same authoritie that the see of Rome had in the West, the title of senioritie onelyonly reserued to the Bishop of Rome. Although the Bishop of Rome, Leo by letters and his legats in the councell cryed out against it as lowd as they could. Cont. Chal act. 16. namely Lucentius cryed. Sedes Apostolica &c, The Apostolike sea ought not to be abased in our presence &c. but all the synode and the Iudges continued in their decree.
The saying of Iustinian in cod de summ. trinit. is examined and aunswered in the 69. article of M. Sanders treatise which is the true Church, before his booke of Images, as also the sayings of the Bishop of Patara, of Eugenius Bishop of Carthage, and Gregory Bishop of Rome. The report of the councell of Sinuessa is too full of corruption and confusion to be credited for authenticall authoritie.
And yet it is playne that Marcellinus the Bishop of Rome was conuicted by witnesses to hauehave committed Idolatry, before he confessed the sinne, and receiued sentence of condemnation and accursing of the Synode, howsoeuer that patche is thrust in after the Actes of the councell, prima sedes, &c. the first see is not iudged of any, which in eueryevery counterfait decretall epistle almost must hauehave a place.
To proue that Phocas did not first make the see of Rome heade of all Churches, when the history is plaine he did, M. Sander bringeth in these and such like alledgged before, which acknowledged a certaine primacie of the see of Rome. And certaine it is the Bishops of Rome before Phocas tyme, affected a great primacie, which of many was acknowledged, but yet neuer absolutely, neuer without cōtrouersie, vntil Phocas for a great summe of money receyued of Boniface the thirde, strake the stroke, and made the decree, for which in all popish writers he is highly praised: although in the Greeke church his decree was not long obserued. Touching the examples of Emperours and Princes of later times, although I could shewe they hauehave often resisted the Pope, yet I know many may be alledged that hauehave submitted them selues to his Antichristian tyranny, which I will not stād to examine, because they can be no preiudice to the truth approued by examples of the eldest age. As for the history of Lucius king of Britayne, that sent to Eleutherius for preachers, if it were true, it maketh nothinge for the supremacy of the romish Bishop. I will therefore conclude this chapter, with a saying of Socrates in proe. lib. 5. to shew what authoritie he iudged them perours to hauehave in Ecclesiasticall matters. Etipsos quidem Imperatores hac historia continua complectimur, pr…pterea quod ab illis postquam Christiani esse coeperunt, res Ecclesiasticae pendent, & maximae Synodi ex illorum sententia & congregatae sunt & congregantur. And in this continuall history we comprehend the Emperours them selues, because that vponupon them, since they began to be Christians, the matters of the Church depend, and the greatest synods hauehave bene gathered & are gathered by their authoritie. The punishment he threat…eth to them that forsake the Church of Rome, shal one day fall vponupon them that take part with … Church of Rome, as in part it doth already.