Anti-Mortonus or An apology in defence of the Church of Rome. Against the grand imposture of Doctor Thomas Morton, Bishop of Durham. Whereto is added in the chapter XXXIII. An answere to his late sermon printed, and preached before His Maiesty in the cathedrall church of the same citty..

SECT. III. Whether the eight generall Councell condemned the Saturday fast, allowed by the Roman Church.

YOu tell vs(o) 1.1 that, we may vnderstand from our Binius, that these Bishops (of the eight generall Councell) condemned a custome of the saboth fast in lent, then vsed in the Church of Rome: and therupon, made they a Canon inhibiting the Church of Rome, from keeping that custome any longer. And you adde(p) 1.2: This Canon (sayth your Surius) is not receaued, because it reprehendeth the Church of Rome, the mother-Church of all other Churches. So you: And your readers, especially of the vulgar sort, by this your expression, what will they conceaue, but that the Ro∣man Church did in those tymes fast the Sundayes in Lent? for as by the Saboth day Protestants, especially the vulgar, vnderstand no other day but Sunday, so by the Saboth fast, what will they vnderstand, but the Sunday fast, which was neuer vsed, nor allowed in the Roman Church, but con∣demned in the Councell of Gangra, as an hereticall obser∣uation of the Eustathians(q) 1.3.

The fast which this Canon inhibiteth is the Saturday fast, which, as then it was, so, notwithstanding this Canon, is still vsed by the Roman Church in Lent, and not prohi∣bited out of Lent.

Nor was that Canon made by the eight generall Coū∣cell, to whom you ignorantly ascribe it, but by the Trullan Synod, as Binius, and Surius testify; whom therfore you abuse, in fathering on them your owne ignorant mistake of the Trullan Synod, for the eight generall Councell. And so much the more, because both of them, with all Ca∣tholike Diuines, hold the Trullan Canons to be illegiti∣mate, and of no force: for as much, as no Legates of Sergius then Pope, were present at that Synod, nor was it assem∣bled by his authority, or consent, but absolutely reproued, and condemned by him, notwithstanding the barbarous violence of Soldiers, and other meanes vsed by the Empe∣tor,

to extort a confirmation from him, and his successors, as Venerable Bede(r) 1.4 who liued at that tyme, Paulus Diaco∣nus(s) 1.5 and other historians testify, and you may read in Baronius(t) 1.6, Bellarmine(u) 1.7, Binius(x) 1.8, and Canus(y) 1.9; who rightly obserue, that as not by the Pope, so neither by any of the Patriarkes of the East, nor by any authority of antiquity it hath bene receaued, as a true Councell, but held to be (and so Bede(z) 1.10 calls it) Erratica Synodus, An erring Sy∣nod; in so much, that the Greeke Historians, Theophanes, Zonaras, Cedrenus, Glycas, and others, thought best to bu∣ry it in silence, neuer reckoning it among the Councells, nor making any mention at all of it. And with great rea∣son: for how Almighty God punished both the wicked Patriarke Calinicus, and the Emperor, who pleaseth may read in Baronius(a) 1.11.

All which being true, as it is, it must follow, that you shew great ignorance, or els lack of Conscience, in attribu∣ting to the eight generall Councell a decree of this im∣pious Conuenticle, and obiecting it against a religious cu∣stome of the Saturday fast in Lent, piously obserued by the Roman Church, from the Apostles tyme. If it be an abuse, why did not the seauen first Oecumenicall Councels take notice of it? Do not the Greeke authors with one voyce cry out, that in thinges of this nature which are not repug∣nant to fayth, or good manners, the variety of ancient cu∣stomes vsed in diuers Churches is to be obserued? And did not S. Hierome, being consulted about this very custome of the Saturday fast, long before the Trullan Synod, ans∣weare(b) 1.12, Let euery countrey abound in their owne sense, and reue∣rence the precepts of their Fore-fathers, as Apostolicall lawes? And did not S. Ambrose(c) 1.13 in this very particular, aduise Moni∣ca S. Augustines Mother, to obserue the custome of what∣soeuer place she was in? And do not both he, and S. Augu∣stine(d) 1.14 professedly proue against you, and such as you are, that wheras the Easterne Church from the tyme of the A∣postles fasted not, but feasted on Saturdayes, contrary to the custome of the Westerne Church, both of them did it, vpon good and pious considerations, declared by the ancient Fa∣thers

(e) 1.15? And doth not S. Augustine(f) 1.16 shew, that variety to be a singular ornament to the Church? And do not the Councells of Agatha(g) 1.17, and Eliberis(h) 1.18, subscribe to that custome of the Roman, & other Westerne Churches? What authority then, had those Trullan Bishops to make them∣selues Iudges of the Roman Church, and of all the Chur∣ches of the West, ouer whom they had no authority, as your selfe well knoweth?

And hereby is discouered your folly, that not contenting your selfe with proposing heere this Argument so imperti∣nent, and friuolous, you repeate it afterwards againe say∣ing(i) 1.19 that, S. Augustine approuing the custome of the Easterne Church, wounds the Papacy, and signifies that the Roman Church had not then any peremptory authority to determine all causes: for the Roman Church then did, and still doth allowe variety of Customes in diuers Churches, though sometimes contrary to her owne, when they are not repugnant to fayth or good manners. Such was the Easterne custome of not ob∣seruing the Saturday-fast, which therfore she allowed. How then doth S. Augustine wound the Papacy, in al∣lowing the Oriental••s to obserue their custome, since the Roman Church agreeth with him, in allowing the same? To proue out of S. Augustine that the Roman Church had not then authority to determine all Ecclesiasticall causes, you should haue shewed, that he held endlesse, and indeter∣minable any cause, which she had once determined; or that he allowed, what she had once condemned: which whiles you do not, you spend your breath in vaine.

Finally, wheras you aske(k) 1.20 Whether the Church of Rome would at this day swallow, and disgest such an hoat morsell, as the Trull an decree was, you insinuate, that then she could, and did swallow that morsell: which how false it is, you haue heard; since neither Sergius Pope, nor any of his successors, could euer be brought to confirme that deceee, or the Sy∣nod that made it; which alone sheweth the transcendent authority of the Roman Church in those dayes; for want of whose allowance, and confirmation, that Synod was then, and euer since hath bene reproued, as an impious Assem∣bly:

whose decrees therfore you are ill aduised to obiect in fauor of your cause, against the Roman Church.

Notes

• (o) 1.1

  Pag. 1••7.
• (p) 1.2

  Ibid.
• (q) 1.3

  See Spond. anno 319. n. 9.
• (r) 1.4

  L D•• sex aetat, in iusti∣nian. iuniore.
• (s) 1.5

  L. 6. e. 4.
• (t) 1.6

  Anno 692
• (u) 1.7

  L. 1. de
• (x) 1.8

  Tom. 3. pag. 152.
• (y) 1.9

  L. 5. de loc. c. vlt.
• (z) 1.10

  Loco cis.
• (a) 1.11

  Anno 691.
• (b) 1.12

  Ep. 28.
• (c) 1.13

  Spond. anno 384. n. 6.
• (d) 1.14

  Apud S. Aug. ep. 86.
• (e) 1.15

  Apud Baro. an. 692.
• (f) 1.16

  Loco cit.
• (g) 1.17

  C. 22.
• (h) 1.18

  C. 26.
• (i) 1.19

  Pag. 220. 221.
• (k) 1.20

  Pag. 127.