Which is the True Church, Part 2 · Chapter 7
An Answer to W. J's second Part of his Reply.
§. 1. IN this which he calls his Second Part there is so much of meer words, or altercation, and of his false interpretation of some particular histories and citations, that should I answer it fully, it would be a great snare to the Reader. 1. To weary him. 2. To lose the matter in controversie in a wood of words. 3. And to suppose us both to strive about circumstances, and so to cast it by, that I shall not lose so much of my time to so ill a purpose. All that I desire of the Reader that would have a particular answer, is, 1. That he remember the answer that is already given to much of it. 2. That he observe that almost all his citations signifie no more, than 1. That both the Romans and other Patriarchs were long striving who should be the greatest, and therefore intermeddling with as many businesses as they could. 2. That the supream Church-power being then placed by consent and by the Emperors in Councils, the five Patriarchs ought to be at these Councils when they were Universal, as to the Empire. 3. That Rome had the first place in order of these Patriarchs or Seats. 4. That the eastern Bishop when opprest by Arrlans and persecutions, did fly for council and countenance to the Roman Emperors who held orthodox, and to the Roman Bishops as the first Patriarchs, and as having interest in the Emperors: he that was one of the greatest, might help the oppressed to some relief, having an orthodox Emperor; by which means Constantius was constrained, and Athanasius restored; by the threatning of a war by the western Emperor, and not by the authority of the Pope. And the like aid was oft sought from Alexandria and Antioch. 5 That this man and the rest of them straineth all such words as sound any respect to the Bishop of Rome, any reverence of his place and judgment, any counsel that he giveth to any, any help that any sought of him, as signifying his Government of all the Empire. 6. That he feigneth all such interest or power in the Empire to be a Monarchical Government of all the world †The Pragmatic. Ferrariensis saith, Imperatores conferrebant omnia beneficia per universum orbem. Is it any doubt what the orbis universus was?. 7. That he to these ends leadeth men into verbal quarrels about the sense of many passages in history and fathers, where he knoweth that the vulgar cannot judge, nor any that are not well versed in all those books, which most preachers themselves have not sufficient leisure for. 8. That contrary to the notorious evidence of histories, he maintaineth that no Councils were called without the authority of the Roman Bishop, when the Emperors ordinarily called them, by sending to each Patriarch to summon those of his circuit to such a place, and the Bishops of Alexandria and Constant. had more hand in calling them till 700 or 800 if not much longer than the Pope had. 9. If the Reader can trie all our passages here about, by the books themselves (not taking scraps, but the main drift of Church-history) and the particular authors, I will desire no more of him than to read them himself; if not, neither to believe the report of W. I. or me, as certain to him: For how can he know which of us reports an author truly? but to keep to such evidences of Reason and Scripture as he is capable of judging of.
§. 2. When I said that the Emperor (Theódòsius 2d.) gave sufficient testimony, and those that adhere to Dioscorus how little in those days they believed the Popes infallibility or sovereignty, when they excommunicated him, (and the Emperor and …ivil Officers bare Dioscorus.) He doth over and over tell me how I defend Rebels against a Sovereign, and I have laid a Principle emboldening all Rebels to depos… Sovereigns, or prove that they have no authority over them. Answ. Alas poor Kings and Emperors, who are judged such subjects to the Priests, that he that pleadeth for your power, pleadeth for Rebels against your Sovereign Pope. And that are by these even judged so sheepish, as that by the name of Rebellion charged on your defenders, they look to draw your selves to take them for Rebels, who would make you know that you are Princes and not the subjects of forreigners or your subjects: but yet the instance which I give sheweth the sense of Theodosius and others, be it right or wrong.
§. 3. Had it not been that the Printer by three or four Errata's (as Sixtus fifth, &c.) made him some work, he had had little to say but what confutes it self.
§. 4. But cap. 4. p. 289 he would be thought to speak to the purpose, viz. That out of the Empire the Pope restored Bishops, (and did he depose any?) He was wiser than to name any; but saith, Such were all those Bishops who about the year 400 in Spain and France, and an. 475 in England, and 595 in Germany, 499 and other Western and Northern Kingdoms, who were taken from under the command of the Roman Emperor, or were never under it, and were restored by the Bishop of Romes authority, &c.
Answ. Meer deceit! he can name none deposed or restored by the Pope, but 1. Such as were in the Empire. 2. Or such as were in the same national Church with Rome, when the Barbarians claimed power both over Rome and the neighbour Countreys, (as Odoacer and others claimed power to have the choice of a Pope themselves, or that none should be Pope but by their consent.) 3. Or when the King of any revolted or conquered nation subjected himself, or his subjects voluntarily to the Pope, as they have done since the declining of the Empire. Or 4. when they that had been used in the Empire to the canonical way, in Councils and under Patriarchs, desired when they were conquered to do as they had done, and were permitted. As the Patriarch of Constant. that layeth no claim as jure divino, yet under the Turk claimeth still superiority over all those Churches that were formerly by Councils put under him, what Princes soever they be under, supposing that those Councils authority is still valid, though the Empire be dissolved. 5. Or when the Pope was but a meer Intercessor or Arbitrator, and no Rector.
§. 5. But p. 410 &c. he cometh on again with repetitions and additions, to prove that Forreigners were at the four first General Councils.
Answ. If he prove that all the Churches in the world made up those Councils, he put hard to prove that indeed they were universal. But I have not yet found that he hath proved it of any one, unless in the fore-excepted cases.
*Of the Emperor Arcadius acts for Gothes and Scythians. See Theodoret. Hist. l. 5. …. 30. 31. And Ni…horus …ith li. …4. c. 56. Theodosii …unioris 19. annum imperantis permissu, in sinitimâ Thraciae regione habitarunt. per 50 annos. And li. 11. c. 48. when the Hunns drove the Gothes …ut of …heir Country, Valens …ave …em a place in …ract.I. His Theophilus Gothiae metropolis, I spake of before. He now saith, Bishop of Gothia in the farthest parts of the North beyond Germany.
Answ. But where's his Proof? The Country that he talks of was not long after converted to Christianity. He knew not that it was the Getae that were then called Gothes, saith Ferrarius Polouci teste Math. Michovicus. (Steph. Paul. Diac) populus Sarmatiae Europeae boreale latus maris Euxini incolentes, prius Getae, teste D. Isidor. li. 9. De quibus Auson. Horum metropolis et urbs GOTHIA archiepis. antequam à Turcis occuparetur. Auson. ep. 3. Hinc possem victos inde referre Gothos: Regio Gothea, nunc Osia, inter Tyram et Borysthenem. This was then in the Empire.
§. 6. II. His second is Dominus (Domnus) Bosphori, a City of Thracia, Cimmeria, or India as Cosmographus declares the Bishop of Botra, a City of this name is found in Arabia and Sala, a Town also of great Phrygia, the higher Pannonia and Armenia is so called.
Answ. This pitiful stuffe may amase the ignorant, Domnus Bospori is the last subscriber. Bosphorus is said in the subscriptions to be Provinciae Bostrensis, in a Roman Province. There be divers straites of the sea called Bosphori, one between Constant and Calcedon; another the sretum Cimmerium, vel os Moeotidis, called of the Italians stretto de Cassa, and the straits between Taurica Chersonesus in Europe, and Sarmatia in Asia, There is the City Bosphorus, an Archiepiscopal seat, vulgo Vospero. Abest (inquit Ferrarius) à Thracio 500 mil. pass. ab ostio Tanais 375 in austrum. This was in the Empire, and he himself nameth it first a City of Thracia, and yet (the Learned Cosmographer) proveth that it was out of the Empire: are not these meet men to prove all the Earth to be in the Popes jurisdiction?
§. 7. III. His 3d. is Ioh. Persi lis, of whom enough already, he is said to be of the Province of Persia, which therefore was some skirt of Persia then in the Empire, and a Town in Syria was called Persa, what proof then is here of any one man out of the Empire? So much for Nice.
§. 8. IV. He next tells us of three Bishops of Scythia at the first Council at Constant.
Answ. And what of that? 1. Is it not said, that they were of the Province of Scythia? And 2. Doth not Euseb. in vit. Const. tell you when Scythia (that is part of it) was conquered by Constantine? And Tomis was known to be in the Empire: It was a City of the Inferiour Mysia, where Ovid was Banished, and by Socrates made the sole Bishoprick of Scythia then.
Binnius desireth pardon if the Subscriptions be not true, so little certainty is here pretended. And what Crab saith, I before cited, the 4 or 5 Copies so greatly disagreeing.
§. 9. V. Saith W. I. And Etherius Anchialensis: now Anchialos, is a City in Thracia, not far from Apollonia.
Answ. 1. There's no mention in Crab or Binnius of Etherius Anchialensis, but of Aetherius Tersonitanus or Tonsonitanus; and of Sabastianus Anchialensis. 2. And if there were three from Scythia (which is not likely, because Socrates said they had none but of Tamis,) this was one of them. 3. And doth not this Man well prove the Pope and Councils Power to extend beyond the Empire, when he instanceth in such a City of Thracia, where Constantinople it self was? But whether it was the Bishop of Anchialos, an Arch-Bishoprick on the side of the Euxine Sea, called Kenkis by the Turks; or else Anchiale, a City of Cilicia, thought by Stephanus to be Tarsus, by Pliny to be near it (though the first is likeliest) it's known that both were in the Empire.
§. 10. VI. He next comes to Ephes. 1. Concil. And there we have again Phebaemon Coptorum Episcopus.
Answ. Reader, pardon my repeated detection of his repeated Errors. 1. It is in Crab or Binnius, Copti; which I have told you was a City of the Province of Thebais: And those now called Copti are Egyptians; yea, Binnius, p. 741. reciting the very words of every Bishop at that Council, saith, Phaebaemon Coptorum Thebaidis Episcopus dixit. And was not Thebais in the Empire? The Copti's now are supposed so called from the City Coptos.
§. 11. VII. His next instance is, Theodulus Esulae, Episc. Anciently a City of Arabia.
Answ. There is no such Man as Theodulus in the first subscriptions in Crab or Binnius; nor no such place as Esula: But Binnius hath Ampela, aliàs Abdela Helusae; and after, p. 742. Theodulus Elusae: and p. 758. Helusae. In the recitation in Concil. Chalcedon, of the Ephesia… Subscriptions, it is Theodulus Ticeliae civitatis Ep. so little certainty is here.
2. Esulae is in Italy, and Esula is Isola, a City of Greece on the Borders of Calabria: See Ferrarius, that there were divers Eleusa's within the Empire.
§. 12. VIII. His next is, Theodorus Gadarorum, Episcopus: Of that Name is a City in Cava Syria.
O happy proof of the Popes Universal Monarchy and Councils! It is Chadarorum in Binnius: But Gadara or Gadora, is indeed a City of Coelosyria, where Christ gave the Devil power over the Swine: And did not this Learned Man know that the Gadarens were within the Empire?
§. 13. IX. Next he cometh to the Council of Chalcedon, and there begins with Antipater Bostrorum Episc. which he saith, is in Arabia, ut suprá.
Answ. Ut suprà, what was said of it before? He dreamed of Bosphorus somewhere far off before, and now it's Bostrorum. But there is no such Man as I can find mentioned in Crab or Binnius: But there is Constantinus Episcopus Bostrorum, Subscribing for himself and thirteen Bishops under him: The first is the Bishop of Gerassa, a Town near the Lake of Genasaret, under this Arch-Bishop. And doth not this great Disputer know that the Arch-Bishop of Bostra was in the Empire, though it were in Arabia Petraea? And was the City where the Emperour Philip was Born, and called thence Philippopolis; and, as Ferrarius saith, was formerly under the Patriarch of Antioch, but after under him of Ierusalem? Such is the Historical proofs of the Roman Universality.
§. 14. X. The next cited, is Olympius Scythopoleos, which is a City of Scythia in Coelosyria.
Answ. 1. There is no such Man that I can find in Binnius, who hath the largest Catalogue: There be divers Olympii, but none Scythopoleos. But there is twice Olympius Sozopoleos, which, it's like, was the Man, as being the nearest Name; of which Name there was one in Pisidia under Antioch; and another in Thrace under Adrianople.
2. *Myraeus tells you the nine Bishops under Scythopolis, vulgo Bethsan, Urbs in Iudeae & Galileae confinibus, ad Iordanem fluvium, nobilis exstitit, saith he, p. 23.But the Bishop of Scythopolis may be found in some Councils: And where is that? In Palestine by the Lake Genasareth, but forty seven Miles from Ierusalem, and sixteen from Samaria, an Arch-Bishops Seat, under the Patriarch of Ierusalem. Here is another of his Proofs.
§. 15. XI. The next is, Eustathius Gentis Saracenorum, of Saraca: There is a City so called in Arabia faelix.
Answ. And what then? Must the word [Gen…s Sarra…orum] prove that he was out of the Empire, when part of Arabia †Niceph. l. 16. c. 43. Arabes servitutes conditiones à Romanis accepisse.was in it? But saith Perrarius, Horuin …bs in consilio Gal… membratur; sed in Palestina idque ratione vio…nitatis, ob quam idem …pens diversis regionibus confinibus attribui consuevit. And was Palestine without the Empire? You see I cite none to shame your falshood, but your own Writers.
§. 16. XII. The next is, Constantinus Episcopus Bostrorum in Arabia ‖Remember that Historians (Socrates, Zozomene, Niceph, &c tell us, that the Arabians had Bishops in the Villages, and therefore great numbers.faelix.
Answ. Memoria faelix was greatly wanting to him, to forget so suddenly that he had just before cited a false named Bishop of the same City; and now he giveth us the true one as another Man: Sure a Papist doth not believe that one City had two Bishops at that Council. I shewed you before that Bostra ¶See in Myraei Natiti. Epis. the nineteen Bishops under Bostra, pag. 26.was in the Empire.
§. 17. XIII. Yet there is one more, and that is, Subscribit quidam pro Giaco Gerassae Episcopo. Gerafa is a City of Coelosyria.
Answ. I mentioned him before I noted your instance. And is he therefore out of the Empire because in Coelosyria? An excellent collection. I told you out of Ferrarius, that it is by the Lake of Gennasareth, under this Arch-Bishop of Bostra: And surely that was as undoubtedly in the Empire, as Ierusalem was.
§. 18. And now I have done with all his strange proofs, that Extraimperial Bishops were at the four first General Councils (or any long after) and consequently that the Pope is the Monarchical Bishop of all the World, and not a National Primate only. And if a Man can tell me where to find a cause so betrayed by the shameful failing of so great a Hector, I am yet to learn it. And this is the Man that before promised us a peculiar Treatise to prove this very thing; but instead of it, was fain shamefully to put us off with thirteen Names, without one proof, but gross Mistakes.
§. 19. But I will say more for him than he hath said for himself: When I read an odd Epistle in Crab and Binnius of the Nestorians at the Ephesine Council to Callimones the King, as commanding them to meet at Ephesus, and as a very Christian Prince: I wondred who it was, having never read of any such King of Persia; and began to suspect that the King of Persia might send some Ioh. Persidis also thither. But I found neither Name, nor Character, nor History, nor the Cities of the Oriental Bishops named encouraged me to any such thoughts. But at last Binnius himself, and his Author helpt me out of my Ignorance; saying, per Callimorem Persidis Regem *Persidis Regem is not in …rah.Theodosium designant. Appellant autem eum ob id hoc nomint, quod Persus debellassit, religionemque ibidem per tyrannidem extinctam, restituisset. And having thus done the main business, I think it needless to add to what I said before to his citations of contests in the Empire.
§. 20. Only about this one Council of Ephesus, which he mentioneth; I desire the Reader to note a few particulars. 1. That it is expresly said to be called by the Emperour Theodosius II. 2. That the Emperour Governed it, both by sending Officers to oversee them there, and by determining of the Effects. 3. That no Patriarch had so little to do in it as the Bishop of Rome. 4. That Cyril presided as Rome's Vicar, is an untrue pretence. 5. The Synod as such ruled the greatest Patriarchs, though Cyil's Interest, vehemency, and copious Speech did prevail. In the beginning in Crab, p. 587. you shall find such a Mandate as this: to Philip the Presbyter Pope, Coelestines Vicar (and therefore Cyril was not his Vicar) and to Arcadius, Iuvenal, Flavian, and other Bishops their Legates, to Constantin…le. Ante omnia sciat Sanctitas vestra quod cum Johanne Antiocheno & cum Apostarum Consilio communionem nullo modo habere debeatis (and after more Instructions) Permittimus vestrae Sanctitati his factis polliceri quidem ipsis communionem, &c. If the Bishop of Rome had but given such Mandates and Permissions to them, as they did to his Vicar and others, it would have been taken for a proof of his Government over them.
5. That it was to the Emperour that they sent Legates, and not to Rome, and that for the effectual Judgment which Party should prevail: The Orientals say, in their first Petition, Nostrae preces sunt … Iudicium … pitate accipiamus: And both sides sollicited him long hereto; but he kept both at Chalcedon, and would not let them so much as come long into the City, to avoid their contentions.
6. That what was done at last, as to decision and depositions, was done by the Emperour: He commanded the Deposition of the Leaders of both Parties at first, thinking that the way to Peace, viz. Nestorius, Cyril, and Memnon. In the second Petition of the Orientals, it's said, Advenit ru…us magnificentissimus magister Johannes, qui tunc comes omnium largitionum, significantes quod à vestra majestate trium depositiones decretae sunt, tollend aque è medio sub…ta offendicula, solamque fidem in Nice… expositum à Sanctis & beatis patribus ab omnibus confirmandam. And accordingly Iohan. Comes did put them all out, till the Emperours mind changed upon second thoughts, and rejected Nestorius alone.
7. That these Oriental Bishops were all his Subjects as they oft profess; as in their third Petition in …rab, pag. 592. Non illorum tantum sed & noster Rex …s: Non enim parva porti… Regni tui est Oriens in qua semper recta sides resulsit, & cum hâc etiam alia Provinciae & Dioceses è quibus Congregati fuimus.
8. This Iohan. Comes, in his Letters to the Emperour, giveth such an Account of the Fury and Contentiousness of some of the Bishops, especially of Cyrils Orthodox-party, and of their fierceness and fighting one with another, as should grieve the heart of a Christian to read it. And had not he and Candidianus kept the Peace, and Ruled them (more than the Pope did) the two Councils (for two they were) might have tryed who should prevail by Blood Cyril's Council Accused Nestorius for keeping Souldiers about him, and not Appearing, Iohn's Council (which was for Nestorius) Accuse the Egyptian (meaning Cyril) for Heresie, Turbulency, setting the World together by the Ears, raising Seditions in the Church, and expending that Money which was the Poors in maintaining Souldiers to strengthen them, Petit. 3. Crab. p. 592.
§. 21. And that the Pope Governed not out of the Empire, nor any of the Patriarchs or Christian Prince then, is intimated in these words of the Orientals first Petition; having praised him for propagating Religion in Persia (by the Sword) You may not send two Religions into Persia, O King; and while we are at Discord among our selves, our matters will not seem great (or be much esteemed) there being none among them to be the Iudges (or to Judge) nor will any Communicate in two sorts of words and Sacraments: So that the Persians were not Subject to the Imperial Church Judicatories, when it's said, There is none among them to Iudge (or determine) which of the two Faiths is right.
§. 22. And whereas he layeth so much on the Council of Chalcedons applauding Pope Leo's Letter, it is notorious that in all these Councils that were militating party against party, every side magnified them that were for them, and strengthened them; (as at Ephesus one cryeth up Cyril, and the other Iohn, &c.) Yet even those Bishops are sain to Apologize for Receiving his Letter; it being Objected, that his Epistle was an Innovation; saying, Let them not Accuse to us the Epistle of the Admirable Prelate of the City of Rome, as an Offence of Innovation; but if it be not agreeable to the Holy Scriptures, let them Reprove (or confute) it: If it be not the same with the Iudgment of the former Fathers, if it contain not an Accusation of the Impious; if it defend not the Nicene Faith, &c. So that they rested not on the Authority of the Author, but the Truth of the Matter, which was to be exposed to Tryal.
§. 23. Note also, That whereas the great Proof of the Papal Monarchy, is, that Rome is called oft, Caput Mundi, & omnium Ecclesiarum, & sedes Petri: That Nazianzene oft calleth Constantinople, Caput totius mundi; and it's usual for Councils to call Ierusalem, Mater omnium Ecclesiarum; as Constant. Consil. 2. Bin. p. 529. Aliarum omnium Mater. And Antioch is ordinarily called, Sedes Petri, and the City Theopolis. Theodoret saith, That Iohn, chosen Bishop of Antioch, Ad primatum Apostolicum suffragiis delectus fuit. Hist. l. 3. c. 17.
§. 24. Note, That whereas W. I. maketh himself Ignorant, that ever any Council was called without the Pope; and they pretend that his Vicars presided in them, almost all the General Councils for six or seven hundred Years, are Witnesses against them: And of the first General Council at Const. Binnius Notes say (p. 515.) Damas…m Pontificem neque per se, neque per suos Legatos eidem praefuisse fatemur.
§. 25. But there is yet another part of our work behind: W. I. will next prove, That the Fathers of those General Councils, in all their Decrees, Constitutions, and Canons, intended to Oblige all Christians through the whole World, and thereby demonstrated themselves to have Iurisdiction of the whole Church; and never so much as insinuated, that their Authority was limited within the Precincts of the Empire.
Answ. 1. I have proved the contrary at large already. 2. They might well commend their Decrees or Judgments to all Christians, on two accounts. 1. For Concord sake; it being desirable that all Christians should, as much as may be, be of one mind and way. 2. Ratione rei decret…: And so all Churches are bound to receive the same Truth that one is bound to, If the Bishop of the poorest City Excommunicate a Man justly for Heresie, all the Bishops in the World that know it, are bound to deny Communion to that Man; (and so Cyprian commended the Bishop of Rome for denying Communion to Felicissimus;) partly because they are bound to keep Concord with all Christians, and Order; and partly, because they are bound to avoid Hereticks: And yet such a Bishop is not Governour of all other Bishops; (nor Cyprian▪ of the Bishop of Rome.) But let us hear your Proofs.
§. 26. I. Thus (saith W. I.) the Council of Ephesus saith, Their Decrees were for the good of the whole world.
Answ. I do not mean to search so large a Volumn to find where, seeing you tell me not where. When as he is unworthy to be Disputed with that knoweth not, how commonly then the Roman Empire was called Totus Orbis; and even the Scripture saith, That all the World was Taxed by Augustus. How oft doth Nazianzene complain, that the Bishops and Councils had distracted and divided the whole World? And also, that all that is for the good of the whole World, is not an Act of Government of the whole World; e. g. The Works of Augustine, Chrysostome, &c.
§. 27. II. Saith he, Thus the Council of Chalcedon, Act. 7. declareth the Church of Antioch to have under its Government Arabia.
Answ. But do you think that no part of Arabia was in the Empire? Look but in the Maps of the Empire, if you have no other notice. And you will be put hard to it, to prove that they meant the rest of Arabia.
§. 28. III. And act. 16. c. 28. (saith he) That the Bishop of Const. should have under him certain Churches in Barbarous Nations, which you must prove to have been under the Empire.
Answ. 1. I thought you must have proved, that it was out of the Empire; who undertook to prove it as you affirm it? 2. But seeing Papists lay Mens Salvation upon such skill in History, Cosmography, and Chronology, which this great Disputer had so little of himself, we must study it better for the time come: And I did fully prove to you before, that the Sauromat…, many of the Scythians and Goths were conquered, and in the Empire; and Barbarians were in the Empire.
And by the way Note, 1. That this …uncil of Chalcedon, even writing to Leo Bishop of Rome, tell him, That They were called by the Grace of God and Sanction of the most Pious Emperours, not mentioning any call of Leo's. 2. That the Emperour Martian, in his Decree against Hereticks, and for this Council, saith, All Men must believe as Athanasius, Theophylus, and Cyril believed (not naming the Bishop of Rome;) and that Cyril, Praefuit Concilio Ephesino, not saying that the Bishop of Rome did it, or Cyril, as his Vicar: And that the Council-Bishops, contemptuously against the Romans, cryed out, They that gain-say, let them walk to Rome; and stood to their last Canon against the Popes dissent.
§. 29. IV. Next he saith, Nicephorus, l. 5. c. 16. saith, That Leo the Emperour Wrote to the Bishops of all Provinces together (Circularibus per Orbem literis ad Ecclesias missis, Leo haec sic ad omnes Episcopos misit) which he accounts were above a thousand, to have them subscribe to the Council of Chalcedon.
Answ. Some Men perceive not when they consute themselves. 1. I tell you, Totus Orbis was a common Title of the Empire. 2. Had Leo any power out of the Empire? His commands shew that they were his Subjects that he wrote to. 3. Were any called, or wrote to under the Name of Provinces, but the Roman Provinces? 4. Do you think that there were not more than a thousand Bishops in the Empire? Yea, many thousands (if poor Ireland had as many hundred as Ninius speaks of.) 5. But remember hence, that if all Bishops were written to, then the Bishop of Rome was written to, to Subscribe the 28 Canon of the Council of Chalcedon; which he refused▪ (as Papists say.)
But indeed the Epistle that Niceph. there mentioneth, c. 16. was but to enquire of all the Bishops, whether they stood to the Council of Chalcedon or no, and what Bishop of Alexandria they were for, to save the calling of a new Council; and it is plain▪ he wrote only to his Subjects.
§. 30. V. Next he saith, The Bishops of the second Armenia, which seem to have been out of the Empire, wrote an Answer; and Adelphus, Bishop of Arabia, Subscribes, among▪ the rest, to this Epistle.
Answ. 1. He tells me …ot where to find any of this. In Nicephorus, there I find it not▪ 2. But if he know not that part of both the Armenias were Roman Provinces, he may see it in the Titles of the Nicene Council, and in the Maps and Histories of the Empire: And of Arabia I spake before.
§. 31. VI. He saith, The Bishop of the second Messia, which you must prove to have been then under the Empire, writ that the Council of Nice delivered the Faith, toti terrarum Orbi, and style the Bishop of Rome the Head of Bishops, and that the Council of Chalcedon was gathered by Pope Leo's Command.
Answ. Here is neither Matter nor Authority worthy an Answer. 1. He citeth no Author for what he saith. 2. Whether he meaneth Messua, or Messia, or Messina, they were all in the Empire: But what he meaneth I know not. Since I find in his Errat. [Messia r. Toti] But where, or what Toti meaneth, my Cosmographers tell me not: If it be Tottaium that he meaneth, it was a City of Bithynia under the Arch-Bishop of Nice.
But it seems he durst not say it was in the Empire, but instead of proving it in, I must prove it out, without knowing Place or Author. 2. He that yet understandeth not the Romans Terrarum Orbem, and he that reading History, can believe that Pope Leo called the Council at Chalcedon, is not to be convinced by me, if he maintain that the Turks called it.
He tells us (out of no cited Author) of an Epistle subscribed by Dita, Bishop of Odyss… in Scythia, which I have nothing to do with, till I know the Epistle: But he should have known that Odyssus is a City of Mysia, near the Euxine Sea, within the Empire.
§. 32. VII. His last Instance is considerable, viz. Of the Bishops of Spain, France, and Germany. To which I say, 1. That none but Rome much medled in the Empire after their Conquest: Nor Rome much in comparison of Alexandria, Constantinople, and Antioch. 2. I easily confess, that those Churches within the Empire had been settled in their several powers by the Councils at Nice and Const. did plead the same Canonical Settlement to keep their possession when they were conquered. And that e. g. Rome under Theodorick and other Arrians, was willing to keep their Relation to the Orthodox Churches of the Empire, for their strength: And Neighbours that were under Heathens or Arrians, were glad of a little countenance from Councils of great Bishops in the Empire (as Basil and the Easternes under Valens, were from the West, without Subjection to the Pope.)
§. 33. Pag. 116. After some trifling Quibbles, he Answereth my Charge, That their Church is not one, but two; having at times two Heads: The Pope to some, and a Council to others.
To this he saith, 1. That this belongs to them that take Councils to be above the Pope, and not to him, who is of a contrary Opinion.
Answ. It is to your Party in general: I did not say, that W. I. was two Churches; but that those called Papists are so.
2. He saith, That they also can answer me with a wet finger; for the Pope is in the Council, and not excluded.
Answ. Such wet-fingerd Answers serve to deceive the Ignorant. The Question is not of the Popes Natural Person, but of his Political: Two summa potestates make two Polities. The Pope in a General Council is not the summae potestas, if a Council be above him, and may Judge and Depose him. To be a Member of a Council that hath the Sovereignty, is not to have the Sovereignty: Did you not know this?
§. 34. I urged him as his proper work, to answer these Questions: Whether the Church, of which the Subjects of the Pope are Members, hath been Visible ever since Christ's days on Earth? And therein, 1. Whether the Papacy, that is, their Universal Papal Government over▪ all the Earth, hath so long continued? 2. Whether all the Catholick Church did still submit to it? 3. Whether those that did submit to it, took it to be necessary to the Being of the Church, and Mens Salvation, or only to the more Orderly and Better being.
But he would not be driven to touch at any of these, or prove the perpetual Visibility of the …. And … over my last … over many of his Im…, … the … that I refer him but to the p…sing of the Histories which … co…th, with the General Answers which I have before given: And he will find, 1. That the Pope was but a National Primate. 2. And that by Humane Institution. 3. And under a General Council. 4. Striving upon every Advantage to be greater. 5. Under the power of Princes. 6. And when he lost his power over all the other four Patriarchs, the West falling from the Empire, he sought to bring the Western Princes under him, and claimed a Government over all the World.