III. claimed, that no foreign authority shall be exercised in DISCOURSE England without leave,-and then give the Pope as much authority as you please. "Volenti non fit injuria❞—' consent takes away error;' he is not wronged, who gives leave to another to wrong him. He demandeth, first, "Were not those laws in force in the [Henry beginning of Henry the Eighth's reign" ?" VIII.'s statutes de ancient Yes; but it is no strange matter to explain, or confirm, or clarative of renew, ancient laws upon emergent and subsequent abuses; laws.] as we see in Magna Charta, the Statute of Provisors, and many other statutes. Secondly, he asketh, whether "we began our religion there*;" that is, at that time when these ancient laws were made. [Not the beginning of our re ligion.] No, I have told him formerly that these statutes were only declarative what was the ancient common law of the kingdom. We "began our religion" from Joseph of Arimathea's time, before they had a Church at Rome. But it is their constant use to make the least reformation to be a new religion. Lastly, he inquireth, whether there be not "equivalent" [Paralleled 267 laws to these "in France, Spain, Germany, and Italy itself;" Catholic and yet they are "Catholics," and hold "communion with countries, the Popey." Yes, there are some such laws in all these places by him mentioned, perhaps not so many, but the liberties of the French Church are much the same with the English, as I have shewed in the Vindication"; and therefore the Pope's friends do exclude France out of the number of those countries which they term 'Pays d' obedience'-' loyal countries.' What use some other countries can make of the Papacy more than we in England, concerns not me nor this present discourse. And here, to make his conclusion answerable to his preface in this section, he cries out, "How ridiculous, how impudent a manner of speaking is this! to force his readers. to renounce their eyes and ears, and all evidence a." Nay, reader, it is not I that go about to force thee to "renounce" thy "eyes or ears" or thy "evidence," but it is he that is troubled for fear thou shouldest use thine eyes and ears to [Ibid.] [Ibid.] [Ibid.] Just Vindic., c. vii. [vol. i.] pp. [225-228.] A [Down-Derry, p. 312.] in Roman and with similar results.] I. PART look upon the evidence; and therefore, like the priests of Cybele, on purpose makes all this noise, to deaf thine ears, least thou shouldest hear the lewd cries of our laws. [Third ground stated in the Vin SECTION THE FOURTH. [Of the Fifth Chapter of the Vindication.] The scope of my fifth chapter was to shew, "that the Britannic churches" (that is, the Churches of the Britannic Islands) "were ever exempted from foreign jurisdiction for viz. that the the first six hundred years, and so ought to continue "." dication; Britannic Churches were ex empted from fo His first exception to this is, how the Britannic privileges do "belong to us?". "Have we any title from the Britannic reign juris. Churches, otherwise than by the Saxon Christians, who only diction for were our ancestors c?" &c. the first six hundred years.] Britannic privileges belong to us.] Yes, well enough. First, Wales and Cornwall have not 1. [How the only a local, but a personal succession. No man can doubt of their right to the privileges of the Britannic Churches. Secondly, there is the same reason for the Scots and Picts, who were no more subjected to foreign jurisdiction, than the Britons themselves. All these put together, Britons, Scots and Picts, did possess about two third parts of the Britannic Islands, after the Saxon conquests were consummated. Thirdly, among the Saxons themselves, the great kingdoms of Mercia and Northumberland were converted by the ancient Scots, and had their religion and ordination first from them, afterwards among themselves, without any foreign dependence, and so were as free as either Britons or Scots, and ought to continue so. Fourthly, throughout the rest of England, a world of British Christians after the conquest did still live mixed with the Saxons, such as they had no need to fear, such as might be serviceable to them, as it commonly falleth out in all conquests; otherwise the Saxons had not been able to people the sixth part of the land. Who can deny these poor conquered Christians, and their Christian posterity, though mixed with Saxons, the just privileges of their ancestors. Lastly, the Saxon conquest gave unto them as good C b [Just Vindic., c. v.] [Down-Derry, p.312. See a fuller an swer to this in Schism Guarded, sect. iv. (pp. 371-373. fol. edit.) Disc, iv. Pt. i.] III. title to the privileges, as to the lands, of the Britons, so soon as DISCOURSE they were capable of them. And so at their first conversion they were free, and continued free, and (further than themselves pleased to consent) ought to continue free for ever. British Secondly, he objecteth, that this pretended exe [mp]tion 2. [The of the British Churches is "false;" for "nothing is more evi- exemption dent in history, than that the British Churches admitted appellation to Rome at the Council of Sardica d" not disproved by the canon of the Before he can allege the authority of the Council of Sar- Sardican Council.] dica, he must renounce his Divine institution of the Papacy. For that canone submitteth it to the good "pleasure" of the Fathers; and groundeth it upon the "memory of St. Peter," not the institution of Christ. Further, how doth it appear, that the British Bishops did assent to that canon? This is merely presumption without any proof. The Council of Sardica was no general Council after all the Eastern Bishops were departed, as they were before the making of that canon. Neither were the canons of the council of Sardica ever received in England, or incorporated into the English laws; and without such incorporation they did not bind English subjects. Lastly, this canon is contradicted by the great general Council of Chalcedon, which our Church receiveth. There appeareth not the least footstep of any Papal juris268 diction exercised in England by Eleutherius, but the contrary; for he referred the legislative part to King Lucius, and the British Bishops. And if Pope Celestine had sent St. German into Britain, to free the Britons from Pelagianism, or converted some of the Scots by Palladius, as we have very little reason to believe either the one or the other, yet it maketh nothing at all for the exercise of any Papal jurisdiction in Britain. Preaching, and converting, and baptizing, and ordaining, are acts of the key of order, not of jurisdiction. But these instances, and whatsoever he hath in answer to the British observation of Easter, are pressed more home by the Bishop of Chalcedon, and clearly satisfied in my reply to him: whither I refer the reader. [Ibid., p. 313. See a fuller reply in Schism Guarded, sect. iv. (pp. 373, 374. fol. edit.).] [Concil. Sardic. can. 3. ap. Labb., Concil., tom. ii. pp. 628, 629.] [Concil. Chalced. P. ii. Act. xv. can. 9. ap. Labb., Concil., tom. iv. p. 759. See Schism Guarded, as quoted in note d.] [Above] c. v. [sect. 4, 5. pp. 168, 176, &c.] PART I. 3. [No But (saith he) "that which is mainly to the purpose is, that since this privilege" (he meaneth the supremacy) "descends upon the Pope as successor to St. Peter, how far it was executed may be unknown, but that it was due, none can monarchy be ignorant "." title in the Pope to a spiritual as St. Pe ter's suc cessor.] [The answer of Dionothus.] Words are but wind, when they are utterly destitute of all manner of proof. We acknowledge the Pope to be successor of St. Peter, and (if he do not forfeit it by his own fault) we are ready to pay him such respect as is due to the Bishop of an Apostolical Church; but for any spiritual monarchy, or universal jurisdiction, we know no manner of title that he hath. His pretence is more from Phocas the usurper, than from St. Peter. And here, though I know not this hereditary privilege of the Pope descended from St. Peter (there is no knowledge of that which hath no being), and the burden of proving it lies upon him, yet he taxeth me for leaving it, and spending my time about the Pope's "Patriarchal" power. I observe how ready they are all to decline all manner of discourse concerning the Pope's Patriarchal power; and yet, for a long time, it was the fairest flower in their garland. I know not what is the reason, but we may well conjecture,because they find, that their spiritual monarchy and this Patriarchal dignity are inconsistent the one with the other in the same subject. They might as well make a king to be a sheriff of a shire, or a president of a particular province within his own kingdom, as make a spiritual monarch to be a Patriarch. And yet a Patriarch he was, and so always acknowledged to be; and they cannot deny it. Among other proofs of the British liberty, I produced the answer of Dionothus to Austin,-no obscure person, as he makes him, but a man famous for his learning, Abbot and Rector of the famous University of Bangor, wherein there were at that time above two thousand one hundred monks and students, at the very close of the first six hundred years, -that he knew no obedience due to him whom they called the Pope, but obedience of love; and that under God they were to be governed by the Bishop of Caerleon *.' This record he calleth " a piece of a worn Welsh manu h [Down-Derry, p. 313.] 1 [Ibid.] [See Just Vindic., c. v. vol. i. p. 162. note q.] script'," and a "manifest forgery" of a "counterfeit knavem." DISCOURSE And to prove it counterfeit, he produceth three reasons. III. put abso First, that the word "Pope' without any addition is put for 1. ["Pope" the Bishop of Rome;" which "if our great antiquaries can lutely at shew" in these days, he will "confess himself surprised "." that time for the Bi I shall not need to trouble any of "our great antiquaries" shop of Rome.] about it. It will suffice to commit him and his friend Cardinal Bellarmine together about it. I see, friends are not always of one mind. Thus he,-"Cum absolute pronunciatur Papa, ipse solus intelligitur, ut patet ex consilio Chalcedonensi Beatissimus et Apostolicus vir Papa hoc nobis præcipit;' nec additur Leo, aut Romanus, aut urbis Romæ, aut aliquid aliud"—" When the word 'Pope' is put alone, the Bishop of Rome only is to be understood, as appeareth out of the Council of Chalcedon, 'The most blessed and Apostolical man the Pope doth command us this;' neither is there added Pope Leo, or the Pope of Rome, or the Pope of the city of Rome, or any other thing "." ric of Caer His second exception hath no more weight than the 2. [How former, that "there was no such Bishopric" as Caerleon in the Bishopthose days, the see "being translated fifty years before that leon put for to St. David's P." Where is the contradiction? The name of the old diocese is Caerleon. The new see or throne was the new Abbey Church erected at Menevia, which place posterity called St. David's. But St. David's could not be called St. David's whilst he himself lived; nor afterward, until custom and tract of time had confirmed such an appellation. Some would make us believe, that St. David and St. Gregory died 269 upon the same day, and then he was still living when Dinoth gave this answer 9. But let that be as it will, for it is not much material, St. David after the translation of his see died Archbishop of Caerleon; "Tunc obiit sanctissimus Urbis Legionum Archiepiscopus David in Meneviæ civitate," &c.— "Then died the most holy Archbishop of Caerleon, St. David, that of St. David's.] |