III. was faulty in itself; nor have we separated ourselves from the DISCOURSE conjoined communion of the Christian world in any thing. I wish the Romanists were no more guilty thereof than we. SECTION THE SECOND. Of King Henry's exemption of himself from all spiritual jurisdiction we have spoken formerly in this very chapters. [THE BRITANNIC CHURCHES WERE FREE FROM all foreign JURISDICTION FOR THE FIRST SIX HUNDRED YEARS, AND SO OUGHT TO CONTINUE.] [SECTION THE FIRST.] of the fifth cation.] THE Scope of my fifth chapter was to shew, that "the [Argument Britannic Churches were free from all foreign jurisdiction for chapter of the first six hundred years, and so ought to continueh." For the Vindithe clearing of which point I shewed, that there was a parity of power among the Apostles, and that the sovereignty did. not rest in any single Apostle, but in the Apostolical college: I shewed, that in the age of the Apostles, and the age next succeeding, the highest order in the Church, under the Apostles, were national Protarchs or Patriarchs; and by what means, and upon what grounds, in after ages, some of these Patriarchs came to be exalted above the rest and to obscure their fellowsi. perior. But each of these within their own Patriarchates did Patriarchs indepenchallenge a jurisdiction independent upon any single superior; dent upon as might be made clear by many instances. When Athan- a single suasius and Paulus procured the letters of Pope Julius for their restitution (I meddle not with the merits of the cause), the Bishops of the East "took the reprehension of Julius as a contumely;" they" called a Council at Antioch, they accused Julius sharply," and "shewed that he had nothing to do to contradict [Surv., c. iv. sect. ii. pp. 62, 63.] 152.] i Ibid., pp. 152-156.] PART them, more than they did contradict him when he thrust I. Novatus out of the Church." Neither did the great Proto Patriarchs challenge this independency only, but other lesser Patriarchs also, as St. Cyprian. When Fortunatus, Felicissimus, and others, being sentenced and excommunicated in Afric, addressed their complaint to the Bishop of Rome, let us hear what St. Cyprian said of it." What cause had they to come and relate the making of a false Bishop against" true "Bishops? Either that which they have done pleaseth them, and they persevere in their wickedness; or if it displease them, and they fall from it, they know whither to return. For whereas it is decreed by us all, and it is equal and just, that every one's cause should be heard there where the crime was committed; and a certain portion of the" Lord's "flock is assigned to each Pastor, which he is to govern, and to give an account of his actions to the Lord; therefore it behoveth those whom we are over not to run up and down, nor to break the firm concord of Bishops by their subtle and deceitful rashness, but to plead their cause there where they may have both accusers and witnesses of their crimes; unless the authority of the African Bishops, who have sentenced them already, seem to a few desperate cast-aways to be inferior"," &c. To say, with Bellarmine", that St. Cyprian speaks only of the first instance, is to contradict St. Cyprian himself, who [dicta sen- saith expressly that the cause had been "sentenced already” tentia est] in Afric. [Remaining argument of the chapter in the Vindication stated.] Then I shewed the bounds of the ancient Roman Patriarchate out of Ruffinus". The rest of the chapter may be reduced to a syllogism. Whatsoever Church or Churches were free and exempted from the foreign jurisdiction of the Roman Court from the beginning, until the general Council of Ephesus, and after until the six hundredth year of Christ, ought to continue free and exempted for ever, notwithstanding the subsequent usurpation of any foreign prelate or Patriarch. This was clearly and irrefragably proved out of the words III. of the Council itself. And if the Bishop of Rome did intrude DISCOURSE himself after that time he is a robber and an usurper, and can never prescribe to a legal possession, according to the famous rule of the law,-" Adversus furem æterna authoritas esto?." But the Britannic Churches were free and exempted from Britain enthe foreign jurisdiction of the Roman Court from the joyed the Cyprian beginning until the general Council of Ephesus, and after privilege. until the six hundredth year of Christ. This assumption was proved, First, by their silence, upon whom the proof in law doth rest; being not able to produce one instance of the exercise of their jurisdiction in Britain, or any of the Britannic Islands, for the first six hundred years, and in some parts of them scarcely for twelve hundred years. When the Pope's legate would have entered into Scotland to visit the Churches there about the year 1238, Alexander the Second, then king of the Scots, forbad him to do so, alleging, that "none of his predecessors had ever admitted any such, neither would he suffer it ;" and 201 therefore willed him at his own peril to forbear". Secondly, by priority of foundation, the Britannic Church being the elder sister, and ancienter than the Roman, and therefore could not be subject to the Roman Church from the beginning; that was, before there was a Roman Church. Thirdly, it was proved by the right of ordination and election of all our primates. For "all other right of jurisdiction doth follow" or pursue "the right of ordination:" but it is most evident, that all our British Primates, or Archbishops, were nominated and elected by our princes with synods, and ordained by their own suffragans at homet; as Dubricius, St. David, Sampson &c., not only in the reigns of Aurelius Ambrosius, and King Arthur, but even until the time of Henry the First, after the eleven hundredth year of Christ, as Giraldus Cambrensis witnesseth," Semper tamen," &c.-" Yet always until the full conquest of Wales by the king of England, Henry the First, the Bishops of Wales were consecrated by the Archbishop of St. David's; and he likewise was consecrated by [Ibid., pp. 156, 157. ex Act.] [Just Vindic., c. v. vol. i. pp. 159, 160, 161.] Matt. Paris., [Hist. Angl.,] in t [Just Vindic., c. v. vol. i. p. 160.] I. PART other Bishops as his suffragans, without professing any manner of subjection to any other Church"." But principally it was proved by the answer of Dionothus, the reverend and learned Abbot and Rector of the monastery and University of Bangor, and from the solemn sentence or decree of two British synods in the point, recorded by all our historiographers, who write the acts of those times*. Bellarmine makes the Apostles all equal in power. John xx. [21.] I confess he nibbles here and there at some odd ends of this discourse, but taketh no manner of notice of the main grounds; especially the two British synods, which are express in the point, and the answer of Dionothus-that they refused absolutely to submit to the jurisdiction of the Pope, or to receive Austin for their Archbishop; that "as for that man whom they called the Pope, they owed him no obedience but the obedience of love;" that "they were immediately, under God, subject to the Bishop of Caerleon"." But let us take a view of his exceptions. First, he saith, that "Bellarmine hath not these words," that Christ, in saying these words, "As My Father sent Me so send I you,' did endue His Apostles with all fulness of power, that mortal men were capable of1." Neither did I cite his words, but his sense, as he might see by the character; but that Bellarmine said as much or more than this, I will now make it good. Let him speak for himself. "Therefore, that the Apostles received their jurisdiction immediately from Christ, first, the words of our Lord do testify,- As My Father sent Me, so send I you,'which place the Fathers Chrysostomb and Theophylact do so expound, that they say plainly that the Apostles were made by these words the Vicars of Christ; yea, that they received the very office and authority of Christ." He addeth out of St. Cyril, that "by these words the Apostles were ... created 'Apostles and doctors of the whole world;' and type in the original edition.] b ["To pyov AUTOû." Chrys., Hom. lxxxvi (alit. lxxxv). in Joan. Evang., Op. tom. ii. p. 921. 11. 20, 21.] [“Τὸ ἔργον τὸ Ἐμόν.” Theophyl., Enarratt. in Joan. Evang., c. xx., Op. tom. i. p. 763. C. ed. Venet. 1754.] [Comment. in Joan. Evang., lib. xii. in c. xx. v. 21, pp. 1093. E. 1094. A. ed. Paris. 1638.] 202 III. that we might understand, that all ecclesiastical power is con- DISCOURSE tained in Apostolical authority, therefore Christ added, 'As My Father sent Me,' siquidem Pater misit Filium summa potestate præditum." Further he proveth out of St. Cyprian, that "whatsoever power Christ did promise or give to St. Peter, when He said, 'To thee will I give the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven,' and, 'Feed My Sheep,' He did give parem potestatem”—“an equal power to the rest of the Apostles in these words." And afterwards he calleth it "jurisdictionem plenissimam"-"a most full jurisdiction." Lay all this together, that "by these words He made them the Vicars of Christ," and "conferred upon them the very office and authority of Christ," made them "Apostles and doctors of the whole world," gave them "all ecclesiastical power," "an equal power to St. Peter's," and, lastly, “a most full jurisdiction ;"-and compare them with that which I said, "that by these words Christ gave them all the plenitude of ecclesiastical power that mortal men were capable of ;"— and if he say not more than I did, I am sure he saith no less. Is "mortal man capable of" more than the Vicariate of the Son of God, yea, of His office and authority? Can any thing be more high than that which is "highest," more full than that which is "fullest," or more universal than that which comprehends "all ecclesiastical power" within it? It had been sufficient to my purpose if he had said no more but only that it was "equal to St. Peter's." If it were needful, I might cite other places out of Bellarmine to make my words good:"Therefore the Lord left unto His Apostles" (by these words) "His own place, and would that they should enjoy His authority in governing the Kingdom"." But" Bellarmine telleth" us, "that this is meant not in respect of themselves, but in respect of" all "other men." I know Bellarmine saith so, not in this place but elsewhere'. But, First, he saith it upon his own head without any authority. None of the Fathers ever taught, that St. Peter had a |