The Novelty of Popery Opposed to the Antiquity of True Christianity, Book 6 · Chapter 10 – Chapter 11
CHAP. 10. A place examined of Auſtins, 162. Epiſtle.
BEſides theſe Epiſtles about which the Cardinal keeps ſuch a coil, there is a place in the 162. Epiſtle of Auſtin, which the Cardinal repeats without end, and thinks he can never alledge it enough. The text is this, Carthage had a Biſhop of no mean authority, who might very well not care for the conſpiring multitude of enemies, (a)Cum ſe videret & Romanae Eccleſiae, in qua ſemper Apoſtolicae Eccleſiae viguit principatus, & caeteris terris unde Evangelium ad ipſam Africom venit, per communicatorias litteras eſſe conjunctum.ſeeing that he ſaw himſelf conjoyned by Letters of communication with the Roman Church, in which the principality of the Apoſtolick See hath always been in vigour; and with the other Countries whence the Goſpel came into Africa. The words of this place which ſeem to favour the Biſhop of Rome, are, that in the Roman Church, the principality of the Apoſtolical Chair hath always been in vigour. But we have ſhewed already in the precedent ch. that many other Churches had the ſame principality, and were called Apoſtolical, and their Chairs. Apoſtolick Sees. As for the title of Principality, it was a degree which all the Patriarchal Chairs did challenge, pretending to have the Superintendency over all the Churches. We ſhall ſee in the following Chapter, that Theodoret giveth to Neſtorius Patriarch of Conſtantinople the title of Governour of the Churches of all the world. Wherefore alſo the Patriarch of Conſtantinople took a little after Neſtorius, the title of Oecumenical Patriarch, that is, the Prince of the Fathers of all the habitable earth; although his authority did not extend beyond the Roman Empire. Gregory Nazianzen ſpeaks thus of Athanaſius Patriarch of Alexandria, in the Oration made of his praiſes, The Government of the people of Alexandria, which is as much as if one ſaid, The Government of all the World, is given him in charge. And in the ſame place,(b)foreign. Athanaſius giveth Laws again to the habitable earth. Baſil in the 50. Epiſtle, ſaith, that Meletius Patriarch of Antioch(c)foreign. did preſide over the whole body of the Church. Thus in the works of Athanaſius there is an Epiſtle of Arſenius, where he ſpeaks thus to him,(d)Pag. 610. foreign. We embrace peace and union with the Ʋniverſal Church over which thou preſideſt. And we have ſhewed by many examples, that every Patriarch had an eye over all the Churches of the Roman Empire, and that their care was not limited by the limits of their Patriarchate. No wonder then if to the Roman Patriarch that title of principality is given, ſince it was common to all the other Patriarchs, which is ſignified by the word Patriarch, which is as much as Prince of Fathers, that is of Biſhops. Obſerve that Auſtin ſaith not that in the Roman Church the principality over the Apoſtolick Sees had always been in vigour. That would be exalting the Biſhop of Rome above other Patriarks, and making him their Prince; but only he attributes to the Biſhop of Rome this honour, to have the principality of the Apoſtolick See. As then he that would ſay that the family of Capets had the pre-eminence of Royalty theſe ſix hundred years, ſhould not thereby deny that all that time there was a Monarchy in England, and in Spain where the Kings had the like pre-eminence. Likewiſe, he that ſaith that the Biſhop of Rome had in St. Auſtins time the principality and pre-eminence of the Apoſtolick See, doth not deny that in other places there were Biſhops having, within their verge, the ſame Principality, of which we need not ſeek far for proofs. For Auſtin in the ſame Epiſtle 162. ſpeaks of the Apoſtolick Sees in the plural number, to which he ſaith, that the Biſhops of Africa could appeal as well as to the Biſhop of Rome. They (e)Qui poſſent aliorum collegarum judicio, praeſertim Apoſtolicarum Eccleſiarum, cauſam ſuam integram reſervare?could (ſaith he) reſerve their whole cauſe to the judgement of their other colleagues, and chiefly to thoſe of the Apoſtolical Churches. As it is one thing to have the pre-eminence of a King, another thing to have pre-eminence over Kings; ſo it is one thing to have the Principality or pre-eminence of Apoſtolical chair, another thing to have the Principality among, or over, the Apoſtolical chairs.
We have another place of Auſtin much like this, in the 2. book of the merit of ſins, and of pardon, ch. 13. where he ſaith that St. Paul, tanti Apoſtolatus meruit principatum, obtained the principality of ſuch an excellent Apostleſhip. He means not that St. Paul hath obtained to be Prince of the Apoſtles, but that he hath obtained the principality and dignity of an Apoſtle.
Truly although thoſe titles were then common to many, and were taken in a more moderate ſenſe, and leſs advantagious for ambition then in the latter ages: yet it muſt be confeſt that theſe titles of honour given to a few Prelates in ſuch a great Empire as the Roman, have been ſteps to raiſe them by degrees to an exceſſive power; And that hence the diſſenſions are come, and the incredible pride whereby the Patriarks of Rome and Conſtantinople did ſince tear one another for ſo many Ages, and the Oriental Churches were made to juſtle againſt the Occidental. Had not the Saracens firſt, and the Turks next, beaten down the greatneſs of the Patriarks of Alexandria, Antioch, and Conſtantinople, and brought them very low, yet to this day we ſhould ſee them croſſing and daring the Popes of Rome, although the Popes have been unmeaſurably inriched by the immenſe liberalities of the Kings of France, who having undergone the Popes yoke (which did inſenſibly grow from age to age) have brought alſo their Subjects to the like ſervitude. Yet to this day theſe Patriarks, as low as they are, refuſe to ſubmit themſelves unto the Pope: And the Patriarch of Conſtantinople doth now ſtyle himſelf Oecumenical, that is, Univerſal Patriarch.
CHAP. 11. Of Neſtorius Patriark of Conſtantinople. Of the Convocation of the firſt Council of Epheſus, which was the third Univerſal: And that the Emperours by their own ſingle Authority convocated the Councils.
IN the year of Chriſt 428. Siſinnius Patriarch of Conſtantinople dyed. Neſtorius ſucceeded him, the greatneſs of whoſe dignity(a)Theodoretl. 4. foreign, cap. de Neſtorio. foreign. Theodoret ſheweth in the 4. book of Hereſies, ſaying, The Government of the Catholick Church of the Orthodox people of Conſtantinople, yea of the whole habitable earth, was intruſted to Neſtorius. Had the like been ſaid of the Biſhop of Rome, M. du Perron would alledge that teſtimony a hundreth times, and would triumph about it. But Theodoret takes the Roman Empire for the whole World, and ſpeaks thus, becauſe every Patriarch had an eye to all the Churches of the Empire of Rome.
That Nestorius being exalted to honour, began to ſpread the venom of a dangerous Hereſie, dividing the natures of Chriſt, and making one Chriſt man, and another Chriſt God, as if they had been two perſons. Then was Celeſtinus Biſhop of Rome, who aſſembled a particular Council in that City, where the Hereſie of Nestorius was condemned: and writ Letters to Cyrillus Patriarch of Alexandria, whereby he exhorted him to aſſemble alſo a Council and there to depoſe Neſtorius, unleſs within ten days after the ſignification he renounced his Hereſie. Cyrillus did ſo, and aſſembled a Council at Alexandria, where he framed twelve Articles of Anathema againſt Neſtorius. But for all that, Neſtorius was not depoſed; and notwithſtanding the ſentence of Celeſtinus and Cyrillus, he kept his place, becauſe he was not ſubject unto them. Such depoſitions were but declarations that ſuch a Patriarch would not acknowledge ſuch a man for a Biſhop: of which we have ſeen many examples. There was need then that the Emperours authority ſhould intervene to aſſemble a Council from the whole Roman Empire, to judge definitively of that buſineſs.