Roman-Catholick doctrines no novelties, or, An answer to Dr. Pierce's court-sermon, miscall'd The primitive rule of Reformation by S.C. a Roman-Catholick.

CHAP. V. (Book 5)

The Doctor obliged to acknowledge Submission due to the Pope's Au∣thority, as exercised during the four General Councils. Of the Title of Universal Bishop. It is not generally admitted at this day.

1. HIs main Position in his forecited Dis∣course on this Argument is:

That a Supremacy of Iurisdiction challenged and exercised by the Pope, as Successor of St. Pe∣ter, is a visible usurpation ever since Boni∣face the Third, to whom it was sold by the Ty∣rant Phocas:

that is, it began about the year 606.* 1.1 never before that time having been ac∣knowledged in God's Church. To prove this, all the foregoing Reasons and Allegati∣ons are produced by him: From this usurpe•• Authority, his English Church (forsooth) hath made a Secession, as he demurely Phrases it, and not from any Authority (if any were) exercised by former Popes, especially during

the times of the four first General Councils. A Primacy of Order he is content to allow him, but by no means a Supremacy of Iurisdi∣ction.

2. Whatsoever Authority then the Prede∣cessors of Pope Boniface the Third by consent of other Churches enjoy'd, especially till the end of the fourth General Council, he must grant is no usurpation, and therefore a Le∣gal rightful Authority, from which, with∣out a formal Schism, they could not with∣draw themselves. He will not surely say with one of their learned Bishops, That they take from the Pope his lawful Christian Authority, and give that (only) to the King, not his un∣lawful and Antichristian. So that the Con∣troversy between us is reduced to this precise point,

Whether before Boniface the Third's time the Pope enjoyed a Supreme Iurisdiction over the Catholic Church.

This he denies. On the contrary I here engage my self not on∣ly to prove he had it, but moreover, that not the least degree or Iota of Iurisdiction will be impos'd on them to acknowledge, for enjoy∣ing the Communion of the Catholic Church more than the very same that Pope Boniface's Predecessors within the times of the four first General Councils confessedly exercised. I may adde, that the new usurped Title, (as he says) sold to him by Phocas, did not give him, nei∣ther did he pretend to by it, any more au∣thority than himself and his Predecessors for∣merly

enjoy'd. And this is I be able to make good, then not all the water in the Sea will be able to wash off his Churches Schism by his own confession.

3. Before I shew what Supremacy the Pre∣decessor's of Boniface the Third exercised in the Church, it will be convenient to enquire into the Bargain that, He says, Boniface made with Phoca••; what he gain'd by it; and why his Predecessors St. Gregory the Great, and P••lagius refused it.

The Patriark of Constantinople, Iohn, out of an humor of lightness and vanity, proper to the Grecians, assumed the Title of [Episcopus universalis, or O••cumenicus] Vniversal Bi∣shop, or Bishop of the whole World: A Title that the Council of Chalcedon had in an E∣pistle given to Pope Leo, but which his Suc∣cessors like't not. Certain it is that Iohn in∣tended little more by it, but to be a distinction of honor and preference above the other Ea∣stern Patriarks: For whilst he took that title, he still acknowledg'd the Pope's Superiority, not only of place, but authority over him. But be∣ing Bishop in a City, wherein the Emperor of the world resided, he thought it not unbecomming him to be called the Bishop of the world, as the Emperor was the Governor. Perhaps indeed his Successors, (if this ambition had been ei∣ther approv'd, or but conn••v'd at by the West) would have endeavour'd to make it not a meer empty Title, but would have invaded an

Authority, which the Title might seem to warrant. Hereupon Pope Pelagius and after him Pope Gregory the Great did vehemently resist this foolish ambition of Iohn, though the Emperor himself, to gain a dignity to his own City, favor'd it in him.

4. Now the Arguments that these two good Popes made use of against him, did not so much combate Iohns present intention (though his meer vain-glory and affectation of Novelty deserved to be repressed) as the probable consequences of such a Title, which might argue, that besides himself there were no Bishops in the Church: For if he were the Vniversal Bishop, and the whole world his Diocess, since by the Canons there can be but one Bishop in a place, it would follow that all others were only Bishops in name, and by their Character had no other office but as his Substitutes depending on his will, whereas the Apostles received their Office and Autho∣rity immediately from our Lord himself: And so their Successors, the Bishops, would never acknowledge a receiving their Episcopal cha∣racter and right of Iurisdiction from any but Christ himself. For, as in other Sacraments, whoever administers Baptism, whether an A∣postle or an Heretic, Baptismus solius Christi¦est, says Saint Augustin: And again, Peter and Iohn (sayth he) pray'd that the Holy Ghost might come on those upon whom they im∣posed their hands, they did not give the Holy

Ghost (Acts 8.) They, as his Substitutes apply the outward Element, but the inward vertue of the Sacrament is administred only by our Lord himself. And as a Subject that receives ••n Office of Iurisdiction from the King, will not esteem he derives that Authority from the Person, who presents him the Letters patents, or invests him ceremoniously in the Office, but only the King. So though a particular Bishop be ordained by a Metropolitan, a Primat, a Patriarc, or by the Pope himself, and Iuris∣diction given him, they indeed are the Mini∣sters of Christ to convey his Characters and Authority, they assign him the place in which he is to exercise that Authority, but the inhe∣rent Authority it self Christ only gives him.

5. Upon these grounds Pope Pelagius thus argues.* 1.2 [Vniversalitatis quoque nomen, &c.] Do not give heed to the name of Vni∣versality that John of Constantinople hath un∣lawfully usurped, &c. For none of the Patri∣triarks did ever make use of so profane a Title: Because if [the Bishop of Rome] the Supreme Patriark be call'd an universal Patriark, the Title would be taken away from the rest. But God forbid this should happen, &c. It therefore John be permitted to take this Title, the honor of all Patriarks is deny'd, and probably he, who is called Vniv••rsal, will perish in his error, and there will not be found one Bishop in the state of Truth. The very same arguments he knows St. Gregory makes use of in several Epistles

both to the Emperor, to Iohn himself, and o∣thers, which being already produc'd by him need not be repeated. Yet for all this nei∣ther Pelagius nor St. Gregory, notwithstand∣ing their detesting this Title, did therefore quit their right to the Vniversal Pastorship of the Church, and their Iurisdiction over all both Bishops and Patriarks too: nay they assert it in these very Epistles, wherein they are most sharp against that Title, as shall be shew'd.

6. The reason of this, 'tis manifest, the Prea∣cher does not understand: therefore let him not disdain to be inform'd. The like Or∣der that is observ'd in the Church of England, he may conceive, is observed in the Catholic Church: that is, that the same person may be both a Bishop, an Archbishop, and a Primat; I will add also the Supreme head of the Church, as the Archbishop of Canterbury is among Ec∣c••esiasticks: [For as for his Majestys Suprema∣cy in Ecclesiastical affairs, it is not in this place to be treated of.] Now my Lord of Canter∣bury is just like other Bishops, merely a Bishop in his Diocese of Canterbury: He is likewise a Metropolitan in his Province to visit all Bi∣shops in it, but he is not a Bishop in the other Dioceses subject to him; for in them none have Episcopal right but only the respective Bishops themselves, which are not removeable by him, unlesse they incur crimes that by the Ca∣nons deserve it. Lastly, he is a Primat over both Provinces, that is, the whole Nation, yet

without prejudice to the other Metropolitan, in whose office of Visitation and Ordinations he cannot interpose; though he have a power to summon him to a National Council, &c. And in this regard he may be stiled the Vni∣versal Pastor of England, and, by being so, makes the Church of England to be one Na∣tional Church, which otherwise would have two Episcopal heads. Yet if any one should stile▪ him the Vniversal Bishop of England, it would not be endured, because he can exer∣cise Functions properly Episcopal in no other Province or Diocese but his own. By conside∣ring this well, the Doctor may more clearly apprehend how matters stand in the Catholic Church.

7. For, though this Title of Vniversal Bi∣shop taken in some sense, might draw after it such ill consequences, yet being apply'd to the Supreme Pastor of God's Church, it might innocently signifie no more but such a general Superintendency, as the Scriptures allow to St. Peter, and the Canons of the Church also have acknowledged due to his Successors, and with such an innocent meaning (as this Title was used long before in the 3d. Act of the Council of Chalcedon, without any contradi∣ction of the same Council to Pope Leo) Boni∣face the Third did accept it from Phocas: yet having done so, it seems to me apparent that he neither exercised nor challenged the least access of Iurisdiction by it more than

himself and his Predecessors had enjoy'd. And of this the Doctor himself shall be Judge. If he can find any proof to the con∣trary, let him produce it, and I will immedi∣ately recall what I have said.

'Tis true, as appears in the History of the Council of Trent, written by the Illustrious and learned Cardinal Palavicino;* 1.3 that there was in that Council an earnest and constant opposition made by the French Prelates a∣gainst naming the Pope, Bishop of the Vniversal Church, who, in conclusion, absolutely gain∣ed the silencing of that Title: But this hap∣pened not because these denied to the Pope an Universal Superintendency over the whole Church, or over all Churches taken disjun∣ctively, for this they willingly acknowledged; but they opposed this Title only as the Univer∣sal Church might be taken in a collective sense, that is to say, as united in a General Council, whereby a right of Superiority over a Gene∣ral Council may seem to be determin'd to the prejudice of the Decisions of the Councils of Constance and Basil, which in this matter they allowed.

Notes

• * 1.1

  A. D. 606.
• * 1.2

  Pelag. 2 Epist.
• * 1.3

  Card. Palav. Hist. del. Conc. de Trento. lib. 19. c. 15, 16, &c. lib. 20. c. 3. 9, &c. lib. 21. c. 4, &c.