Of the Church fiue bookes. By Richard Field Doctor of Diuinity and sometimes Deane of Glocester.

§. 10.

IN my third booke, and first Chapter, speaking of the Patriarche of Constantinople, I haue these words: In the second generall Councell holden at Constantinople, he was preferred before the other Patriarches of Alexandria and Antioch, and set in degree of honour next vnto the Bishoppe of Rome; in the great Councell of Chalce∣don, hee was made equall with him, and to haue all equall rights, priuiledges, and prerogatiues: because hee was Bishoppe of new Rome, as the other was of old. Hereupon the Treatiser breaketh out into these wordes: I cannot doe otherwise, but maruaile, that a man of his place and learning, doth not blush to committe such a noto∣rious * 1.1 vntrueth, to the Print and view of the world. For not to speake of the fals∣hood of the first part of his affirmation, because it is in some sort impertinent, that which hee saith of the Councell of Chalcedon, is most vntrue, repugnant to all antiqui∣ty, and not onely contrary to all proceedings, and the history of the sayd Councell, but also to the wordes of the Canon by him alleaged. Who would not thinke that there were some grosse ouersights committed by Mee, in these passages, vppon such an out∣crie? Wherefore, lette vs consider the seuerall parts of this his exception against Mee.

First, hee sayth, the Bishoppe of Constantinople was not preferred before the other two Patriarches, of Alexandria and Antioch, and set in degree of honour next vnto the Bishop of Rome, in the first Councell of Constantinople, as I haue sayd; and that I say vntruly, when I say hee was. Let vs therefore, heare the wordes of the Canon it selfe, and then let the Reader iudge betweene vs. The words of the third Canon of that Councell are these; Constantinopolitanus Episcopus obtineat praecipuum honorem ac dignitatem, secundum ac post Episcopum Romanum, ideo quòd Constantinopolis noua Ro∣ma est, that is: Let the Bishop of Constantinople, haue the chiefest honour and dignity after the Bishoppe of Rome, because Constantinople is new Rome. If the words of the Canon suffice not to iustifie my assertion, let vs heare the Treatiser himselfe; in the same page hee citeth these words of the Bishoppes assembled in the Councell of Chal∣cedon, in their Synodall Epistle to Leo Bishoppe of Rome: Wee haue confirmed the rule of the hundred and fifty holy Fathers, which were gathered together at Con∣stantinople, vnder Theodosius of happie memory, which commaunded, that the See of Constantinople which is ordained the second, and to haue second honour after your most holy and Apostolique See, &c. Is not here as much sayd as I haue

written? Did not the holy Fathers, assembled at Constantinople, decree, that the Bishoppe of Constantinople, shall bee preferred before the Bishoppes of Alexandria and Antioch, and set in degree of honour next vnto the Bishoppe of Rome? and doe not the Fathers in the Councell of Chalcedon say they decreed soe? Haue all these holy Fathers committed notorious vntrueths to the Print and view of the world? It is well the Treatiser concealed his name, for otherwise hee must haue heard further from Mee.

But happily I mis-reported the Councell of Chalcedon when I sayd that in that Councell, the Bishoppe of Constantinople, was made equall with the Bishoppe of Rome, and to haue equall rights, priuiledges, and prerogatiues, because hee was Bishoppe of new Rome, as the other of old. Let vs therefore heare the words of the Bishoppes assembled in that Councell. The a 1.2 Fathers, say the Bishops of that Councell, did rightly giue preeminences, and priuiledges, to the Throne of old Rome, because that •…•…ittie was Lady and mistresse of the world, and the hundred and fifty Bishops, most dee•…•…ely beloued of God, moued with the same respect, gaue equall preeminences, and priui∣ledges to the most holy throne of New Rome, thinking it reasonable that that Cittie honoured with the inperiall seate, and Senate, and enioying equall preeminences, and priuiledges, with the elder Princely city, should bee made great as the other, in ecclesi∣asticall affaires, being second after it. Out of this decree, b 1.3 Nilus, in his booke of the Primacie of the Pope, obserueth first, that in the iudgement of these holy Bishoppes, the Pope hath the primacie from the Fathers, and not from the Apostles. Secondly, that he hath it in respect of the greatnesse of his Citty, beeing the seate of the Em∣pire, and not by reason of his succeding Peter, which vtterly ouerthroweth the Pa∣pacie. And therefore this good man, after all this outery raised against Mee, as if I had * 1.4 mis-reported the Councell, is forced to deny the authority of the Canon, as not beeing confirmed by the Bishoppe of Rome. See then how hee demeaneth himselfe. First, hee vrgeth, that the Bishoppe of new Rome, or Constantinople, could not haue e∣quall priuiledges with the Bishoppe of old Rome; because hee was to bee second, and next after him; where-unto Nilus answereth, that if that reason did hold, the Bi∣shoppe of Alexandria, could not bee equall to the Bishoppe of Constantinople in power and authority: nor the Bishoppe of Antioch vnto him: one of these beeing after another in order and honour: and thence concludeth, that if the Bishop of An∣tioch, might bee equall to the Bishoppe of Alexandria, and the Bishoppe of Ale∣xandria to the Bishoppe of Constantinople, notwithstanding the placing of one of them, in order and honour, before another, the Bishoppe of Constantinople might bee equall to the Bishoppe of Rome, though he were the second and next after him. Soe that, that which this Treatiser alleageth, that by the confession of these Fathers, the Bishoppe of Rome had alwaies the Primacy, is to no purpose; seeing the Primacie hee had was but of order and honour, which may bee yeelded to one amongst them that are equall in power; in which sense the Bishoppes assembled in the Councell of Chalcedon, in their relation to Pope Leo, call him their head. Secondly, hee confes∣seth, it may be gathered out of some Greeke copies of this Councell (hee might haue sayd, out of all copies, Greeke and Latine) that by this Canon, the Bishop of new Rome, or Constantinople, was soe made second, after the Bishop of old Rome, that equall pri∣uiledges were giuen vnto him. But addeth, that they were onely concerning iuris∣diction, to ordaine certaine Metropolitans of the East Church, as the Bishoppe of Rome had the like in the West: which euasion serueth not the turne. For the Bishops in this Councell, supposing that the reason why the Fathers gaue the preeminence to the Bishoppe of Rome, was the greatnesse of the Citty, doe the •…•…pon giue him the like preheminences. Soe that they meant to make him equall generally, and not in some particular thinges onely. Besides, if they did equall him in iuris∣diction, and in the ordination and confirmation of Metropolitans, it will follow, that they equalled him simply, and absolutely. For in the power of Order, there canne bee noe inequalitie betweene him and any other Bishoppe. Thirdly, hee sayth, That the Canon of this Councellis of no authority: and the

like he must say of the Canons of the first Councell of Constantinople, and that in Trul∣to, and so beare downe all that standeth in his way, as c 1.5 Binnius, and other of his fel∣lowes do, who feare not to charge these holy Fathers and Bishops, with lying & fals∣hood. But how doth he proue that this Canon is of no authority? Surely, the one∣ly reason he bringeth, is, because the Legates of the Bishop of Rome, resisted against it, and the Bishop himselfe neuer confirmed it, which is of litle force. For we know, that notwithstanding the long continued resistance of the Romane Bishops, yet in the end they were forced to giue way to this constitution. So that after the time of d 1.6 Iu∣stinian the Emperour, who confirmed the same, they neuer made any word about it any more. The words of Iustinians confirmation are these. Wee ordaine, according to the decrees of the holy Councels, that the most holy Bishop of olde Rome, shall be the first of all Bishops: And the most blessed Bishop of Constantinople, which is new Rome, shall haue the second place after the See of olde Rome, and shall be before all the rest in order and honour. Neither did Martian the Emperour, as the Treatiser most vntruely avoucheth, voide the Canons of these Councels, which in this sort were confirmed afterwards by Iustinian. Wherefore seeing it is evident, that almost the whole Chri∣stian world, in diuerse Generall Councels, feared not to make another Bishop, the Bi∣shop of Romes Peere: I hope the Reader will easily discerne, that I haue not passed the bounds of modestie, nor fallen into any vnseemely scoffing and railing vaine, as the Treatiser chargeth M•…•…, when I taxe the Antichristian and Lucifer-like pride of the Romish Antichrist, who, not-with-standing the contradiction of the greatest part of the Christian world, sought to subject all the members of Christ to himselfe; and pro∣nounced them all to be in the state of damnation, that bowe not downe before him as Vice-God, and supreame commaunder on earth. But, it seemeth, hee had a great desire, at the least to seeme to say some-thing against Me. For other-wise hee would not so shamelesly be-lye Me, as he doth, when hee saith: I would deriue the beginning of the * 1.7 Popes superioritie from Phocas, whereas in the place cited by him, I haue no such thing, but the contrary. For I affirme, that in the first Councell of Constantinople, the Bishop of that citty was set in degree of honour next vnto the Bishop of Rome, and before the other two Patriarches of Alexandria and Antioche, thereby confessing. that the Bishop of Rome had the first place at that time: Which when the Constan∣tinopolitan Bishop sought to haue, Phocas so concluded matters betweene these two Bishops, that the Bishop of Rome should haue the first and chief place in the church of GOD, and Constantinople the second; so that the praeeminence & chieftie which the Pope claimeth lawfully, was ancient, and not deriued from Phocas, howsoeuer he might, and happily did enlarge and extend it farther then was fit, giuing him a kinde of vniversalitie of jurisdiction.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Pag. 73•…•….
• a 1.2

  Synodus Chalcedon. actio. 16.
• b 1.3

  De primatu Papae. lib. 2.
• * 1.4

  Pag. 123.
• c 1.5

  In notis in conc. Chalced.
• d 1.6

  Novella 100.
• * 1.7

  Pag. 1•…•…9