Romanism Discussed, Treatise · Article 1 · Section 9
SECT. IX.
The defect of H. T. his Catalogue for proof of his Succeſſion in the ſixth, ſeventh, eighth, ninth, tenth Ages is ſhewed.
H. T. in his catalogue from the year of Chriſt 500. reckons up thirteen chief Paſtors, one general Council, the ſecond Conſtantinopolitan Pope Vigilius prefiding (Fathers 165. An. Dom, 553.) againſt Anthimius and Theodore: but Bellarmine himſelf confeſſeth lib. 1. de concil. c. 19. that Eutychius of Conſtantinople was Preſident there, though Vigilius Biſhop of Rome was then at Conſtantinople, As for that which Bellarmine cites out of Zonaras in the life of Juſtinian, he cites it maimedly. For Zonaras ſaid not that onelyonly Vigilius was Prince of the Biſhops who were preſent, but with him Eutychius of Conſtantinople and Apollinaris of Alexandria. What H. T. mentions of the definitions of the council is nothing againſt the proteſtants, nor for the Papacy.
That which he allegeth out of the third council of Carthage is diſorderly placed in the ſixth age, it being held, as is ſaid, in the year 397. and is of doubtfull credit, ſith it mentions Pope Boniface as then living, though he ſat not, according to Onuphrius, till the year 419. but it matters not what it was, ſith it was but a provincial Synod: and of the canons cited by H. T. the firſt is onelyonly about a point not of Faith, concerning the celebrating the Maſs, Faſting; the other, which terms the Apocryphal books as canonical, may be expounded, according to Hierom's diſtinction, that they are canonical to form manners, not to inform faith. Yet this may be obſerved by the way, that the ſix and twentieth Canon of the third Council of Carthage, which was authorized by the ſixth general council holden at Conſtantinople, in Trullo, as it is alleged by Gratian in the Decrees diſt. 99. de primatibus, and by Pope Pelagius approved, denies to any the title of Chief Prieſt, or Prince of Prieſts, but alows onelyonly this Title, Biſhop of the firſt See: whereupon the Gloſs ſaith, that even the Biſhop of Rome was not to be called the Univerſal Biſhop.
The determination of the Council of Mileris about Childrens Baptiſm is diſorderly placed in the ſixth age, being ſaid to be held in the year 402. and being no general council about a point not gainſaid by moſt proteſtants, is impertinent to prove a ſucceſſion of aſſertors of the Roman Doctrine oppoſite to the proteſtants.
That which he allegeth out of the Caeſar Auguſtan Council, which decreed that Virgins ſhould not be vailed till after forty years probation, makes againſt the Papiſts, who in the Trent council, allow it ſooner, and practiſe the vaſting of them afore they are twenty years old.
That which he adds of Pope John the firſt his Decree, that Maſs ought not to be celebrated, but in places conſecrated to our Lord, unleſs great neceſſity ſhould enforce it, becauſe it is written, See thou offer not thy holocauſts in every place, which the Lord thy God hath choſen, Deut. 12. ſhews the Popes ignorance or Judaiſm, who applies this to the Maſs, which was meant of Jewiſh ſacrificing in the Levitical Law, and makes the Maſs to be an offering of an holocauſt, and every place conſecrated by a biſhop, the place that God chooſeth, and alſo the vanity of this Scribler, who puts in his catalogue ſuch an impertinent teſtimony to prove a ſucceſſion of the aſſertors of the Roman faith, which I ſcarce think any ſober papiſt would make any part of his faith againſt proteſtants, nor do I think the papiſts in England would be content to be tied to that Law.
In that which he adds of Catholick Profeſſors to the year 600. he doth not ſhew that they acknowledged the biſhop of Rome's ſupremacy or the now Roman faith. Yea Columbanus in this age, and after Aidanus, Colmannus, and others lived and died in oppoſition to the Romans about Eaſter.
That Auſtin the Monk converted England, is onelyonly true of ſome part of it, and it is true alſo that he did in many things pervert them, and it is ſaid he was an inſtigator of the murder of many Britiſh Chriſtians better than himſelf: but that either he, or Pope Gregory that ſent him, held the ſame ſupremacy of the pope, which now popes claim, or the now-Roman faith oppoſite to the proteſtants cannot be ſhewed. On the contrary, it is manifeſt enough, that Gregory the great refuſed the Title of Univerſal Biſhop, as profane, and ſacrilegious, and accounted the aſſumer of it to be a fore-runner of Antichriſt, lib 4. epiſt. 32, 34, 36, 38, 39. & lib. 6. epiſt. 30. he allowed not Worſhip of Images in his Epiſtle to Serenus biſhop of Marſeiles, he allowed prieſts wives, nor did tie men to follow the order of the Roman church, which ſhews the popes then not to have been altogether ſo bad as in the next age. In which and throughout the reſt of his Catalogue he can hardly ſhew a Pope that lived either the life of a Chriſtian, or did the Office of a paſtour of the church of God, if any, ſure not many: but in ſtead of Chriſtian paſtours a generation of men of an ambitious and luxurious ſpirit, contending with Emperours and Biſhops for worldly greatneſs, perſecuting godly Chriſtians, living in pomp, riot, and all kinde of wickedneſs, are ſet down as chief paſtours of the univerſal church.
In the ſeventh age he reckons up nineteen Popes, whom he terms chief Paſtors: of them the ſecond is Boniface the third, who obtained of Phocas the Emperor (who by treaſon had gotten the Empire, ſlaying his Lord Mauritius and his children) the title of univerſal Biſhop, deteſted before by Gregory the great, as profane and ſacrilegious; and Honorius the firſt, is the fifth condemned in the third Conſtantinopolitan Council, in which H. T. ſaith, there were Fathers two hundred eighty nine, Pope Agatho preſiding, Anno Domini 680. against the Monothelites, and that in it were condemned Sergius, Paulus, Petrus, Cyrus, and Theodore, who moſt impiouſly taught, but one will and operation to be in Chriſt. But this Author deceitfully conceals it, that the ſame Council in the thirteenth action, did ſolemnly condemn Honorius the Pope of old Rome as a Monothelite together with the reſt; and again in the Greek edition the firſt Chapter, and that Pope Agatho in his Epiſtle to the ſixth Council, doth anathematize his predeceſſor Honorius as a Monothelite, and Pope Leo the ſecond, in his Epiſtle to Conſtantine the Emperor, inſerted in the eighth action of the ſixth Synod, which was alſo done in the ſecond Nicene Council, termed the ſeventh ſynod in the laſt action.
As for that which H. T. adds of the definitions of the ſixth Council againſt Prieſts marriage, not giving grapes, mingling water and wine, adoration of the Croſſe, conſideration in him that binds and looſeth, invocating Saints; it is not worth while to inſiſt on the examination thereof, partly becauſe ſome of the definitions ſerve not the purpoſe; for though it be granted, that there ought to be a particular knowledge of the ſin of him that is to be abſolved by his confeſſion of it, yet is not thereby the neceſſity of Popiſh auricular confeſſion proved, or the Prieſts power judicially and authoritatively to abſolve, and remit ſins eſtabliſhed, partly becauſe they are not all points of faith, but either of diſciplin, as about the marriage of men in orders, or of Ceremonies, as about the mingling of water and wine in the Euchariſt; and partly becauſe it is doubtful whether thoſe Canons are truely aſcribed to that Council, there being ſome reaſons tending to the contrary, and partly becauſe if they were their determinations, there is little reaſon to aſcribe any authority to them, after the firſt ſix hundred years barbariſm, and many corruptions being gotten into the Chriſtian Churches, and the ſimplicity of the Chriſtian profeſſion very much changed into contentions about Biſhops Sees, Eccleſiaſtical priviledges, humane ceremonies, and ſuch like abuſes: yet, were all granted which he allegeth of the councils definitions, neither the now Roman ſupremacy nor faith is proved, nor from the Catholick profeſſors, as he terms them, or Nations converted are either of them avouched in that age.
In the eighth Century things grew worſe. In it H. T. reckons thirteen Popes, among whom there's not a man, of whom their own writers relate any thing that belongs to the Paſtors of the Church of Chriſt, to wit, the Preaching of the Goſpel; but their intermedling with the buſineſs of the Empire and Kingdoms, making Kings monks, contentions about images in Churches, enlarging their dominions, building walls, making decrees about ſhaven crowns and ſuch like toyes... Two Popes, Zacharias and Stephen the ſecond, can hardly be acquitted from being ſinfully inſtrumental in the depoſing of Childerick King of France, and the traiterous uſurpation of Pepin.
As for the ſecond Nicene Council, in which H. T. ſaith, were three hundred and fifty Fathers, Pope Adrian preſiding, Anno Domini 787. againſt image breakers, in which were decreed for images in Temples, and the veneration and worſhip of the Saints, Reliques, Images, and the Council of Sens about traditions, though theſe things are but a few of the Popiſh doctrins, yet we grant, that then the Popes had gotten to ſuch heighth as to juſtle Emperors, and that the Churches in Communion with the Papacy were in that age and the following ſo corrupt, as that traditions of men and decrees of Biſhops were more regarded than the written Word; and that thereby placing of images in Temples, and their worſhip got into the Chriſtian Churches to the promoting of that Idolatry in the Roman Church, which hath made her the mother of harlots, and of abominations of the earth: yet this was not done without oppoſition, not only in the Greek Empire, but alſo in the Weſtern: Charles the great calling a Council at Frankford, which condemned the ſecond Nicene Council.
And for the Catholick Profeſſors, ſuch as venerable Bede and others, though they were tainted with the ſuperſtitions of thoſe times about monkery, and ceremonies, and eccleſiaſtical dignities and orders, yet that they held the now Roman faith cannot be demonſtrated, nor that the Nations mentioned to be converted were converted to it. And for the miracles mentioned there is no credit to be given to them, many ſuch tales having been made, or ſuch miracles counterfieted in thoſe dayes for deceiving the ignorant people: nor were they done in ſuch manner and to ſuch purpoſes, as the miracles of Chriſt and his Apoſtles were by which the Goſpel was confirmed.
In the nineteenth age H. T. reckons up eighteen Popes, omitting the mention of one of them as a woman; though a great number of Popiſh writers ſet her down as Pope, and relate the ſtory of her ſitting in the chair ſome years, till ſhe travailed with child in proceſſion. But if that were not true, yet the things related by themſelves of Formoſus, Stephanus, Romanus ſhew cruelty and wickedneſs in the Popes of that age, one hating and undoing what another had done, and thereby ſhewing that they were rather of Cadmus, than St. Peters race.
And for the fourth Conſtantinopolitan Council (Fathers one hundred and one) Pope Adrian preſiding, Anno Domini 869. againſt Photius, and for the Pope and images, and againſt temporal Princes medling in the election of Biſhops; it is an argument, that the Roman Biſhops were gotten then by many wicked practices to a great heighth of unjuſt power. And the depoſition of Photius for reproving the Emperor, together with his oppoſition of the Pope (whoſe works extant do ſhew him to have been of more worth for learning than any Pope in that age) and the Epiſtle of Ulderick Biſhop of Auſpurg to Pope Nicolas the firſt, in which he rebukes the wickedneſs of Popes in denying marriage to the Clergy, do prove that the doctrin and tyranny of the Popes of Rome, did not freely paſs without controul even in that age, which by the confeſſion of Genebrard himſelf, Chron. l. 4. was an unhappy age for want of any writer of worth in the Latin Church.
As for the Catholick profeſſors mentioned by H. T. in this age, that they were all of the Roman church, or profeſſed her faith is not ſhewed: not that the Nations converted, were either converted by the Roman Biſhops, or owned their now claimed ſupremacy or profeſſed faith; H. T. ſaith the Ruſſians were converted by a Prieſt ſent by the Emperor Baſilius, and therefore had their converſion from the Greek church whom they followed, and with whom they now hold communion, not acknowledging the Biſhop of Romes ſupremacy to this day, and therefore that inſtance is manifeſtly againſt H. T. his purpoſe.
In the tenth age are reckoned twenty ſix Popes, whereof there's ſcarce any that may be termed a Chriſtian, much leſs a chief Paſtor of the Chriſtian churches. Their own ſtories tell us of ſome of them that got the Popedome by means of Mororia a notorious whore, others by cruel practiſes: one, to wit Sylveſter the ſecond, by the help of the Devil, whoſe agents they were in bringing a deluge of ignorance and wickedneſs into the world, which made that age to be termed a miſerable age, in which were neither famous writers, nor Councils, nor Popes that cared for the publick, by Bellarmin in his book of Eccleſiaſtical writers, and of it H. T. here ſaith, in this tenth age or century I find no general council, nor yet provincial in which any controverſie of moment was decided. So that by his own confeſſion, his catalogue of councils fails him. And for his ſucceſſion of chief Paſtors, it is of ſuch perſons and ſo uncertain a ſucceſſion, and by ſuch irregular ways, as yeilds proof that Rome was the Synagogue of Satan, not the church of Chriſt. Of the catholick profeſſors added, ſome of them, as Dunſtan, &c. were ſuch, as it may be well doubted whether they are in heaven or in hell. And for the Nations converted, it is not proved they were of the now Roman faith.