WHosoever shall read the New Testament, will there find that Jesus Christ alone is establish­ed as Head of the Church, and that it is not said of any other, that she should be his Body, or Believers his Members, that belonging to none but Jesus Christ, who is also the only Spouse of the Church, which would be adulterous should she sub­mit to another; and this other could not be but an evil person, and a reprobate, since that in taking the quality of Spouse of the Church, he must renounce that of Son of the Church, and so could not have God for his Father, according to the Maxim, That he who hath not the Church for his Mother, hath not God for his Father. Now no one person can be the Head, the Spouse and Son of the Church at the same time. Nevertheless it is certain that the Popes do assume these Titles to themselves by a vanity which exceeds all folly, and without being able to produce any reason for it, Divine or Humane. But let us see what they say to maintain their pretensions.

They say that among the Jews one man only, viz. Aaron, had the conduct of Divine Service, and was Head of the Levites, and [Page 2] that by consequence there ought to be in the Christian Church an Authority like unto this, Established over the whole Church; and that the Bishops of Rome perform the Functions of this charge. Whereupon there are many things to be said: First of all, it was not difficult for Aaron to acquit himself of this in so little a State as Judea, and in one only City of this State, which was Jerusalem, and in one only T [...]mple of that City; for it was not allowed to perform Divine Service, nor to Sacrifice elsewhere; whereas Chri­stianity is at this time spread over the whole world, and therefore one single person only cannot perform these Functions every where. It is as if a man should say, that because France is well governed by one King, he might as well govern all the States of the habitable Earth; and yet it would be much more easie for him to do it, than for one Bishop to govern the whole Church, because (as it is well known) the Ecclesiastical Ministry cannot inflict Corporal punish­ments upon Delinquents as the Civil Government may and does. Besides, Aaron was no way the Figure of the Bishops of Rome; for then the Type would have been more excellent than the Original; but he was the Figure of our Great and Soveraign High Priest Jesus Christ. Furthermore, Aaron was not the Monarch of the Levites, but as the Doge is at Venice; for according to all the Tal­mudists, he was subject to the Jurisdiction of the Great Sanhedrim, and to their Censure; whereas the Popes pretend to be not only the Monarchs of the whole Earth, but particularly of all the Cler­gy. And besides all this, there was an express institution of God for this charge, and for the person of Aaron, and of his Successors. Whereas there is nothing like it for the Papacy, nor for the persons of those who exercise it. We see in the Old Testament the Institution of Aaron's Charge with many Ceremonies for his Installment, and for his anointing; many Ordinances for the Exercise of this Charge, and for the Succession; many Chapters which speak of the Subordination of Priests and Levites. But on the contrary we find not one word in the Gospel of this pretended charge of Uni­versal Head of the Church, of Vicar-General of Jesus Christ, and Successor of St. Peter, nor any thing that hath any relation to it; and yet it ought to have been there clear and evident, since that this Ministry was to be of an extent a thousand times greater, and the thing in it self is prodigious, and appears quite contrary to the nature of the Messias his Kingdom, and to the Gospel. We see several Orders of Ministers of the Gospel, there [Page 3] often spoken of; but not one word that can any ways relate to the Pope; when surely that was the place to have spoken of it, especially if it be necessary to Salvation to be subject to him, as they would have it, and if he hath the power as they would per­swade us, as well over the Temporality as the Spirituality of the whole world; St. Paul who without question was of as great abi­lity as the Pope, was not of these peoples humour, who pretend to govern the whole Church; since he who had not the thousandth part of Christians to take care of, as the Pope would have accor­ding to their supposition, declares that no Mortal man was sufficient to perform every thing that was necessary to be done in it, and that he was himself overwhelmed with the care he took for all the Churches. Nor had St. Peter the courage of our good Popes, who believe themselves capable of governing the whole Church, (and they might do it without difficulty after the method they take) since he agreed with St. Paul, that St. Paul should go toward the Gentiles, and he towards the Jews, and so they parted the Ministry between them. At least the Popes, after Aarons example, ought to meddle only in Ecclesiastical, and not in Secular affairs, as they do, pretending to Lord it over the whole world; for we see that Aaron applied himself only to the Functions of his Charge, and that in things Temporal and Civil he was subject to Moses, and left the Absolute direction of them to him.

Instead of imitating Aaron, the Head of the Levites, in his Modesty, the Popes pretend to be Lords not only of the Temporality, but of the Spirituality, of all the States of the world, and will in this be Vicars of Jesus Christ, tho he declared that his Kingdom was not of this world, tho he taught his Disciples, that he among them who would be the first, should be the last, though he fled away when they would have made him a King, tho he payed Tribute to the Princes of the world, when he was himself Lord both of Hea­ven and Earth; tho he expresly forbad his Disciples to bear rule over any one whatsoever.

The Popes notwithstanding this, will govern, and pretend that our Saviour did amiss when he spoke thus, and that they know better than he how to improve the rights of his Prerogative. For my part, I believe that such a King as Jesus Christ who holds the Earth in his hand, according to the Prophet's expression, who up­holds all things by the power of his word, as St. Paul says, who knows the hearts of all men, and governs the motions of all the [Page 4] creatures; who is Almighty, who knows and sees every thing, without whom no man can have neither life, motion, nor being; such a King, I say, hath no need of a Vicar-General for the Spiri­tual. Government of the Church, because he is present in all places, no more than an Husband needs a Vicar for his Wife, or a living Father for his Children; and that he himself assureth us that where two or three are gathered together in his name, there will he be in the midst of them. If he hath a Vicar-General, he can be no other than the Holy Ghost. We also see that when he was upon the point of leaving his poor Disciples who were afflicted by reason of his ap­proaching departure from them, he tells them not, I will leave you the Pope to guide and govern you, which had been but a poor consola­tion: But, I will send you the Comforter, who shall lead you in all truth.

And if we consider in what the administration of this Spiritual Kingdom doth consist, we shall clearly see that no one mortal man can be the Vicar-General of it: Can one only man preach the Go­spel, and administer the Sacraments all the world over? They tell you, that he will make it be done by others, (would to God the Popes would do so) but these Delegated Preachers would be thus the Popes Vicars, who pretends to be the Vicar of Jesus Christ, and sometimes of St. Peter; which cannot be according to all the Canonists, who maintain that one Vicar cannot make another; be­sides, that the Ecclesiastical Ministry, properly speaking, cannot be subdelegated to Vicars; for whosoever discharges it, ought always to perform it in Preaching, or Ex [...]rcising the other Episcopal Fun­ctions in the name of Jesus Christ, and not in the name of any creature; and a man must be a fool or a seducer to do otherwise. A meer man, as the Pope is, can he fill the souls of men with peace and joy in the Holy Ghost, which is the Kingdom of Jesus Christ? Can he def [...]nd the Church against all its enemies, visible and invisible? Can he give the Crown of Righteousness to those who shall be victorious and faithful to God to the death? Can he raise them up again? These are Acts of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ over his Church. What relation hath the Dominion of the Pope to that of Jesus Christ? What resemblance between light and darkness? between Jesus Christ and Belial?

Thus it is evident that it is without any foundation that the Bi­shops of Rome boast of being Vicars of Jesus Christ; th [...]y are no more so, then the meanest Priest of the Church; and it was with reason that the Council of Basil Aeneas Silv. in Gest. Conc. Basil. maintained to them, that they [Page 5] were not Vicars of Jesus Christ, but of the Church, as every Cu­rate is in his Parish, Pontifex Vicarius Ecclesiae, non Christi. Neverthe­less they maintain that St. Peter had this Employ of Universal Vi­car, that he was Head of the Apostles, and of the whole Church, Bishop of Bishops, Soveraign both of Spirituality and Temporality, Monarch of the Church, and of the World. In a word, that he had all the Prerogatives that the Popes at this present time enjoy, in quality of Successors of St. Peter. And that, as I have said, with­out being able to produce so much as one word, of the Creation and Institution of this Charge so important to the Church, if you will believe them, nor of the Rights of this Charge, nor of the Succession, nor of the manner of the Election, nor how so mar­vellous a Charge ought to be Exercised, nor of the respect and obedience due to this Vicar, nor of the use of his Office. They affirm boldly that St. Peter was at Rome, that he was Bishop there, That he founded that Church, That he died there, and left a Suc­cessor, who was called Clement or Linus, or Anacletus; of which things, tho they make the Salvation of all men to depend upon them, they are not able to prove one tittle. And they do affirm that this Successor entered into the full possession of all the Privi­ledges of St. Peter, to which all the Bishops of that City have ever since equally succeeded, both good and bad, unto the present Pope Innocent the Eleventh.

It must be readily acknowledged, that these Gentlemen must have very penetrating understandings to make these discoveries from the Gospel; for it is certain that they are wholly impercepti­ble there; I have sometimes read it without ever finding any thing that was at all like it, and I think I saw clearly that St. Peter never knew he had this Authority, but that on the contrary he believed that no Christian whatever, much less a Bishop, ought to have it in the Church; nor did the other A [...]ostles know it any more than he, for somewhat of it would then appear; and they who protest they have made known to us the whole will of God, would have been extreamly to blame not only to have declared nothing of it to us, but also to have always spoken and acted with their Soveraign Head and Master, as with an Equal. And St. Paul would have lost all manner of respect for him when he so warmly reproved him. It seems probable also that our Saviour was obliged to have given them notice of it; for naturally they could not know it; and the Modesty, Charity, and Humility of St. Peter might have hindred [Page 6] him from declaring and exercising this Empire over them; yet it is certain that there is nothing like this to be found. Nevertheless this doth not hinder but that the Pope and Cardinals whose eyes their own interest opens, as it blinds other peoples, have in their own opinions found very strong proofs of it in the New Testa­ment: They say for example, that our Saviour changed only St. Peter's name; the reason as you see is without reply; for it follows very necessarily from thence, that St. Peter was the Head and King of the Church. But unluckily he also changed the names of the Children of Zebedee. They say also that he is sometimes named the first; but if he be not so always, this will signifie nothing to them; but tho he had been always so, this would not prove that he had authority over the others as the Pope hath over the other Bishops. Amongst the Presidents, the first hath no power over the others; nor amongst the Electors of the Empire; the Elector of Mentz, who hath the first place, hath no authority over the other Electors; and so in all Societies the Primacy carries no dominion along with it: But besides, if that reason should take place, the Holy Virgin, who is sometimes named the last in Scripture, would be greatly degraded from the place that belongs to her. If St. Peter were always named the first, that might have been given to his Age, as the Fathers say; and in truth we ought to attribute it to this, that our Saviour spoke so often to him, as well as to the fervency of his zeal, which as we ought to admire and commend, so also may we say that it was owing to the eagerness of his temper, which being not always well regulated, made him commit greater faults than any others of the Apostl [...]s (except the perfidious Judas) which made him be called Satan by his good Master, which none of the other were. We ought also to attribute to this temper the blow he gave Malchus with the Sword, as well as that warmth that made him promise wonders of Fidelity to his Master, and in­duced him to accompany him to the Emperors Court, where he denied his Saviour. So that it is with very little reason that they make an argument of this to prove his Royalty in the Church. In Spain, where the most Honourable walk the last, they will not fail to alledg places where St. Peter is named last, as in the passage where it is said, I am the Disciples of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Caephas, who is Peter. For I remember that at Paris, where they understand Divinity a little better than in Spain, a good Bishop and an Abbot did maintain to me, that the passage where it is said [Page 7] that James, Peter and John are esteemed Pillars of the Church, I ha­ving alledged against them another where he is named the first, they maintained to me I say, that this passage confirmed that which they alledged and proved very well the Primacy of St. Peter. For said the Bishop, when three persons of worth are walking together, they always put the most Honourable in the middle. This is accor­ding to the common saying, That a Lawyer well paid shall always find the cause of his Client, good: His Benefices made him see clear in this passage.

There are three other passages which the greatest part of our Doctors produce against our Adversaries with a little more colour, which are, Thou art Peter, &c. I will give thee the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, &c. Feed my sheep. Which passages we shall examine one after an­other, to see if St. Peter had any priviledg above the other Apo­stles; they say, that in the first of these passages Jesus Christ doth establish the Church, found it, and built it upon St. Peter. I do not deny but that St. Peter was one of the Pillars of the Church, be­cause he is so called as well as James and John. Nor can it be de­nied, but that he was and is one of the foundations of the Church, since that he is not excepted out of the number of the Twelve, who in Scripture are called the Foundations of the New Jerusa­lem. But I maintain that the Church is no more founded upon him, than upon St. Paul, and the other Apostles. I would fain have these Gentlemen tell me, upon whom the Church was founded be­fore St. Peter? and why the Church changed its foundation, and upon whom Peter himself was founded? It was without doubt up­on Jesus Christ, upon the Rock which is the Christ. And it is with­out all question that St. Peter and we ought to have no other foun­dation than that which St. Paul had, who says, That no man can lay any other foundation than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Also we see in this passage, that it is upon the Rock, upon the Rock of Ages, that our Saviour builds his Church, and not upon St. Peter. The Holy Ghost would have changed neither name nor person, if he would have had us to have believed this of St. Peter. He would not have said, Super hanc Petram, sed super te Petrum. Vpon this Rock, but upon thee Peter.

To the end that no difficulty may remain, we must observe what goes before, and what follows after. Jesus Christ had deman­ded of all the Apostles together, whom they thought he was? Peter either as the eldest or most zealous answers for all, and says to him, [Page 8] Thou art the Christ the Son of the living God. Whereupon Jesus Christ says to him, Thou art Peter, and upon this Rock will I build my Church, &c. It is evident that as our Saviour's discourse was directed to all, and that Peter answered for all; the following part of our Saviours Discourse was directed also to them all, and related no more to Peter than to any other particular Apostle. And men must have lost their understandings to think, that Jesus Christ in this place founded his Church upon Peter, whom in the same Chapter he calls Satan. What Foundation would the Church have had, and what would have become of her when he deni'd his Saviour?

It must then necessarily be acknowledged, that it is not the visi­ble Church that is here spoken of, which they pretend St. Peter to be the Head of: But the Invisible, the Society of the Faithful, and the Elect. For the Gates of Hell would have prevailed against the Church, not only when St. Peter denied his Master, since that the foundation being run to decay, that which is built upon it falls to ruin: But since that time have they not very often prevailed against this Church which they would have the Bishops of Rome the pre­tended Successors of St. Peter to be the Heads of? For Example, when according to the Fathers the whole World was Arian [...]otus Or­bis se Aria­num esse mi­ratus est. Hieron., the Bishops of Rome and all their Flock; and so many other times as the Popes have been Magicians, Sodomites, Atheists, Hereticks, &c. And what would have become of the Church in the time of that great Schism that succeeded Gregory the Ninth, which lasted fifty years, when the French would not have an Italian Pope, nor the Italians a French one; and many Princes would have neither one nor other; to whom at length Charles the Sixth joined himself for three years, and the Kingdom of France was very well conten­ted without a Pope; and many other Princes for a longer season. And what shall we say of that great Schism which the Popes made and caused with the Greek Church, by cutting them off, out of De­vilish pride, from the Communion of the Church, because they would not submit to their yoke, but demanded the observation of the Canons? What shall we say also of that great Apostacy that happened about 130 or 140 years since, or thereabout, when so many States separated themselves from the Church, by reason of the Impiety and Tyranny of the Popes? Doth not all this prove that Hell hath prevailed against this exterior and visible Church, which the Popes govern, and whereof St. Peter according to them was the Head? It is then the Invisible Church which is here spoken [Page 9] of the Society of the Faithful, the Heavenly Jerusalem, whereof Je­sus Christ is the principal Corner-stone, upon which St. Peter him­self saith believers are built as living stones. He says not it is on himself that they are built, but on the contrary, he pretends himself as well as others, to be one of these living stones which are built upon the Corner-stone, which is Christ. It is then upon the Rock confessed by Simon Peter, or upon his Confession that the Church is founded; on that which he declared that Jesus Christ was the true Messias, the Son of the Living God. And the Fathers understood it no otherwise. I do not pretend here to relate all that they have said upon this subject, but only some clear passages: Origen in Mar. chap. 16. Tract. 1. Origen upon St. Matthew tells us, That if we say as Peter did, Thou art the Christ, &c. we are also what St. Peter was; and that it shall be also said unto us what follows, Thou art Peter. For whosoever is the Disciple of Christ, the same is also Peter. And Cypri. de simplicitate Praelat. St. Cyprian shews very well, that he did not believe that St. Peter was priviledged beyond the other Apostles, when he says, that the other Apostles were as considerable as Saint Peter, and that they were all equal in authority and power, but that our Lord to shew the Uni­ty there ought to be in his Church, speaks but to one, and that the first place was given to Peter. And in another place, Our Lord, says he, gave to all his Apostles the same power after his Resurrection, and said to them, As the Father hath sent me, so send I you. Ambr. in Epist. ad Eph. cap. 2. And Saint Ambrose, Our Lord said to Peter, Vpon this Rock, &c. that is to say, upon this Confession of the Catholick Church, I ordain that Believers shall have life. And in another place, Ambr. in Psal. 32. What was said to Peter, was said to the other Apostles. And St. Hierom Hieron. in Psal. 40. The Church is the House built upon the firm Rock which is Christ. Idem in Mat. 8. And in another place, She was founded upon a Rock, that is to say, Christ; for this is the only founda­tion which the Apostle as a good Architect hath laid, viz. our Lord Jesus Christ. August. in Johan. Tract. 124. St. Augustine, Our Lord said, Vpon this Rock, &c. because that Peter had said, Thou art the Christ, &c. Vpon this Rock then which thou hast confessed, will I build my Church. The Rock was Christ, upon whose f [...]undation Peter himself was builded; for no man can lay any other foundation than that which hath been laid, viz. Jesus Christ. Ideo ait Dominus super hanc Petram, &c. Quia dixerat Petrus tu es Chri­stus, &c. Super hanc ergo Petram quam confessus es aedificabo Ec­clesiam meam. Petra erat Christus super quod fundamentum ipse aedi [...]icatus est Petrus; nam nemo potest ponere aliud fundamentum quam id quod positum est, a Christo.

[Page 10]The same August. de Verbo Dom. Serm. 60. Author speaks in another place thus: Quid est super hanc Petram? super id quod dictum est, Tu es Christus, super Petram quam confessus es, super hanc Petram quam agnovisti dicens, Tu es Chri­stus, super me aedificabo te, non me super te. Nam volentes homines, super homines aedificare dicebant; Ego quidem sum Pauli, ego autem Apollo, ego autem Cephae, ipse est Petrus; sed alii qui nolebant aedificare super Petrum, sed super Petram, dicebant; Ego sum Christi, &c. What is this saying, Vpon this Rock? That is, upon this Faith, upon what was said, That thou art the Christ, upon this Rock which thou hast acknowledged, say­ing, Thou art the Christ: Vpon me will I build thee, and not thee upon me; for they who would build upon men, said, I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, who is Peter; but those who would not build upon Peter, but upon the Rock, said, I am the Disciple of Christ. This Holy Doctor hath a thousand such like sayings which I cannot relate to avoid being tedious. Chrysost. in Matth. 16. Chrysostome says also, Vpon this Rock, &c. That is to say, upon this Faith and Confession. Super hanc Petram, hoc est super hanc fidem & confessionem. And Chrysost. in Sermone de Pentecost. in an­other place, Super hanc Petram, non dixit super Petrum, non enim super hominem, sed super fidem aedificavit Ecclesiam suam: Quae autem erat fi­des? Tu es Christus filius Dei viventis. Vpon this Rock, he did not say upon Peter; for he hath not built his Church upon a man, but upon Faith. What then was this Faith? Thou art the Christ the Son of the Living God. Gregor. Nyss. lib. de vita Mosi [...]. Gregory Nyssen, Non Petrus & Johannes, & Jacobus tantum, sunt Ecclesiae columnae, sed omnes qui Ecclesiam sustentant. Peter, James and John are not the only Pillars of the Church, but all they who support the Church. Methinks there needs no more to perswade every honest minded man, that the Fathers did not believe that Jesus Christ founded his Church upon St. Peter in particular, much less upon the Popes. I could easily produce a thousand other Eviden [...]es from the ancient Fathers, and even from many Doctors that lived within the last four or five hundred years; tho the truth hath been al­most wholly stifled, and that by men perfectly sold to the Court of Rome, as well as to Iniquity. But I must not tire out my Reader. Sal. 13. Tom. 1. lib. com. in Epist. Pauli. The Jesuit Salermont alone, is worth a thousand of them, for he doth own that the Popes Authority hath no foundation in the Scri­pture, and he placeth it among Traditions not written. I demand only the liberty of confuting the abuse of two other places of Scri­pture, whereof we have spoken: One would think they were al­ready sufficiently confuted by the passages which I have alledged; which prove that the Fathers did not believe that St. Peter had any [Page 11] Prerogative above the other Apostles; and here a Reflection may be made, which I think necessary to prevent the Cheat which may be put upon us in this matter, by producing some passages of the Fathers falsified or maimed, or else some Testimonies of the Do­ctors of the later times, who have been for the most part vile slaves to the Popes and the Court of Rome.

It must be considered that when upon such a subject as this, a man shall pretend to alledg any thing of Antiquity, which seems to favour the opinion of St. Peter's Primacy, that cannot counter-ballance what I have produced in short against that Primacy, not only because I can produce an hundred places against one which they shall alledg; but principally for this reason, that it is never al­lowable for any man to oppose the Institutions of God, nor to mis­understand, deny, change, or diminish them. So that if St. Peter had had the Authority over the Apostles, and over the whole Church, which they pretend, and which the Popes at this time do exercise over Bishops, Kings, and the whole Church, the Fathers never could deny it without a crime; nor could they ever equal him to the other Apostles without being guilty of Heresie, and hei­nous offence against God. Whereas we may very lawfully speak advantageously of the Ordinances and Institutions of God, of Holy things, and every thing that conduceth to the true Worship of God, and consequently of the Holy Apostles also, who were the admirable Organs of his Grace for the conversion of the World. We may, I say, speak of them with praise and with wonder, with respect and veneration, and even attribute to them sometimes names and degrees of excellency, which do not belong to them without any prejudice to Piety, provided they are not attributes nor honours which are appropriated only to the Divine Being, for then it would be Idolatry, as it is to attribute that to the Pope which belongs only to Jesus Christ. For example, in reference to the great men of this world, it is very allowable to speak to the advantage of a Minister of State, to whom a great King shall com­municate a part of his Authority for his service: It is very fit to commend him, and to extoll him even above his merit, by reason of the good qualities which appear in him, or the favours which he receives from the King; provided that the respect and obedience due to the King be inviolably kept; but it would be a crime to lessen or contemn him, especially when the prosperity, tranquillity and safety of the State depends upon him. So I maintain, that tho [Page 12] the Fathers had said a t [...]ousand times of St. Peter, That the Church was founded upon him, and that he was the Head of it; If they have said sometimes that he was not so, and that he had nothing more excellent than the other Apostles, this last ought to prevail, because that the first was an expression of favour, and without dan­ger, since they assert ev [...]ry where, that Jesus Christ is the only Head of the Church, and that it was hard to conceive that ever men should arrive to su [...]h excess of extravagancy as to think that one simple man could be the Head of the Universal Church. Whereas if St. Peter had been instituted by God in that quality, to deny it, would look like resisting God, destroying the Church, which would be established upon him, and dethroning J [...]sus Christ, by dethroning his Vicar. It must then be agreed to, whatever the Doctors of the Age say, that the Church is built upon Jesus Christ, and not upon a man; and we may say with David, That the stone which the builders refused, is in spight of them become the Corner­stone of the Church.

But let us come to the second passage: Tibi dabo claves, &c. I will give thee the Keys, &c. First of all you must know the occasion whereon this was said to him: Jesus Christ had asked this questi­on of his Disciples, Whom think you that I am, &c. Peter with his wonted fervor spake and answered for all, Thou art the Christ, &c. And our Lord upon this promiseth to all his Apostles, and to the whole Church under the name of Peter, the Power of the Keys, which is indisputable, because in the 18 Chap. of St. Matthew, he tells them all in general, and without distinction the same thing, Verily I say unto you, That whatsoever you shall bind upon Earth, shall be bound in Heaven; and whatsoever you loose on Earth, shall be loosed in Heaven. The other Apostles then, have this power as well as St. Peter; and we see it also in St. John the 20. and the 22. where Jesus Christ says to all his Apostles, Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whosesoever sins ye forgive, they are forgiven; and whosesoever ye retain, they are retained.

Let us see whether the Fathers be not against us. We have al­ready heard St. Cyprian, Cypr. de Unitate Ec­clesiae. who says, Christus Apostolis post Resurrecti­onem parem potestatem tribuit. Jesus Christ after his Resurrection gave an equal power to his Apostles. Origen. in Math. Tract. 1. Origen demands, An vero soli Petro dan­tur a Christo claves Regni Caelorum, nec alius beatorum quisquam eas ac­cepturus est? Quod si dictum hoc, tibi dabo claves, &c. Caeteris quoque commune est, cur non simul & omnia & quae prius dicta sunt, & quae se­quuntur velut ad Petrum dicta sunt omnium communia? Were the Keys of [Page 13] the Kingdom of Heaven given only to Peter, and shall no other blessed per­son have them? Certainly if what was said, I will give thee the Keys, be common to all the Apostles, why shall not all that goes before, and that fol­lows after, tho said only to Peter, be common to all?

St. Hilary St Hilary lib. 6. de Tri­nitate, in the Council of Ephesus — there is an E­pistle of the Council of A­lexandria, where are these words, Petrus & Jo­hannes & ae­quales sunt ad alterutrum dignitatis. Vos O sancti & beati viri ob fidei vestri meritum, claves Regni Coelorum & ligandi & solvendi jus in terra adepti. He spoke to the Apostles, O holy and blessed men, who by the merits of your faith have obtained the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven, and the power of binding and loosing upon Earth. Hieron con­tra Jovian. lib. 1. cap. 14. St. Hierom, At dicis super Petrum fundatur Ec­clesia, licet id ipsum, in alio loco super omnes Apostolos fiat, & cuncti claves Regni Caelorum accipiunt, & ex aequo super eos, Ecclesiae fortitudo solidetur; tamen propterea inter duodecim unus eligitur, ut capite consti­tuto schismatis tollatur occasio. Sed cur non Johannes electus est virgo? Aetati delatum est. Quia Petrus senior erat, ne adhuc adolescens ac poene puer provectae aetatis hominibus anteferretur, & ne causam praebere videretur invidiae. But you say the Church is founded upon Peter, tho in other places the same thing is done upon all the Apostles, and they all receive equally the Keys of the Kingdom of Heaven; and the strength of the Church is equally founded up­on one as well as another; nevertheless he chose one out of the Twelve, to the end that by establishing a Head he might take away the occasion of Schism. But why was not John chosen? Jesus Christ had regard to the age of Pe­ter, who was the eldest, and would not prefer a young man, one that was almost a child, before those who were more advanced in years, that he might not seem to give an occasion for envy amongst them. Hieron. in Mat. 16. The same Hierom tells us, that the Ministers under the Gospel have also the power of binding, and of loosing, of pardoning sins, or retaining them; that is to say, of judging when God doth pardon us or not. Id juris & officii habent Sacerdotes Evangelici quod olim sub lege habebent Legales in curandis Leprosis. Hi ergo peccata dimittunt vel retinent, dum dimissa a Deo, vel retenta judicant vel ostendunt. St. Augustin August. in Joh. Trac. 118., Sicut in Aposto­lis cum esset etiam numerus duodenarius, & omnes essent interrogati, solus Petrus respondit, Tu es Christus, &c. Et ei dicitur, Tibi dabo claves, tan­quam ligandi & solvendi solus acceperit potestatem, cum & illud unus pro omnibus dixerit, & hoc cum omnibus dixerit, & hoc cum omnibus tanquam personam gerens ipsius unitatis acceperit. Ideo unus pro omnibus quia uni­tas est in omnibus. Amongst the Apostles who were Twelve in number, tho they were all asked, Peter only answered, Thou art the Christ: and Jesus Christ said to him, I will give thee the Keys, as tho he alone had received the power of binding, and of loosing. Tho the truth is, that he said that for all; and that he received also this power for all; because that he represented [Page 14] the person of them all, and the union that there ought to be amongst them. One spoke for all, because the unity was in all. The same Father also says in another place, Manifesta est Sententia Domini nostri Apostolos mittentis, & ipsis solis potestatem a patre sibi datam promittentis, Id. in Epist. Joh. Tract. 10. quibus nos successi­mus eadem potestate Ecclesiam regentes: That is to say, We see clearly the intention of our Lord when he sent out his Apostles, and promised them the same power which his Father had given him; and we have succeeded them, governing the Church with the same power.

August. in Joan. Tra. 124.And so in other places, ‘Quando Petro dictum est, Tibi dabo claves, &c. Typum Ecclesiae gerebat, unus pro omnibus respon­dit. When it was said to Peter, I will give thee the Keys, &c. he represented the Church, one single person answered for all.’ And in another place, Idem in Joan. Tract. the 10. Theoph. in Mat. chap. 16. ‘Ecclesiae dictum est: Tibi dabo claves, &c. It was said to the Church, I will give thee the Keys, &c. ’ Theophylactalso, ‘Habent potestatem remittendi & ligandi quicun­que sicut Petrus Episcopatus gratiam assecuti sunt, quamvis au­tem Petro soli dictum sit, Dabo tibi; omnibus tamen Apostolis concessae sunt. That is to say, All they have the power of remit­ting and unloosing, who as St. Peter have obtained the Honour of being Bishops; for tho it were said to Peter alone, I will give, &c. yet the Keys were given to all the Apostles. And Leo the first, Leo in Anni­ver. die assum­ptionis suae ad Pontif. Ser­mone 3. Transivit etiam in alios Apostolos vis potestatis istius, & ad omnes Ecclesiae Principes Decreti hujus constitutio commeavit, sed non frustra uni commendavit, quod omnibus intimetur. Pe­tro idem ideo hoc singulariter creditur, quia cunctis Ecclesiae rectoribus Petri forma proponitur; manet ergo Petri privilegium, ubicun (que) fertur ex ipsius aequitate Judicium. That is to say, That the power of the Keys was given also to all the Apostles; and not only to them, but to all Bishops; and that it was not without design that our Lord committed to one what he intima­ted to all: For thereby the example of Peter is proposed to all them who have a share in the Government of the Church. Where­ever then any one judges as Peter did, there is the priviledg of Peter also to be found.’ And it is to be observed that Leo said this in a time when the Bishop of Constantinople would have had the Primacy.

I think these Evidences are sufficient to shew the injustice of the Popes, who attribute to St. Peter alone those things which he had in common with all the other Apostles, and all good Pastors, and that to usurp an authority which neither St. Peter nor any other [Page 15] Creature ever could have; and though it were possible that St. Peter or any other might have had it, the Popes have less right to pretend to it than any other Priest, because that they are but Temporal Princes; For under the Gospel men derogate both from Episcopacy and Priesthood, when they become Temporal Princes; and it is certain that according to the Scripture and the Holy Canons, these two things are inconsistent. They ought to consider which they will stand to: I am perswaded they would not contradict themselves in the matter, but would always hold to the Temporal, which they call the solid thing, as Cardinal Pa­lavicini Palavicini lib 4. c. 6. very well observes, that they desire the Popedom only for the vast quantities of Money which they get by it, with the means of Obliging and doing Courtesies; Due beni per cui soli appar Desi­derable il Pontificato, il Principiato dell Oro e del Obligo. And in the Age we live in, they would be in danger of not making so much of their Episcopacy as Boniface the third did by Phocas; and if they should let their Beast but once get loose, they would find it a hard matter to get up again.

But besides, I think I ought here to put you in mind of one thing, which is, that the power of binding and loosing is not what the Popes and many evil minded Priests would make us believe; for I do maintain, not only that the Pope cannot free a man from the guilt of his Crimes, and from the punishment due to them, no more than the meanest Priest, as Marsilius Patav. p. 2, c. 15. Marsilius of Padua heretofore said; but also, that neither one nor other of them hath any power of pardoning Sins, but as far as it doth appear to them that God doth pardon them, and that properly it belongs not to them but to God. I shall be asked how the Priest or the Pope knows when God pardons any mans Sins: And I ask them, by what Authority they can dispence with the punishments a man hath deserved for ha­ving offended God, without there be some appearance of Contri­tion in this Man? I know very well there are many who affirm that the Pope can do it, and others who pretend that attrition is sufficient; but it will be no hard matter for me to prove that these Opinions are both foolish and Impious: It is God only that can truly pardon Sins, and he never does it but to the Contrite Heart, that is to say, to those who have a real sorrow within themselves for having offended so good and so merciful a God; and who make a firm Resolution to forsake their Sins, and to punish them­selves [Page 16] by Repentance, and by the Mortification of their Flesh, and of their Passions, and who will as much as in them lies in refe­rence to men, repair their crimes by making Satisfaction to all those they have wronged: and Lastly, who have made a Vow to endeavour all their Life-time to root up all their evil habits. When these Dispositions do not appear in a Penitent, the Pastor cannot pardon his Sins; and when they do appear, he cannot refuse to give him Absolution. The Holy Scripture mentions no other power of binding and loosing Sinners, but doth detest the use which the Popes make of it, who Excommunicated whomsoever they please, even Kings themselves, and whole Nations for no other reason that their Fantasy, Hierom in Math. cap. 16. St. Hierom made light enough of these Excom­munications, when he said, Apud Deum non Sententia Sacerdotum, sed reorum vita quaeritur. Idem in Esaiam cap. 14. And in an other place, Solvunt Apostoli Sermone Dei, testimoniis Scripturarum & Exhortatione virtutum. That is to say, that God enquires not after the Priests Opinion, but what sort of life a Sinner hath led. It is the word of God, the Evidences of Holy Scripture, and Exhortations to vertue, by which the Apostles do Absolve, St. Amb. cap. 4. lib. 2. de Cain & Abel. St. Ambrose also, Verbum Dei, says he, dimittit peccata, sacerdos est Judex, sacerdos officium suum exhibet, nullius autem potestatis jura exercet; It is the word of God, says he, that pardons Sins, the Priest is the Judge who doth his Duty (in judging according to this Word) but exerciseth no Authority. And St. Augustin. August. in Johan. tract. 124. Claves sunt discernendi scientia & potentia qua dig­nos recipere & indignos excludere debet Sacerdos a Regno Dei. The Keys, saith he, signifie no other thing than the Knowledge and Skill of discerning those who are Worthy, and those who are Vnworthy, that the Priest may Exclude them from the Kingdom of God.

It is now time to examine the third passage which they alledge for the Primacy of St. Peter, which you find in the 21 of St. John. Peter, lovest thou me? Feed my Sheep? From whence they draw this Consequence, that St. Peter was the Head of the Universal Church; It is certain that he was one of the most excellent Pastors of the Church; but notwithstanding that, he was not a Pastor to any of the Apostles, nor to any other Christians, but as the other Apostles were; For our Lord says to them all in common: As my Father hath sent me, so send I you; and in another place, Go then and teach all Nations, &c. Which is the same thing as if he had said to them all, Feed my Sheep. What is to Feed, but to Teach, Instruct, and Edify as well by Speaking as Writing, by Preaching, and Explain­ing [Page 17] to men the word of God and its Truth, accompanying that with a life conformable to that Holiness the Gospel requires; Which is called pascere Exemplo & verbo? But they ask why our Lord repeated three times, Peter lovest thou me, Feed my Sheep? Aug. in Johan. tract. 123. cap. 210. St. Augustin answers that Redditur Negationi Trime Trina Confessio, &c. St. Cyril understands it also in the same sense, Jure nunc ab eo Trina dilectionis Confessio petitur, ut trina negatio aequali Confessionis numero Com­pensetur: Ita quod verbis commissum fuit verbis curatur, St. Cyril. in Joh. lib. 12. cap. 64. &c. Dixit au­tem pasce Agnos meos Apostolatus ipsi Renovans dignitatem ne propter Ne­gationem quae Humana infirmitate accidit, labefacta videretur, &c. That is to say, Our Saviour had reason to demand a three-fold Confession of his love towards him, to Recompence in some measure Peters thrice denying him, &c. And he says unto him, Feed my Sheep, to renew unto him the Dignity of his Apostle-ship, from which he might seem to have fallen by denying his Master. Cypr. de unitate Ec­clesiae. St. Cyprian, Pastores sunt omnes, says he, Sed grex unus ostenditur qui ab Apostolis omnibus unanimi Confessione pas­catur. Episcopatus unus est cujus a singulis in solidum pars tenetur. They were all Pastors, but he shewed them but one Flock, which all the Apostles were to feed with an Vnanimous consent. St. Augustin, St. Aug. de Pastor. In Petro uni­tatem Commendavit; multi erant Apostoli & uni dicitur pasce oves meas, &c. Sed omnes boni pastores in uno sunt, unum sunt Illi pascunt, Christus pas­cit, &c. He recommended the unity in the person of Peter; there were many Apostles; he said nevertheless but to one of them, Feed my Sheep, &c. But all good Pastors are in one, and are but one. They feed, Christ feed­eth, &c. The same Father says in another place; Idem in ser­mone de Pe­tro & Paulo. In uno Petro figu­rabatur unitas omnium Pastorum sed Bonorum. In Peter only was repre­sented the unity of all Pastors; but that is to say, of all good Pastors. Chrysostom, Chysost. lib. 2. de sacer­dote. tum ostensu [...]us es eximiam tuam Dilectionem in Christum, cum paveris ejus gregem, cum scriptum sit si diligis me, pasce Oves meas. Then said he to St. Basil, thou wilt shew thy love towards Jesus Christ, if thou feedest his Flock as it is written, Lovest thou me? feed my Sheep. St. Peter himself explains to us these words, and shews that he was himself far from pretending to the quality of Universal Pastor, Excluding the other Apostles; because he doth acknowledge that even the Priests are Pastors as well as himself, and that the Flock of Christ is committed to their charge as well as to his; which they ought to feed not out of a [...]hameful desire of gain; but by a disinterested Charity, not in lording it over the Heritage, or over the Cl [...]rgy of the Lord; St. Peter the 1. c. 5. v. 1.2.3. But by giving themselves a good exam­ple to their Flock: How many r [...]proofs are [...]ere in a f [...]w words ag [...]inst the Pope and evil Priests?

[Page 18]These are the places of Scripture which they cite with the greatest colour for the papacy of St. Peter, which as they explain them, are I think sufficiently confuted. One may say of them, as here­tofore the Council of Basil said to the Creatures of Pope Eugenius, who also corrupted the Sence of these Passages. Sunt Interpretati­ones Paparum fimbrias suas extendentium. Conc. Basil apud Aene. S [...]. in gestis Concil. These are Interpretations of Popes, that stretch out the Skirts of their Garments. To these which I have already given, I shall yet add some reasons drawn from the Gospel it self, against this pretended Primacy and Rule of St. Peter. I shall not repeat that we see nothing in the Gospel but Precepts of Humility, of Charity, of renouncing the World, its Grandures, Pleasures and Riches, But I shall say that we read in the Acts of the Apostles, Acts cap. 8. v. 14. that St. Peter was sent to Samaria by the other Apostles. A Prince is not usually treated thus by his Sub­jects: Acts 11. v. 1. We see also that in another place, having been accused by the others for misbehaving himself, he justifies himself; This looks not like a Soveraign. Would the Pope endure this from the Bishops, or from any other? We see not that he gave Laws to others, that he established any thing by his own private Authority, without the other Bishops. 1 Corin. chap. 11. v. 5. St. Paul says expresly, that he was not inferior to the greatest of the Apostles: In St. Math. 28. v. 20. Matthew and St. John, it is manifest, that Jesus Christ gave to all his Apostles the same power. John 20. v. 22.23. And in the Epistle to the Galatians, that Peter, James and John gave their hands to each other, as a mark of the Society that was between them. Would the Pope give his in this manner to the other Bishops? We see that at the Council of Jerusalem, it was not St. Peter, but St. James, who presided and concluded. We read in the Epistle to the Galatians, Gal. 2. v. 9, Gal. 2. v. 7. that St. Paul and he agreed together, that St. Paul should go and Preach to the Gentiles, and St. Peter to the Jews.

If St. Peter had known that he had been the Head of the Church, he would not in all likelihood have suffered, that his Ministry should have been thus limited, or that the Ministry or Power of St. Paul should have been of an extent an hundred times greater than his, especially if he had been of the humour of our good Popes. If any Bishop should pretend to govern the Church of France or Spain without them, it is to be believed, that it would not be ve­ry pleasing to them; and from hence by the way, one may judge that Saint Peter had nothing to do at Rome, nor was he ever there, as they imagine. There is yet somewhat of greater [Page 19] weight then all this; That is, that St. Paul tells us he withstood St. Peter to his face, because he deserved reproof. This looks as if St. Paul had had some Authority over St. Peter: We hear not that he reproached him for his Arrogance, nor that he Excommunica­ted him. It must be acknowledged that here is a great difference between the proceedings of the Pope, and those of St. Peter: For it is certain that if a Bishop should at this day dare to displease the Majesty of the Pope, he should be soon swallowed up and destroy­ed by his glory. I believe that Origen might have an eye to St. Paul's thus correcting St. Peter, when he said that St. Paul was the greatest of all the Apostles; Origen in Numeros, Hom. 3. Paulus Apostolorum maximus; or else he might also have regard to the great extent of St. Pauls Ministry, or to what he himself says, that he took more pains than all the other Apostles. And all the Fathe [...]s looked upon him, as he who among all the Apostles wrote the most profoundly, and with the greatest light. This is what St. Augustin says of him. St. Chry­sostom looks upon him as the first of all the Saints; and if there had been any Preheminence among the Apostles, he should have been preferred before any other. We may say then, that the Popes in that Authority which they usu [...]p, have nothing common with St. Peter, nor can they be compared together, but in one thing, which is, that as St. Peter being come into Pilates-Hall, denyed Christ three times, the Popes since they have taken upon them­selves the Authority of Pilate, and of worldly Princes, have deny­ed him not three times, but once for all. Vna sol volta in Corte di Pilato entro est Petro e tra rinego Christo.

Thus we see that in the Holy Scripture there is not one word that can in the least authorize the Popes Supremacy. And we may compare those who establish it there, to poor Heralds, who to get a little mo­ney, do very frequently make people meanly descended, to derive from the Ancient Greek and Roman Emperors, because the Cullyes hav [...] gotten an Estate, and are become rich, tho most usually 'tis only by Rogueries and Robberies. And it is not difficult thus to de­ceive people, who always admire those that are rich and able to do them a kindness. They never enquire how they came by it as the Spaniard says, Alcansados los honores quedam Borrados los passos, por­dende se subio a ellos. Since then that the new Testament doth not acknowledg this Authority of the Popes, but absolutely condemn it; it hath no lawful Institution for a Doctrine of that Importance as the Primacy of the Pope is, whereon they make the whole Go­vernment [Page 20] of the Church, Religion it self, and the Salvation of all Christians to depend, being not to be found in Scripture, cannot be but false. For though it be true that there are some Customs and Ceremonies in the Church which are not to be found in Scripture, and which the Protestants are greatly in the wrong, obstinately to reject, because that Tradition, and the use or practise of the Church, have so long since given them sufficient Authority, as they them­selves acknowledg; yet that cannot be said of this Article, which according to the Popes, and the greatest part of the Doctors, is Ca­pital; and so Capital they would willingly perswade us, that without it the rest signifies nothing. It was very impiously said of Cardinal Palavicim in his Third Book of his History of the Council of Trent, Chap. the 15. That the Christian Religion hath no more sure and immediate certainty than the Popes Authority. Quella Religione, i cui Articoli Vnita­mente considerati non hanno Altera Certezza prossima & immediata che l' Au­torita del Pontifice. We see clearly, that if this Authority were laid a­side, they would renounce the profession of Christianity, as piety hath been already renounced by them.

LET us now see if the Primitive Church did acknowledg a power in the Church like to that of the Popes. Altho that which hath been already alledged from the Holy Fathers proves sufficiently, that they knew not the Papacy, let us however exa­mine the thing a little more particularly. We are told then that St. Peter was Head of the Church, that he was at Rome, that he was a Bishop there, that he died there, that he resigned that Charge of Head of the Church, and of Bishop, but not that of an Apostle to a Successor; which Successor he either chose, or the Church of Rome did it after his death, by the power which he had given her; which things are all of them very difficult to prove, and certainly [Page 21] very false; for a thing of this consequence ought not to be founded upon conjectures of meer probabilities, but we ought to have as cer­tain and as exact a knowledg of it as of any other Article of our Religion. And yet we see that they who have spoken of St. Peter's coming to Rome, and of his Death there, have said it upon such mi­serable grounds, and say so many contradictory things as well of it as of his pretended Successor, that there is nothing more uncertain in all Antiquity. But besides this, none of them ever believed, no nor so much as suspected that St. Pet [...]r was Head of the Universal Church. And the contradiction and little certain­ty that is in these Authors, shews sufficiently that in the Primitive times it was not believed that this was necessary to be known; nor did they in the least suspect that ever any body would endeavour to lay upon it the foundation of that horrible Autho [...]ity which the Popes do Exercise.

To give you some Instances of their Contradictions, I need only to shew you that some say it was Linus who succeeded Peter; others Clement; and lastly, others say it was Anacletus; some will have it that St. Peter founded this Church, and was the first that Preached at Rome. Others maintain, namely Dorotheus, that it was Barnabas. Dorot. Tyren­sis in Synopsi. Barnabas primus Romae praedicavit.

And St. Paul shews us clearly that it was he himself who founded that Church; for he complains that coming to Rome, he found that the Jews there, who had embraced Christianity, were but very lit­tle instructed in the Doctrine of the Christian Religion. Who can believe that if St. Peter had been there, and had founded this Church, he would not have instructed them better? And what is yet more, St. Paul says expresly in another pla [...]e, that he would not go and preach, wh [...]re others had preached before him; because he would not build upon the Foundation of others. As for the man­ner of his Death, some say he was Crucified with St. Paul; Others, that he was beheaded, and Linus the pretended successor of St. Peter, who writes the History of St. Pauls Death, says not one word of St. Peters. St. Hierom in Matth. cap. 23. lib. 4. Lyran in 1 Petri. Hierom though a Roman, and Nicolas de Lyra assures us, that he was Crucified at Hierusalem: And St. Hierom says in another place also, that his Sepulcher is in Hierusalem. Thus we see what reason they have to build an Article of Faith so mon­strous, as the Popes Supremacy is, upon an imaginary Conjecture, that hath no Foundation that St. Peter was at Rome. But how comes it then to pass, may some say, that many of the Fathers both be­lieved, [Page 22] and said, that St. Peter was at Rome? It was, because they did not examine the thing, believing it useless; and they did not for­see the dreadful Consequences that the Bishops of Rome would draw from it: They grounded it upon that place of St. Peters Epi­stle, where it is said, the Church which is at Babylon, saluteth you; Interpreting Rome by Babylon, without any reason; because there were two other Babylons, the one in Mesopotamia where Bagdet is; and the other in Aegypt near Memphis, where it is certain there were many Jews who were under St. Peter's Ministry. As for the pretended combat between St. Peter and Simon Magus, the Learned acknowledg that it was but a fiction.

But put the case St. Peter had been at Rome, what advantage can the Bishops of Rome make of it? That he had left at Rome his Charge of Universal Vicar of Jesus Christ? But on what do they found this pretence? If he had done it, it would plainly have been united to his Apostleship, rather than to the quality of a Bishop; and so by consequence could not have been communicated to any other than an Apostle, and so St. James, or St. John, who continued alive long time after him, should have inherited it, and not Linus nor any o­ther; and they would have transported it to Jerusalem, or to Ephe­sus, which were their Churches, if the Town of Rome had not had some particular priviledges (which no man knows) that affixed this Dignity to that City, in which case one of these two Apostles ought to have come and resided there. However it is likely that St. James or St. John, who without all controversie lived a great while after him, should rather have succeeded him in this admirable Charge than a simple Priest or Bishop, as Linus. If the City of Rome pretends to derive this Prerogative from St. Peter's having been there, and Preached the Gospel, (which cannot be proved) the Church of Antioch ought to be preferred before it, for it is certain both by the Scriptures and by the Fathers, that he was there, and Preached there before it was possible for him to do it at Rome. And upon this it was that they built that Revelation of the See of Pe­ter's being removed from Antioch to Rome, which you find in the Decrees of Gratian, in the Epistle of Pope Marcellus Caus. 84. q. 5. Can. ro­gamus.; which Imposture they contrived, because they could find nothing in the Scripture that could favour their pretences. Besides, if St. Peter had had a Successor in this pretended Charge, how comes it to pass that the Primitive Church that compiled the Canon of Books, which ought to regulate the Faith of the Church, hath not comprehended [Page 23] therein the Works of Linus, or of Clement, who wrote enough, and yet hath inserted those of St. James, and of St. John, who ought to be much inferior in Infallibility, and in Sanctity to the Vicar-General of Jesus Christ upon Earth, and who ought to have been his Subjects, and to have taken the Oath of Fidelity to him as they do at this day to his Holiness? But a man may well wonder that Cle­ment, who according to some Writers was his Successor, and who, be he what he will, must have lived very near that time, knew no­thing of it. 'Tis seen by his first Epistle to St. James Clem Epis. 1. Fratri Do­mini Episcopo Episcoporum, &c. where he terms him Bishop of Bishops; and in another place he brings in St. Peter, saying, Jacobus Episcopus acc [...]rcitum me inde huc Caesaream mittit. That is to say, That the Bishop James sent him into Caesarea. It is yet a little surprising that the Fath [...]rs of the Primitive Church who com­posed the Canon of our Faith, that is the Creed Lib. 1. Re­cognitionum ubi Petrus.; should forget to place after the Catholick Church the Bishop of Rome, who is the Head of it, and without whom as they say it is like a Body with­out a soul, or a Vessel exposed to the tempest without a Pilot. That Article doth it self sufficiently exclude all dependance upon any particular See. And the other, I believe the Communion of Saints, doth also establish Jesus Christ the only Head of the Church, and condemns its being subject to an humane Head. And St. Dionysius the Areopagite, or some other of those times who in his name com­posed a Treatise of the Hierarchy, and says not one word of a Bi­shop of Bishops, and Head of the Church, shews that in those times people did not believe that the Hierarchy could not subsist without him. Saint Gregory also Bishop of Rome was whol­ly ignorant of these pretended Priviledges of his Bishoprick; for he acknowledges in his Register to Eulogius Bishop of Alexandria, that the Bishops of Alexandria and of Antioch, are Successors of St. Peter, and that they sit in the Chair of Peter as well as the Bishops of Rome. Nor was Irenaeus any more perswaded that the Bishops of Rome alone had this advantage, when having reproved Victor Bishop of Rome, who by a ridiculous rashness had Excommunicated for a matter of small importance all the Churches of Asia, (which was concerning the difference of the day whereon Easter was to be kept) he says to him Iren. apud Eusebium, lib. 5. cap. 26, & 27., Presbyteri Ecclesiae cui nunc praesides, Anicetum dicimus, Ejum, Hyginum, Telesphorum & Christum; neque ipsi sic observarunt, neque posteris suis sic praeceperunt.

Observe by the way the modesty of the Bishops of those times, they affected no other quality than that of Priest, as we also see in [Page 24] the Gospel that Bishops are there sometimes called Priests: It was not in contempt that St. Ireneus called them so, but because that in those blessed times the Bishops were humble, and were ambitious of no other Title. But now-a-days a Priest is called, My Lord Abbot, an Abbot takes the Arms of a Bishop, a Bishop of a Cardinal, a Cardinal equals himself to Princes, and will even take the place of them. And the Bishops of Rome (who in those times were hum­ble, and desired no other Crown than that of Martyrdom) now raise themselves above Soveraigns, Kings and Emperors, wear a Triple Crown which these Villains called Il Regno, for a mark of their Royalty, tread even Emp [...]rors under their feet, make them kiss their Slippers, and treat them like fools.

Cardinal Cusan confirms to us what St. Gregory said before Cusan lib. 1. cap. 14., In Cathedra Petri, says he, Patriarchae leguntur sedisse, Romanus, Alexan­drinus, & Antiochenus, & cum illis omnes subjecti Episcopi; that is to say, We read that the three first Patriarchs who sat in the Chair of Peter, were he of Rome, he of Alexandria, and he of Antioch, and with them all the Bishops who were under them. Let a man read the Writings of Gregory, of Gelasius, and of Leo, who were all Popes, and he shall see that they all acknowledg that all good Bishops are Successors of St. Peter; and altho they sometimes failed not to demonstrate suffi­ently their Ambition, and the desire they had to make the other Bi­shops their subjects, yet it was not in quality of Heads of the Church, much less by vertue of any Text of Scripture. And we find not that for the first six Centuries any man dared to bring so much as one passage of Scripture to establish the Primacy of the Bishoprick of Rome, Amb. de In­carnatione c. 14. St. Ambrose is not at all favourable to them, when he says, Primatus Petri, Confessionis erat, non Honoris, fidei non ordinis: That the Primacy of Peter was a Primacy of Confession, and not of Honour [...]; of Faith, and not of place.

St. Cyprian whom we have already mention'd, says farthermore, in another place, Cyprian in Conc. Carth. sive de Sent. Episcoporum. Neque enim quisquam nostrum se Episcopum Epis­coporum constituit ut Tyrannico t [...]rrore ad Obsequendi necessitatem collegas suos adigat, cum habeat omnis Episcopus pro licentia libertatis & Potesta­tis suae Arbitrium proprium, tanquam judicari ab alio non possit, cum nec ipse possit Alterum judicare sed expectamus Vniversi Judicium D [...]mini nostri Jesu Christi qui unus & solus habet potestatem & praeponendi nos in Eccle­siae suae Gubernatione & de Ac [...]u nostro judicandi. There is n [...]ne among us who pretendeth to be a Bishop of Bishops, that by a Tyrannical power he may oblige any of his Colleagues to the necessity of being subject to him; [Page 25] since that every Bishop being his own Master, and independent on any other, cannot be judged by another, nor can he judg another, but we ought all to expect the judgment of our Lord Jesus Christ, who only hath the power of establishing us over his Church, and of judging of our behaviour in it. Cyprian lib. 3. Epist. 21. The same St. Cyprian calleth Stephen Bishop of Rome his Col­league: Stephanum Collegam nostrum, ut & Cornelium nostrum co-Epis­copum. And Cornelius our Fellow-Bishop. He speaks of two Bishops of Rome. And in another place he shews that he thought he had as great a share in the Government of the whole Church as the Bishop of Rome. Id. Ep. 30. Omnes enim, says he, de [...]et pro corpore totius Ecclesiae, cujus per varias quas (que) Provincias membra digesta sunt, excubare. And in ano­ther place, Idem de Aleatoribus. Divina & Paterna Pietas in nobis Apostolatus ducatum contulit & Vicariam Domini sedem coelesti dignatione ornavit. That is to say, The Goodness of God hath conferred upon us the conduct of the Apo­stleship; and hath adorned by his Heavenly Grace the deputed See of the Lord which we hold. And furthermore, Idem ad Puppienum. Ep. 66. Christus dicit ad Apostolos ac per hos ad omnes praepositos qui Apostolis Vicaria Ordinatione succedunt; Qui vos audit me audit. Jesus Christ saith to all the Apostles, and in the persons of them to all Bishops who succeed the Apostles, being their Substi­tutes by Ordination, Whosoever heareth you, heareth me. He shews in these places, that he pretended that his Church was an Apostolick See, and that he was the Vicar of Jesus Christ as well as the other Bi­shops Idem in Epist. 55.. In his 55 Epistle he says that a man must be a fool or a mad man to believe that the Authority of the Bishops of Africa was less than that of the Bishop of Rome, to whom abundance of profli­gate wretches did resort that so they might avoid the giving an account of their actions to the Bishops of Africa, and the being pu­nisht for their crimes.

After his death a Council assembled at Carthage, did ordain In Conc. Africano, Art. 6., Vt prima sedis Episcopus non appelletur princeps Sacerdotum aut primus Sacerdos sed tantum primae sedis Episcopus: That the Bishop of the first See ought not to be called Prince or chief of the Priests, or any thing of this kind, but only the Bishop of the first See. And the Council of Nice marking out the bounds of the extent of each Patriarchal See, says thus Concil. [...]icen. Can. 6., There is an ancient custom whereby the Bishop of Alexan­dria doth govern all the Diocesses of Egypt, of Lybia, and of Pentapo­lis, as also it is a long time since that the Bishop of Rome hath presided over those which he now governeth, and so likewise the Bishop of Antioch. Upon which Cardinal Cusan makes this reflexion: Cusan de Co [...]cord. Ca­tho [...]icâ, lib. 2. c. 12. We see, says he, h [...]w much the Bishop [...]f Rome ha [...]h gotten against the Holy Constitu­tions [Page 26] by the long use of a submission, which hath been given him, and which was not due to him. Concil. Antioch. c. 13. Concil. Calce­don, Act. 16. Concil. Con­stant. c. 1. This Decree of the Council of Nice was since confirmed by the Councils of Antioch, of Calcedon, and of Constantinople. Theodoret produceth a Letter of the Council of Con­stantinople, which sufficiently shews the place which the Bishops of Rome held at that time: it begins thus Theodor. lib. 5. c. 9., To our most Reverend and dear Brethren and Colleagues, Damasus, Ambrose, Brillo, Valerian, and all the other Holy Bishops assembled together in the Great City. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. 7. cap 30. Euse­bius also relates to us another Letter which the Council of Antioch assembled against the Heresie of Paulus of Samosatenus writes to the Bishop of Rome, which begins thus: To Dionysius, to Maximus, and to all those who are Ministers with us: Com-Ministris nostris, through­out the whole world, Bishops, Priests, Deacons, and all the Church under Heaven. Would a man now in good earnest in this corrupt age write thus to our Holy Father the Pope? Theod l. 2. cap. 16. Theodoret relates to us in his Ecclesiastical History, that the Emperour Constantius was very urgent with the Bishop of Rome, Liberius, to embrace the Commu­nion of the other Churches, which shews that he also knew not that Rome was the Mother of the other Churches. The Emperors Gratian, Valentinian, Cod. The­od. l. 16. tit. 1. cap. 2. and Theodosius, in the year 380, proposed Rome and Alexandria, for Models of the Orthodox Faith. Or­daining that all the world should follow the Faith of Damasus Bi­shop of Rome, and of Peter Bishop of Alexandria. And after the first Council of Constantinople, as tho they would have the Center of Christian Communion in the East only, they order without men­tioning Rome, that all Churches should be conferred upon those who joyned in Communion with Nectarius Bishop of Laodicea, and Diodorus Bishop of Tarsus, in the Diocess of the East, with Amphi­lochus Bishop of Iconium, &c. If the Bishops of Asia, of Cilicia, and of Mesopotamia, had believed that the Communion of the Bishop of Rome had been necessary for their Churches, they would never all have been excluded from its Communion, during 140 years, as they were, after that Victor Bishop of Rome had Excommunicated them for a Trifle; for if they had pleased they might have been reconciled to the Church of Rome by submitting to the Laws of that Bishop. Greg Na­zianz Ep. 22. St. Gregory of Nazianzen writing to the Clergy of the Church of Caesarea in Cappadocia, speaks to them thus: It is just that care should be taken of the whole Church, as of the Body of Jesus Christ, chiefly of yours which hath been from the beginning the Mother of al­most all the Churches, which is so at this time, and is so esteemed, and to [Page 27] which the whole body of the Church relates as a Circle does to the Center, round which it is formed, &c. This holy man thought not the Church of Rome was the Center of all the Churches. Concil. Milevitan, cap. 22. In the Milevi­tan Council where St. Augustine was present, it was Ordained, That those of Africk who should Appeal to Rome should be Excommuni­cated: These are the words: We have adjudged that all Priests, Dea­cons, and other Inferior Ecclesiasticks who shall complain of their Bishops Administration, shall apply themselves to the Neighbouring Bishops, who by the consent of their own Bishops shall decide the Controversie between them: And if they will Appeal from their Opinions, let them not do it, but to the Councils of Africa. And if any man makes his Appeal to any place be­yond the Seas (here Rome must be understood) let him be looked upon as an Excommunicated person by all Africa Concil. Africanum. cap. 105.. And since that time the same thing was Ordained in the Council of Africa, and this they give for their reason: ‘That no Council hath taken away this Authority from the African Councils, and that the Decrees of the Council of Nice have committed as well Priests, as the Bi­shops to the direction of their Metropolitans: Most prudently and justly providing, that affairs should be determined upon the place where they had their first beginnings; and that no Province would ever want the assistance of the Holy Ghost to discern equity; that any injured person might procure a Council of his own Province, yea and appeal from that to a General one, and a man must be a fool to think that God would not rather inspire with the love and knowledg of Justice, a great number of Pre­lates assembled in Council, than a single person be he who he will.’ What stupidity and dulness is it that hinders Christians in these times from carrying it in the same manner towards Rome? Concil. Constant. c. 2. Can. 6. And the Council of Constantinople after having limited the bounds of each Patriarchal See, says that the Affairs of every Diocess ought to be Regulated by the Synods of the Diocess, and that in Confirmation of the Fourth Canon of the Council of Nice. Concil. Nicen, can. 4. And in the sixth Canon it doth Enact. That if any man hath been vexed by the Bi­shop, let him complain of this Bishop to all the other Bishops of the Province; and if these Bishops cannot determine the affair, he ought to apply himself to a greater Synod of Bishops of that Dio­cess; whereby we see that the Bishop of Rome had in those days no Authority over other Bishops, but that every thing was then Re­gulated by Councils and by Synods. If an Archbishop, or a Metro­politan were accused, the Affair was determined by an Assembly of [Page 28] the Synod of the Diocess; and if any man appealed from thence, it was not to the Bishop of Rome, but to a Synod composed of many Diocesses, which may be seen in the case of Bagadius Bishop of Bostra Metropolitan of Arabia, who having been Deposed by some Bishops of his Province, appealed from them, not to Rome, but to Constanti­nople, where quickly afterwards was assembled a Synod of many of the Eastern Diocesses, at which Nectarius of Constantinople, Flavian of Antioch, and Theophilus of Alexandria, all three Patriarches assisted; and the case was determined in the year 394, and Bagadius Reestab­lished in his place. Hierom in Epist. ad Eva­grius. It was the opinion of St. Hierom, tho a Roman, and very zealous for his own Patriarch, That if there be any question concerning Authority, that of the whole world is greater than that of one single City. For what end shall a man alledg the Customs of one only Town? Wheresoever there is a Bishop there is always the same Dignity. Neither Riches nor Poverty making them Superiors or Inferiors. They are all Succes­sors of the Apostles. St. Chrys. Hom. 43. in Matth. St. Chrysostom was also of this opinion when he spoke thus: If any Bishop affecteth Supremacy on Earth, he shall find confusion in Heaven. And whosoever shall be ambitious of raising himself a­bove others, shall not be reckoned among the servants of Jesus Christ. Thus are all the Popes Inclusively Excommunicated by St. Chrysostome, since Boniface the Third; and not only by him, but by the Milevitan Council, by the Council of Sardis, the third Council of Carthage, and another Council held at Carthage at the Instance of Gregory the First, under the Emperor Maurice; all these Councils do Excom­municate and declare him a forerunner of Antichrist, who shall call himself Universal Bishop. Greg lib. 6. Ep. ad Maurit. Imperat. St. Gr [...]gory doth himself abominate the Pride and Impiety of our Popes of these last Ages, when he says, That whosoever shall make himself be called Vniversal Bishop, shall be the forerunner of Antichrist, because he will by his Insolence raise himself above others. Idem lib. 6. Ep. 24. ad Anastasium Antiochen. And in another place speaking to Anastasius Bishop of Anti [...]ch, he says, That without m [...]ntioning the dishon [...]ur that the pride of such a man would do you, If a Bishop should m [...]ke himself be called Vni­versal Head of the Chur [...]h, the whole Church must run to ruin if this Vni­versal Head sh [...]uld fall. For my p [...]rt I pr [...]y God keep me from hearkening to any such fol [...]ies, and from b [...]ing capable of so gre [...]t [...] [...]anity, &c.

I should never have done, if I should pretend here to relate all the Evidences of Antiquity, which are contrary to the pretences of the Bishops of Rome for some Ages past. St. Aug. in li cont. Donat. post Collat. c. 33. St. Austin tells us a story which I cannot l [...]t pass, which shews things pretty clearly: He says that Don [...]us had accused Cecili [...]n, Arch-bishop of Carthage, of a great [Page 29] Crime, and that the Emperor Constantine chose the Bishop of Rome, and several other bishops for Judges of the Affair. Donatus was con­demned by them, and made his Appeal to the Emperor, who refer­red the Judgment of his Appeal to Arles. At this Judgment the Bishop of Arles presided, and the Affair was by him determined in favour of Cecilian, and the Judgment given at Rome confirmed. It would be a fine thing now to see the Emperor in an Affair pur [...]ly Ecclesiastical, as that was, establish the Pope as his Commissary, with other Bishops, and an Appeal made from their sentence before the Emperor, and he should send the cause before another Bishop, to judge definitively of it. I know not after this what Eviden [...]es I further need to prove the Usurpations which the Popes have made since those times. Christians ought to die in confusion, who want Proofs for a thing as clear as the day, considering the enormi­ty and exorbitance of the power which these people take upon them. Leo in E­pist. 89. ad E­pisc. Viennen­sis Provinciae [...] contra Hilari­um. In St. Hilaries days they endeavoured to bring under the Bishops of France, in such sort, that St. Hilary opposed their Ambi­tion, which made Leo have the Impudence to write of it to the Bi­shops of the Province of Vienne. However, that did not hinder him from continually attacking him, and his successors, who found opposition enough from time to time, they always gaining the Vi­ctory: And we have a Letter which the Churches of France and Germany wrote together in the time of King Clouis, to Anastasius the second Bishop of Rome, where we see that they were not satis­fy'd with the Ambition of that Bishop. Epistola E­piscoporum Germaniae & Galliae, contra Anastas. secun­dum, sub Clo­doveo Magno, apud Aventi­num in Colle­ctaneis. It is not, say they, without reason, that the Bishops, it being grounded upon many Authorities, affirm that the Authority of Councils is above that of a Pope. St. Paul the Apostle, who tells us, that we should be his followers, resisted Peter, the first of the Apostles, to his face, because he d [...]served reproof. For our parts, we understand not this new compassion which the Italian Physicians have for our M [...]ladies of France. They would cure our Bishops, and are themselves sick of a continued Fever: They are thems [...]lves blind, and yet th [...]y off [...]r us light: They forsake their own Flock, suffering it to wander, and pretend to lead our Pastors in the right way. Th [...]y would make us be­lieve, that the Cure for Spiritual Diseases, that is to say, Absolution, is to be found at Rome, &c. But if the Ark of the Covenant should fall in France, it must be our Bishops, and not theirs, that must take it up again. But if they be so rash, as to pretend to touch the Ark of our Church, they only draw evil upon themselves, as well as Uzzah the Levite. Let th [...]m fairly unde [...]stand this Syl [...]ogism; If th [...]r [...] be but one [...]nly power in all Bishops, [Page 30] it is also in one person alone: Now there is one and the same power in all Bi­shops; therefore it resides also in one single person.

But let us here observe by the by, how much the Germans and French are degenerated from that Piety and Love for the Liberty which Jesus Christ hath acquired for his Church.

It is certain, that Bishops were always equal in the first Ages of the Church: It was some time after the Death of St. Cyprian, before they thought of establishing in every Province one Bishop above the rest: They thought it would be advantagious for removing the dis­order that sprung up sometimes among them for concurrence and presidency. He resided in the Capital City, and was called the Metropolitan. At first he had no Authority over the others, but on­ly the place; but afterwards they conferred upon them the power of consecrating Bishops of the Province, because they dwelt in the Capital Ciiy, where every body came about their Affairs. And it is from thence that Bishops became subject to their Metropolitans, and have been distinguished from them by the Ordination which they receive from them. These Metropolitans were called in the West Arch-bishops; After this there was given them the power of calling Provincial Synods, who for that Reason were assembled al­ways in the Capital City. That was brought in at first only as a Custom, and because it looked as though the state of the Civil Go­vernment did require it. But at length this Custom was con­firmed by the Decrees of the Council of Nice, and became a Law. After that, for the maintenance of Unity among the Churches of divers Provinces, it was further thought requisite to establish Ex­archs, or Primates over these Arch-bishops, according to the Idea of the Civil Government. These Primates were the Bishops of the chief City of some great Province, or of a Diocess that compre­hended many Provinces. At first they acknowledged no Superior, but by little and little, they of Constantinople, of Antioch, of Alex­andria, and lastly, he of Rome, did first attempt their Rights; and after came the Council of Calcedon, who established over these Me­tropolitans four Patriarchs, of Rome, of Alexandria, of Antioch, and of Constantinople, to whom afterwards he of Jerusalem was also add­ed, for the Honour of that City; but he lasted not long. The two principal were he of Rome, and he of Constantinople, because those were two Seats of the Empire, and at last they took upon them the Quality of Oecumenical Bishops against all Reason, Divine, or Humane, and against the Decrees of many Councils. Since those times every thing hath gone worse and worse.

[Page 31]It is no hard matter to prove, that the Presidence of the Bishop of Rome was purely in consideration of the Dignity of that City: Concil Con­stant. Can. 2. The Second Canon of the Council of Constantinople shews it suffici­ently; where it is said, That the Bishops who are established over a Diocess, shall not go beyond the bounds which have been set them; but that the Bishop of Constantinople shall have the Honour of the Primacy, after the Bishop of Rome, and not before him, because that City is not so ancient as that of Rome. After the same manner the 9 th Canon of the Council of Antioch ordains, That the Bishops of great Cities shall have the pre-eminence, because all men of business repair to the Capital City. Conc. Antio. Can. 9. [...], &c.

Concil. Cal­cedon, Act 16. And the Council of Calcedon, in its 16 th Act, gives no other Reason for the City of Rome's having the first place. The Fathers, says this Council, have also given these Priviledges to the See of Old Rome, by reason of the Empire of that City, &c. And for this very reason they have given the same priviledges to the most Holy See of New Rome, judging very rati [...]nally, that a City honoured by the Sena [...]e and the Empire, ought to enjoy the same priviledges as the Ancient Rome, and have the same pre-eminence in Eccl [...]siastical Affairs, and be the second after her. Conc. Turin, c. [...]. And the Council of Turin, in its first Chapter, hath these words, That Bishop who can prove that his City is the Capital of the wh [...]le Province, let him have the honour of the Primacy, and the Faculty of conferring Or­ders upon others. And we must not judge of this matter by what we now see: For Example, That Paris and London, which are the Capital Cities of two great States, have not the Primacy over the other Bishops of these Kingdoms: for besides that they here re­ceived the Christian Faith later than the others did; the Court of Rome, and its Favourers, have managed this very politickly, not suffering that any great City shoul [...] have this Honour, lest the Bi­shop of it should become their Rival, and should cast off their yoke; as we see, they had all the difficulty in the World, to subdue the great City of Milan: Sigon. lib. 9. de Regno Ita­liae. Petrus Da­mianus, in E­pist. ad Hilde­brandum. For in the year 1059. Nicholas the Second, having sent thither Peter Damien, Bishop of Ostia, to make them lay aside the Ambr [...]sian Service, and take up the Roman; both the Cler­gy and People answered vigorously, That they had never been sub­ject to the Roman Laws, and that the Bishop of Rome had nothing to do to meddle with what concerned them: That it would be a thing unworthy of their Church, which had been always free, to become subject, by their own cowardize, to another Church; and [Page 32] that if they did it, it would bring an eternal shame upon them. It is true, the Cardinal did corrupt the Arch-bishop, who received the Roman Service; but the Clergy and the People soon shook off the Yoke, till Gregory the Seventh's time, who by cunning practices, and by cruelty, oppressed them. Vasaeus in Chronico Hisp Anno Christi 717, Rodericus Arch. Tolet. lib. 6. cap. 25, & 26. In the same manner, at Toledo, the Popes were forced to shed a great deal of blood, before they could compel that Town to receive the Roman Service; and at last, to appease the People, they were forced to allow, that they should retain the Gallican Service in Six Parishes of the City of Toledo. Ra­venna also resisted for some time couragiously, because they had ta­sted somewhat of their Spiritual, as well as of their Temporal Do­minion. We see it by the 54 th Epistle of Adrian, Ad Carolum Mag­num de Leone Episcopo Ravennate qui non vult Obedire Adriano. His Pre­decessor Sergius had done the same thing, and so did John, his Suc­cessor, and many others. See Cardinal D' Ailly, in his book of the Reformation. Guicciardin also confirms it: The Church of Ravenna, says he, disputed with Rome for the Primacy, because the Seat of Religion hath been accustomed to follow the Power of the Empire and its Arms; which, by the way, also proves the Usurpations of the Bi­shops of Rome. Durand also tells us, That Charlemayne was intreat­ed by the Pope Adrian, to abolish the Ambrosian Service throughout all Germany and France, and that he found great resistance, as against an unheard of Tyranny. The Emperor, says he, did compel all the Ec­clesiasticks, both by Threats and Punishments, to burn the Books of the Am­brosian Service. He could not force the Men of Milan to it, who yet kept it near 300. years. And we see in the 6 th Chapter of the Capitularies of Charlemayne, that this Emperour made this Ordi­nance in the Year 806, that the Service should be sung in Churches, according to the Use and Custom of the Roman Church. These Villains, who owe so much to this Emperour, make but very little acknowledgment, and have shewed but small consideration to his descendants.

I do not think it necessary to prove, that the Bishops of Rome presided in the Councils, no more than other Bishops; that it was the Emperours who called the Councils, that were to approve, and make them to be observed. There is no man but knows that our Kings have assembled many, and have presided in them, even when the Bishop of Rome hath had a Deputy, or Legate present. We have a remarkable Example in the History of the Gallican Councils, which it were to be wished, that our great King would follow; Historia Con­cil. Gallic. Concil. Lepti­nense ad An­num 748, in Praefat. that is, of [Page 33] the Council of Leptine, assembled in the Name of Carloman, Duke and Prince of the Francks, under Chilperie the third. First of all, you there see that it was Carloman who presided, though the Bishop of Rome had his Deputy there present. See how he there speaks: In the Name of Our Lord Jesus Christ, I Carloman, Duke and Prince of the Francks, in the Year from the Incarnation 742, the Second of the Ca­lends of May, have assembled a Council, by the advice of the Servants of God, and the Lords of our Court, that is to say, Boniface, and Burchard, Bishops, with their Clergy, to advise concerning means whereby the Law of God, and the Ecclesiastical Religion, which is fallen to decay in these latter Ages, may be re-established, and how Christian People may attain to the Sal­vation of their Souls, and not be destroyed by the deceits of false Teachers.

This is a true Idea of the present State of the Church; but with this difference, that the disorder is now much greater; and would it would please God to touch the heart of some great Prince in our days, to do as Carloman did. Under the same King Chilperie, Pepin, who was yet only Duke of the Francks, called also another Council at Soissons, where he also presided: The Preface begins thus, I Pepin: And at the end it is said, Whosoever shall contradict these Decrees, Esta­blished by 23. Bishops, and other Servants of God, by and with the consent of Prince Pepin, and of the Lords of France, shall be judged either by the Prince, or by the Bishops: And the Council is signed, Pepin. The Bi­shop of Rome is no more mentioned in all this, than the Mufti, though they were already arrived to a great height, because it was near two hundred years since they had been declared Heads of the Church by the Emperor Phocas. The first who took upon him this Quality, was one B [...]niface the third, who for having protected Phocas, who had killed the Emperor Maurice, to settle himself in his place, was by him, in recompence, honoured with the Title of Universal Bishop. Many Authors do relate the History of it, but one only shall suffice, who is Beda, Beda in Tra­ctatu de sex aetatibus mundi. who reports, Phocam Imperatorem rogante Bonifacio se­cundo, Gregorii M [...]gni Successore statuisse sedem Romanae, & Apostolicae Ecclesiae Caput esse Omnium Ecclesiarum, quia Constantinopolitana Pri­mam se Omnium Eccl [...]si [...]rum scribebat. And since that time they are become the Vicars General of Jesus Christ upon Earth, because they are the worthy Successors of Simon Magus, who as St. Epipha­nius reports, Epiphanius haeres 20. pretended to be the Vicar of Christ. And the Di­vine Power, for the Government of the Church. Being thus far ad­vanced, no man need wonder that they govern the Church so well: for as Tacitus observes Tacitus. Ne [...] [...]nquam Imperium flagitio quaesitum bonis [Page 34] Artibus Exercuit. Since this Consecration of Phocas, they have al­ways had the Wind in their Stern, and Fortune hath by little and little greatly advanced them: They were never at a loss to find peo­ple who would assist them to get a share in the Plunder. Prima Prin­cipatus initia, Ardua ubi sis ingressus, adesse Studia & Ministros. And I may say that which the same Tacitus says in an other place, with re­spect to the Ancient Grandeur of Rome, That Fortune prepared them in many places of the World means and occasions of establish­ing their Empire: Tacitus. Struebat jam Fortuna in diversa parte Terrarum, ini­tia causus (que) Imperio, (Papatui.) It is now not very long since that the Emperors did elect and depose the Popes: They made use of them in their Affairs; in Embassies; they punished them when they had committed any Crime, and sometimes even with Death. Theodorie, King of Italy, for Example, sent John, Bishop of Rome, in an Em­bassy to the Emperor Justinian; and having afterwards re-called him, he put him to death in Prison. Platina, Si­gebert. Belisarius, Lieutenant of the Emperor Justinian, in the year 538, drove away Silverius, Bi­shop of Rome, and put Vigil in his place, whom he afterwards drew through the Town with a Rope about his Neck, as Platina Platina. relates. In the year 654, the Emperor Constantine bound the Pope Martin in Chains, and sent him away in Exile to Chersona, where he died. In the year 963, the Emperor Otbo deposed Pope John the 12 th. In the the year 1007, Henry the Second deposed Three Popes, Benet the Ninth, Sylvester the Third, and Gregory the Sixth. We see by the Authentick of Justinian, that the Popes paid to the Emperors, as to their Soveraigns, Twenty Pounds of Gold for their Investiture Authent. Ju­stinian, 123. cap. 3. And Pope Adrian himself, and also Leo the Eighth, do confess, that the Emperor Charlemayne had the Authority of Electing Popes Distinct. 63. Can. in Sinodo..

Why is it not so now? It is because the Popes have by a thousand Cheats ruined the Roman Emperors, and are become more mighty then they, as well by the desolation of the Empire, which they have rent in pieces, as by the Conquests which they have made in Italy, and by the Usurpations which they yet make upon what re­mains to the Emperor, in debauching part of his Subjects, who swear Fidelity and Obedience to them, even against the Emperor himself, and by holding in Captivity their Consciences, by means of the Monks, to make them do what they please in favour of the Pope; not to mention how they drain his Country, as well as others, trafficking with Princes and their Subjects, in almost the same man­ner as is usual with some people of the Ind [...]es, to whom they give [Page 35] Pins, and pieces of Glass for their Pearls and Gold. After this manner they draw to them all our Substance; and we are, at least, as simple as these poor people.

Some body in Tacitus complains, That the Money went out of Rome for Diamonds; and that [...]trangers and Enemies made advan­tage by it: Tacitus. Pecuniae nostrae lapidum causa ad Exteras & Hostiles Gentes transeunt. We have now so much more reason to make this Com­plaint, as Diamonds are better worth than Bulls and Dispensations of our Most Holy Father the Pope.

Bonif [...]ce the Third, as I have already said, having been made Uni­versal Head of the Church by Phocas, this power increased prodigi­ously in a little time: Sigebert in Chronico. This good Pope presently called together some Ecclesiasticks of his Faction, in a Synod, who confirmed to him the Title of Head of the Church. After him, his Successors, taking advantage of the weakness of the Greek Emperors, and of the distractions of Italy, they established and augmented their Au­thority more and more; and the Exarchat of Ravenna, having been ruined by the Lombards, the Spiritual Power of that City fell as a prey into the hands of the Bishops of Rome, who, seeing none in Italy but the Lombards, who could disturb him, plaid a cunning trick to draw to them out of France, Pepin, Son of Charles Martel; it was by sending him Letters brought from Heaven to the Holy Father, which promised Pepin an assured Victory over the Lombards. Pepin gave credit to this Letter, came and defeated the Lombards; pursu­ant to which, His Holiness, Pope Zachary, the worthy Successor of Boniface the Third, very honestly dispenced with Pepin's Oath of Al­legiance, which he owed to King Chilperic, and crowned him King of France; and at the same time dispenced with all the French for their Obedience due to their lawful Prince. Pepin then in acknow­ledgment of this, gave them the Exarchat of Ravenna, with many Cities and Priviledges, reserving to himself only the Soveraignty, and the Right of Electing Popes, which, as History testifieth, his Successors enjoyed long after him.

Nor had any of their Bishops any need of Bulls, or to pay Tri­bute to the Popes, being elected by the Clergy and the People, inve­sted by the Prince, who alone assembled Capitula Ca­roli Magni Ludovi. Lo­tharii, &c. Councils, and made Regu­lations in Ecclesiastical things. And when the Popes encroached farther than they had to do, we see that the Churches of Germany, and of France, had yet courage enough to oppose their Enterprises. And we find that in the year 991. the Counc [...] assembled at Reimes [Page 36] under Hugh Capet, deposed one Arnoulph, Arch-bishop of Rheimes, in spite of the Pope; and when he complained of it, they asked him for what [...]eason they should prefer his Apostleship before others? Concil. Rhem. anno 991. c. 26. & cap. 28. Vt sciamus & intelligamus cur inter caeteros Apostolatum vestrum praeferre debeamus. And in the 28 th Chapter of the same Council, What would Laws signifie, if all were to be governed by one Man's Humour?

In the greatest prosperity of Rome, when it was the Seat of the Empire, and Bishops were men of Merit, the Gelasiuses, the Grego­ries, and the Leoes, the Afr [...]cans would not give them the Priviledge of Appeals; how much less ought we to do it now? Compare our times with theirs. It is true, that notwithstanding the Protesta­tions which were every where made against the Ambition of the Bi­shops of Rome, yet they still gained ground; and at length, having gotten, either by some trick, or by open violence, not only the Exar­chat of Ravenna, but Benevento, and Ferrara, and what they call the Pa­trimony of St. Peter, having made themselves absolute Masters of the Town of Rome, they were no longer afraid to declare open War a­gainst the Emperours. And this it was which made Guicciardin say in two places, Jam ita se gerunt ut Authoritatis ponti [...]iciae videatur Leges dare potius quam accipere Terrorem armo [...]um Coelestium in res caducas vertunt. Tandem non erga Deum & Homines Charitas, sed Exercitus, sed bella in Christianos horum Curae & Ludicra; jam per multos annos beliorum Autho­res, incendiorum Faces, &c. Now they behave themselves as though it were a part of the Popes Authority to give Laws, not to receive them. They turn the Terror of Heavenly Weapons on Worldly Affairs; now not love to God and Man, but Armies and Wars a­gainst Christians, are their care and sport. For many years they have been Authors of Wars, &c.

Aventin. in Boi. Hist. Aventin gives us an account of a Letter which the Emp [...]ror Bar­berossa wrote in the year 1150. to the Princes of Germany, which saith expresly, That the Popes being increased in Wealth and Digni­ty, by means of him and his Predecessors, apply themselves with all diligence to dethrone Kings and Princes, and cannot suffer an Equal: That they were busied both Night and Day, not so much to destroy him, as the Sacred Empire. After they had oppressed the Head of it, they affect not only Domination, but Divinity it self, and will not be feared and adored less than God: And that the Christian Religi­on hath no greater Enemies than they.

[Page 37]But he who of all the Popes gave the most mortal blow to the Church, and to the Authority of Christian Princes, was Gregory the Seventh, and that by three Devilish means: First of all by Depo­sing the Emperor Henry the Fourth, which caused the ruin of the Western Empire; for since that time it hath been torn into many little States, and weak Principalities, which the Popes have play­ed with at their pleasure, as well in Germ [...]ny, as in Italy. Only our Country of France hath maintained it self against all their endea­vours, without being divided, and hath still kept some small Re­mains of Liberty, which they daily attempt to rob us of. The se­cond device was to engage Princes, and great men, and those who were very rich, in the Croisadoes and Expeditions of the Holy Land, and to make them take the Cross; which besides the vast Treasures which the Popes got by it, augmented greatly their Authority; for from hence they invented Indulgences, from whence the Court of Rome hath drawn unspeakable Advantages as well in Riches, as in Authority. The third was by introducing neatly under the pretence of ignorance, and the weakness of Princes, the use of Cardinals of divers Nations, in the Election of the Pope; for by this these Nations are for the Spiritual [...]art become subject to the See of Rome, the Clergy and people of R [...]me, as well as the Empe­rors, have lost the Right of Electing the Bishop. All these States have thought that the Bishop of Rome was greater than another Bishop, and that they had great Interest in his Election; and the Popes have gotten many Creatures in all these States. It is true, that at this time they are almost all Italians, because they have of late so well bridled all these Countries by the Infinite number of their Monks, and by many other Inventions that they now fear not their casting off the yoke.

After that Henry the Fourth had been Deposed, and the Right of Investing Bishops taken from him, the Successors of this Gregory pretended that the Ecclesiasticks were exempt from all Jurisdiction and power of [...]ecular Princes, even in Civil Affairs. And besides that, that the Bishop of Rome could D [...]pose Kings, if they did not submit to all his Orders; and to fortifie this, came forth the Decre­tals of many Popes, of which these people at last made so good use to compose their Bull de Caena Domini, and the Directory of the Inquisitors.

But, say they, all this does not hinder the Bishop of Rome from being Head of the Church, for we see that the Laws and [Page 38] Rules, and Roman Discipline, have been followed by the other Churches. It is true, that in the West, as there was no other Patriarchal See, and as in most places thee Christian Faith had been received by means of the Roman Chur [...]h, the wo [...]ld had a great respect for it; and be [...]ides, it was by reason of the Dignity of this City. As in France we always consult the Sorbonne at Paris concern­ing matters of Religion; not that for this reason the other Uni­versities or Churches depend upon it. But it is false, that all Chri­stians, or the greatest part of them have received the Rules and Discipline of Rome. The Greek Churches never owned them, nor any of those who are in Asia, or in Africa, as the Armenian, the Ethiopian and others. And what we have already alledged from many of the Fathers and Councils, from the Gallican Church▪ from the Churches of Ravenna, Milan and Toledo, who with so much difficulty received the Roman Office, even in the Eleventh Century, shews sufficiently that they had no dependance on the Bishop of Rome. I could bring a thousand other proofs did I not fear being too tedious to the Reader. Avent. Anno 723. Aventin relates that Gregory the Se­cond sent one Winefred towards the Countries lying upon the Rhine to reform the Churches there, and to set them on the Roman bot­tom; but that they vigorously opposed him and many Bishops, called him the Author of Lyes, and corrupter of the Christian Faith. 1 Tom. Con­ciliorum. In the first Tome of the Councils we have a Letter of Damasus Bishop of Rome, to Hierome a Priest, where we find these words, which do sufficiently confute the pretences of our people: I intreat, Brother, thy charity to send us the Greek Psalter, with the Notes by which they sing them. These are the words, Peto charitatem tuam ut Graecorum Psallentiam ad nos dirigere tua Fraternitas delectetur. For, adds he, we are so simple that upon Festival days we do nothing but read a Chapter in the Epistles, or in the Gospel, and we have no custom of singing Psalms, nor is the Grace and Glory of Hymns to be found in our mouths. Observe these words, Charitas tua, and Fraternitas tua, from a Bi­shop of Rome to a Priest, and how far they were from endeavour­ing to make other Churches subject to their Laws, since that on the contrary they did correct their own faults by the good exam­ple of others. At the end of St. Grego­ries Works. We find also at the end of St. Gregory's Works, that about the year 593, he sent a Monk called Austin into England, who passing through France, was surprized to see there another manner of Divine Service than he had seen in Italy, with Cere­monies quite different; that when he wrote to Gregory, he asked [Page 39] him how it came to pass that since there was but one Faith, the customs of Churches were so different, and that the custom and manner of Masses was not the same at Rome as in France? To which St. Gregory answered, You know, Brother, what is the custom of the Roman Church, wherein you have been educated. But my opinion is, that if you find any thing, be it in the Roman Church, or the Gallican, or in any other which may be more agreeable to God, you should pr [...]f [...]r it; for we ought not to love the things for the places, but the places for the good things we find in them.

See Aposto­lick. There are some people also who would make an advantage of this that the Church of Rome is by the Fathers called the Aposto­lick See. In truth as the Pharisees sat in the seat of Moses, as our Sa­viour says, so do the Bishops of Rome also [...]it upon the Seat of the Apostles. But it is certain, that the other Bishops who teach the Doctrine of the Apostles, and imitate their example, are more A­postolick than they. You must know that all the Churches founded by the Apostles were honoured with this Title, and particularly famous and Metropolitan Cities, which were looked upon as the Mothers of other Churches, tho sometimes they had embraced Christianity after others that were less considerable, because there Resided the Civil, which drew after it the Eccl [...]siastical Jurisdicti­on. And because there were many in the East where Christians were far more numerous than on this side, none of those Churches ever raised it self above the others; but in the West there being but one, which was the Roman, and no other having been since erect­ed, tho the Germans, Spaniards, French, and oth [...]r Nations have embraced the Christian Religion since those times, yet Rome alone hath had this Glorious Title, and the others have had great respect for it, without any manner of d [...]pendance on it however at the beginning, as hath already been shewed. But that hindereth not but that other Orthodox Church [...]s may also have it; consult Ter­tullian, Tertul. de praescripti; cap. 20. he says that all Churches that follow the Faith of the Apostles, are Apostolick. And Pope Pelagius confirms the same thing, Pelag. ad Valer. in Col­lect. Rom. part 1. p. 227. Whensoever, says he, there ariseth any question in peoples minds con­cerning an Vniversal Synod, let those who love their own Salvation, consult the Apostolick Sees, that they may learn the reason of what they understand not. St. Aug. Epist. 162. And St. Austin speaking of Cecilian Bishop of Carthage, con­demned by the Donaetists, before whom he refused to answer, says that he might reserve the whole cognizance of the thing to the judgment of his other fellow Bishops, chiefly those of Apostolick [Page 40] Sees. We have seen already that the Council of Rheimes assembled under Hugh Capet, says that the Apostleship of the Bishop of Rome is not to be pr [...]ferred before that of other Bishops, and so his See is no more Apostolick. Apollin. lib. 7. Epist. 4. Sidon. Apollin. lib. 6. Apol [...]inaris gives this account of the Apostleship to Fontelus Bishop of Vaison; and says also, that the Bishop Tricassin lived forty years in an Apostolick See. Greg. Hist. l 4. cap. 26. Gr [...]gory of Tours calleth the Church of Bourdeaux an Apostolick See. The Council of Antioch assembled against Paulus Samosatensis calleth the Church of Antioch the Church Catholick. We have, say they, been obliged to give unto the Catholick Church another Bishop in the room of this Heretick. Euseb. Hist. lib. 7. cap. 30. Nevertheless this Catholick Church was not subject to the Bishop of Rome no more than Cecilian Bishop of Car­thage, of whom the Emperor Constantine also said, that he presided over the Church Catholick Euseb. Hist. lib. 10. cap. 7..

Bishop of Bishops. As for the quality of Bishop of Bishops, which the Popes take upon themselves, and which the Fathers have sometimes given to the Bishops of Rome, it is like that of King of Kings, in regard of those who had Kings under them. The Metropolitans who were the first Bishops were thus called. Chrysostome is called Father of the Fathers, and Teacher of the whole World by the Emperors Theodo­sius. Niceph. lib. 4. cap. 43. Sy­don. Apollin. lib. 6. Epist. 2. Soveraign Pontife. And Sydonius calls Lupus Tricassin Bishop of Trequier, Fa­ther of Fathers, and Bishop of Bishops. He also calls one Graecus Massiliensis Bishop of Marseilles by the same name, and gives also the Title of Soveraign Pontife, even to those sort of Bishops, and to Aegrotius Bishop of Sens, and to Fontelus Bishop of Vaison. Sydon. Apol. lib. 7. Epist. 2, & 4. He says in another place, that Evatrix King of the Goths having subdued all Aquitain, killed all the Soveraign Pontifes that were there, and that there were no other Bishops establi [...]hed in their stead. Idem lib. 5. Epist. 6. The same Author calls also Mamereus Bishop of Vienne Soveraign Pontife. Lib. 4. Ep. 11. & lib. 6. Epist. 4. And there also speaking of Lupus Bishop of Trequier, he says, he is the fir [...]t Bishop of the Habitable Earth. This same Sydonius having been chosen by the Clergy of Bourges, to Elect, and in the presence of the Archbishop of Sens to establish a Bishop at Bourges; says, You have gi [...]en me this Commission to Elect a Bishop in the presence of our most Holy Father the Pope, a man m [...]st worthy of the Soveraign Priesthood. Praesente sacro sancto Papa Pontificatu summo Dignissimo. So he calls Aegrotius Bishop of Sens, and not the Pope of Rome. Ignatius ad Smirnens. We see also that St. Ignatius acknowledges no Dignity above that of a Bi­shop. Honour the Bishop as being the chief Priest, wh [...] beareth the Image of God. Leo Epist. 87. ad Afric. And Pope L [...]o acknowledgeth that above a Bishop there [Page 41] is no other degree. The Poet Fortunatus gives St. Germain Bishop of Paris, the Title of High Priest Fortun. lib. 11. Ep. 13..

As for the word Pope which these people have affected to distin­guish themselves by from other Bishops; it is like the word Legate or Nuncio, which they give to their Embassadors and Envoys in­stead of using the ordinary Terms; these are singular marks of vanity and pride, which however have their effect on silly people, who imagin by these words that the Pope is a man of a quite dif­ferent kind from others. You must know that this word in its Ori­ginal signifies no other thing than a Priest or Bishop; and that it was common heretofore to all people of this Character, and even now at this day they are so called in Greece, and also in Germany, and the Motto of the Duke of Brunswick, who stiled himself Gottes, friend; and Paepsten fiend, signifies no less that he was an enemy to Priests than to Popes. We see in the Life of St. Cyprian, writ­ten by Pontianus a Deacon, that he is there called Pope. Epist. Cler. Rom. ad Cypr. de Lapsu. 15. And in the Epistle of the Roman Clergy to St. Cyprian, there are these words, Cypriano Papae, to Pope Cyprian; and at length, We desire thee most H [...]ly and most Glorious Pope. And in the Epistle of Calerin, which is the 89 th. in Cyprian, The most Holy Pope Cyprian. And Ischy­ras writing to Athanasius, says thus, Beato Papae Athanasios: To the blessed Pope Athanasius, Greeting. I need not bring any more proofs, since Baronius himself doth acknowledg and attest that this name Baron. Martyr. Janu­arii. had been common to all Bishops until the year 1070, that Gregory the Seventh, that Able Pope whom we have already mentioned, forbad it to be given to any other Bishop than he of Rome.

As for the Cardinals who are in no other See than that of Rome, they in my opinion give so little advantage to it above the Sees of other Bishops, speaking like a Christian, that they do abase and make it infinitely less than others. For what are these people? They are worldly men, Epicures, people of pride, vanity and prodigi­ous expence; there are but few of them who devour less than Three hundred thousand Livres These are French Livres that are worth 20 En­glish pence a pie [...]e, 25000 l. a year after an Infamous man­ner; and it was not without reason that the Emperor Sigismond re­presented to the Council of Constance, that they were good for no­thing [Page 42] in the Church, and their Dignity ought to be supprest. And of latter days even in the Council of Trent there were men bold enough to propose the abolishment of this Dignity, or else to re­duce them to their first Functions of Curates. As also the Gallican Church demanded in its Remonstrances to the Council of Constance, Domini Cardinales: My Lords, the Cardinals, say they, are Curates of the Parish Churches of Rome, and in this respect are they called Cardinals; that is to say, th [...] chief of Principals Cardinals in other pla­ces besides Rome.. And according to this Insti­tution their chief duty is and ought to be to hear Conf [...]ssions, Preach and Baptise. Besides there were many other Churches who as well as Rome had such like Priests as the Cardinals. We see it by a Brief of the Gallican Chur [...]h under Charles the Fifth Apostoli dati. Cardina­libus per Na­tionem Galli­canam, sub Ca­rolo Quinto., It is not only Rome, says this Brief, which hath Cardinals, but there are many other Churches who have them, as that of Ravenna, and who call them Cardinals who have the chief Employments in the Church. And so it was in many other Churches, Kingdoms and Provinces. And the Cardinals were in those times under the Bishops, as may be seen by the The Chro. of the Abby of St. Jean de Vignes at Soissons. Chroni­cle of the Abby of St. Jean de Vignes at Soissons, where Theobald Bi­shop of Soissons is brought in speaking of the Curate of St. John de Vignes, and says, Presbiter vero Cardinalis, ipsius ejusdem loci, mihi de more & Archidiacono de Cura Parochianorum reddat rationem. That is to say, That the Cardinal-Priest of this Parish ought according to the custom to give an account of his Parishioners to me, and to the Arch-Deacon. The same Author called Le Gris, a Canon Regular of St. Augustin, says, That there were Twelve Curates at Soissons, who time out of mind had been called Cardinals; and it was the same thing in many other places of France. And we read in Pasquier that in a Council held at Metz under Charlemagne, it was ordained, Pasquiet, lib. 4. cap. 3. Vt Titulos Cardinales in Vrbibus vel Suburbiis constitutos honestissime & Canonice retractatione or­dinent & disponant Art. 54. . That the Bishops should ordain and dispose the Title of Cardinals Honestly, and Canonically, in Cities and Suburbs.

If this name and dignity be to be esteemed so highly in the Church, it would be very easie to make as many as one would in France without the Bishop of Rome his consent, since that ev [...]ry Bi­shop hath the power of making them, and without being Reor­dained there is no Priest who doth now officiate, who may not be a Cardinal when you please. Thus this signifies nothing, no more than the other things which have been already confuted, to prove that the Popes Authority is Divine, since the S [...]ripture and the whole Primitive Church are against it.

[Page 43]But I must here also answer one Humane Reason which they make use of to throw dust in our eyes; A humane Reason for the Papacy. they take it from an Au­thor whom they esteem as much as St. Paul, nay more, for they pretend that without him we should fail in many Articles of our Faith; this is Aristotle. I scarce believe so much can be said of St. Paul, who wrote the clearest of all the Apostles. Senza Aristotele noi mancarono di molti Articoli di Fide, Palavic. lib. 8. cap. 19. says Cardinal Palavicini. Bellar­mine also, another Cardinal and a Jesuit, doth object to us that Ari­stotle demonstrated Monarchy to be the most excellent of all Govern­ments, and by consequence God would have his Church so govern­ed, and that this Monarchy belongs to the Pope. It is certain that the Spiritual Government of the Church is Monarchical. It is Jesus Christ who governs it, a Monarch all-wise, and Almighty; but the external Government of the visible and Universal Church cannot be so; and their principle it self is contested by the greatest part of Politicians. Aristotle himself, their Apostle, says in some places, that a mixed or compounded Government, be it Aristocratical, or De­mocratical, is better: Aristot. lib. 2. Pol. cap. 4. Quae ex Pluribus constat Respublica melior est. And tho a Kingdom may be very well governed by one single per­son; yet it doth not follow that this one person can as well govern all the States and Kingdoms of the World. And he says in another place. Idem lib. 5. Pol. cap. 11▪ Huc enim sunt omnia reducenda ut ii [...]ui in Imperio sunt, non Ty­rannum sed patrem Familias agere videantur, & rem non quasi Dominus sed quasi Procurator & Praefectus administrare, nec quod nimium est sectari. Do the Popes govern after this manner? Reason and Experience both convince us of the contrary. We see by History, that the Empires of the World, when they were of too great an extent, could not subsist, and have been torn in pieces; and we have the example of some wise Emperors who made Decrees to hinder the enlargement of their Empire, as Augustus made one, Tacitus. De Coercendo intra limites Im­perio. It is a Proverb, That he who takes too much into his arms, can't hug it close. And this is so much the truer in Ecclesiastical Government, which cannot inflict Corporal punishments upon Delinquents; for St. Paul says expresly, that the Arms of the Evangelick Ministry are not according to the Flesh. And the Fathers as well as the Coun­cils do teach us, that the Arms of a Bishop ought to be Prayers and Tears. The example which they bring of one single Bishop, who by Divine Institution governs a Diocess, or of a Curate who governs one Church only, can signifie to them nothing at all; b [...]cause first of all there is a Divine Institution for that, but none for this. [Page 44] Besides, a man may easily manage a Boat upon a little River, who knows not how alone to manage a great Vessel upon the Ocean, much less a Fleet of Ships. And the Example of a Bishop or Cu­rate makes against them, for they are not Soveraigns, the one pre­sides only among the other Priests, and the other in a Parish.

I foresee that it will be said, that though this Authority of the Pope was not Instituted by Jesus Christ, that the Church for the first five Centuries knew it not, that it hath been since opposed from time to time by many people, perhaps of a turbulent or dis­contented mind; yet it must be believed that the Church which did establish it since, did it for good Reasons; that Jesus Christ and his Apostles have not so precisely Regulated every thing that concerns the Discipline of the Church, but that she may according to her own Prudence alter some things according to the times and places; or as others say, that every time hath its customs; or as Cardinal Palavicini, Palav. lib. 23. cap. 10. Altri tempi, Altri costumi: That the Church was at that time in its Infancy, and that the mature age to which it is now arrived, is not to be governed as its tender Infancy. I acknow­ledg that the Church may sometimes vary in its Discipline, and in its policy without any great crime; but this must be always by a principle of charity; and according to the Fathers, Quod prop­ter charitatem fit, non debet contra Charitatem militare. That which is done by a Principle of Charity, ought not to militate against Charity. It must tend to Edification; the Church ought to do nothing against the Commandments of God. Now I have shewn that the Papacy is against the Maxims of the Gospel, and is altogether con­trary to the Genius of Christianity, and more contrary than light is to darkness.

The Church hath not esta­blisht the Pa­pacy. The Papacy never did any good in the world.Furthermore, it is not true that the Church hath established the Papacy, only some few Councils held in Italy about two or three hundred years since, or thereabouts; as that at Florence, La­teran, Bolonia and Trent. But we speak not of these dark Ages; for those with whom I dispute, believe that the Church hath established this power in the Sixth or Seventh Century.

Cusan de concor. Ca­thol. lib. 2. cap. 14. In this respect the Cardinal Cusan mistakes himself, when he says, P [...]patus est de jure Positivo; The Papacy is of Positive Right: For the Church hath not established it in any Council, unless you call that Rabble of Ecclesiasticks and Seculars the Church, who as­sembled themselves together at the desire of Boniface the Third, to confirm upon him the Title of Universal Bishop, which he got by [Page 45] the Parricide Phocas, for the assistance he had given him. He himself acknowledgeth, that this Authority came to them, Cusan lib. 2. c. 13. & 34. ex usu & Con­suetudine Subjectionalis Obedientiae. And he maintains with good rea­son in another place, Si per possibile Treverinus Archiepiscopus per Ec­clesiam Congregatam pro Praeside & Capite Eligeretur, Ille proprie plus Suc­cessor esset Beati Petri in Principatu quam Romanus Episcopus: That if it were possible that the Arch Bishop of Treves could be chosen Head of the Church by a General Council, he would be a more lawful Successor of St. Peter than the Bishop of Rome; which shews, that in his time no Council had declared the Bishop of Rome as such. Besides, these words, if it were possible, shew, that he belioved not that the Church could dispose of such a thing. Gerson de potestate Ec­clesiastic. Gerson was also of this Opinion; for he acknowledgeth very ingeniously, that the Papal Authority cannot be conferred by the Church: Papalis Authoritas si non a Deo esset immediate instituta, a tota Ecclesia institui non poterat: If the Papal Autho­rity were not from God immediately, it could not be instituted by the whole Church.

And though it were true, that the Church had established it, as Pope Innocent the Third pretends, when he says, Ecclesia non nupsit vacua, sed Dotem mihi tribuit abs (que) pretio preti [...]sam, spiritualium plenitudi­nem & latitudinem temporalium; illius me constituit vicarium qui habet in vestimento suo scriptum, Rex Regum & Dominus Dominantium: The Church hath not married me without a Fortune; but hath given me the invaluable dowry of God, the fulness of Spirituals, and the latitude of Temporals; hath made me the Vicar of him who hath written on his garment, King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

Although that, I say, were true, it would not be less necessary to abolish this power, which is the cause of so many disorders, be­cause the Church in those days might have created it for the good of the Church, as she then thought: And having found out that it is to her ruine, she ought to destroy it; for the Chair of Peter is for the Church, and not the Church for the Chair of Peter: Petri Ca­thedra propter Ecclesiam, non Ecclesia propter Petri Cathedram. Quod prop­ter Charitatem fit, non debet contra Charitatem Militare. And since that our Faith, according to Thomas Aquinas, ought to be founded upon the Word of God only, and not upon the Eshablishments of the Church, as he says, Tho. Aquin. summa, part. 1. quaest. 1. Art. 8, & 10. Fides nostra innititur Revelationibus Prophetis & Apostolis Factis; Ecclesia non statuit nisi de non necessariis ad Salu­tem; According to this Truth, we are not obliged to believe the Ex­travagant [Page 46] of Pope Boniface, who says, That it is necessary to Salvati­on to submit to the Pope. And if the Church, according to these People, dared to change the Aristocratical Government, instituted by Jesus Christ, under which the Kingdom of God spread it self so far, Piety flourished, Idolatry was confounded; shall it not be allowable for the Church, and for Princes, who are its natural Pro­tectors, to redeem it out of that Slavery into which the Enemy of Mankind hath reduced it, to its first Purity and Simplicity? Methinks if Men had any sense of Religion, they ought to sigh continually, for the deplorable condition of the Church, and of the Greeks and Protestants, whom we have cast headlong into the Evil they now la­bour under.

Some people will have it, That because the Greek Patriarchs a­mong themselves hold that Place which the Council of Nice, and the Emperor Constantine gave to all Patriarchs, he of Rome, who had the first Place, ought still to keep it; and as in Place he was the first Bishop, and the only Patriarch in the West, he ought still to en­joy these Prerogatives. But first of all, none of the Greek Patri­archs, unless it were that John of Constantinople against whom St. Gregory wrote so vehemently, ever pretended to bear Rule o­ver the other Bishops, nor over the Church, much less over Chri­stian Princes, as the Popes do; and the Patriarch of Rome for above Three Hundred Years after his Institution, never attempted it.

Secondly, The Place which the Bishop of Rome held, was Prop­ter Principalitatem Vrbis, in regard of the Dignity of the City, which now hath no weight at all, Rome being no longer the Seat of the Empire, but the Sink and Common-shore of all filthy Iniquity, a Den of Thieves, and a Nest of Satan, Nido di Satanazzo, and the very Habitation of Sloth, Laziness and Beggary. Paris, or London, do at this time deserve this Honour a thousand times better. Be­sides, it was in a time when there were but very few Christians in the West; These great States were not yet converted to the Faith: France, Germany, Poland, part of Spain, and all the Northern Coun­tries, knew not what Christianity was; so that one Patriarch might more easily have the inspection of this small number of Christians who resorted also to Rome for their civil Affairs, as to the capital Ci­ty, where the Emperor resided. How are they now able to govern all the Churches, they who cannot govern that at Rome, and, which is worse, that trouble not their Heads about it? Add to this a [Page 47] fourth Reason, which is, That in those days they were not Temporal Princes, as they are become since; and had not innumerable Legi­ons of Monks and Beneficiaries at their command, as now they have, which renders this Power the most formidable of any upon Earth a­mong the Catholicks.

If because Rome had heretofore the first Place for the Spirituality before other Cities, she should pretend still to have it, it will thence follow, that she hath it for the Temporality over these same Cities, since the Spiritual Authority of this City, as I have already proved, was founded upon the Temporal and Civil, which she enjoyed as the Seat of the Empire; and so in pretending to the Regency of Religion in France, Flanders, and other Catholick Countries, they pretend also to have a Right of treating these States as they please; and they have effectually made them their Subjects and Tributaries, even to the disposing [...] the Crowns of Kings, as their fancy leads them.

There are others who believe they have hit on the right, when they say, that the Pope is Primus inter Pares, and that so he is the first of all Bishops. But I ask by what Authority? It is true, he was so among the Patriarchs, whilst that Rome, as I have said already, was the Seat of the Empire; but now I maintain, that he is Vltimus inter Pares, and unworthy of the Name of either Priest or Bishop, be­ing the Tyrant of the Church, and of Christian Princes, and a Temporal Prince himself. Were he not a Temporal Prince, all he could lawfully pretend to, would be to be the first Bishop of Italy.

I know it will be said, That I ask too much to obtain any thing; and I know that it will be neither better nor worse; but I will dis­charge my mind, and tell the Truth. God Almighty may raise up Princes when he pleases, who may restore that happy Equality a­mong the Bishops, under which the Church was heretofore so flou­rishing, and Christianity made so great Progress; which would also re-establish Peace among all Christians, much better than the Equali­ty of Turkish Politicks, of which they say, Ittichat Khoga Kopatmas: Equality produceth no Wars: They mean, the Equality of Poverty; that is to say, that great men are not to be suffered in a Nation; and that being all miserable, they would make no commotions: Whereas the Equality which I speak of, would produce not only a firm and la­sting Peace, but also the abundance of all Spiritual and Temporal Goods.

[Page 48]There are also some People who pretended, that if we acknowledg a necessity of having Arch-bishops and Primates, who take their Places above Bishops instituted by Jesus Christ, tho the Dignity of Arch-bishops or Primates is not so; in like manner, for Orders sake we may have a Pope. That might pass, if the Popes did not pretend to be of another Order; if they exercised no Authority over their fellow-brethren; if they were not Temporal and Mighty Princes; if the Clergy did not absolutely depend upon them; if they had nothing but a Pre-eminence of Place over the other Bishops in Assem­blies and in Councils; if there were One of them in every Christi­an State, who should solicite the Prince for the assembling of Provin­cial Synods every year, to whom he should be subject, as the other Bishops, and should entertain Communion with the other Patriarchs, or Catholick Popes, and with whom he should keep Correspon­dence, that they might altogether, by the Consent of their Respe­ctive Princes, cause General Councils to be assembled, when they should be necessary, which should be held sometimes in one State, and sometimes in another, and wherein should preside men of the greatest Understanding, and the greatest Merit, without exception of Persons; or else every Patriarch in his turn.

Thus was the Church anciently governed without Tyranny; by this means did Religion spread it self abroad with great success in all Countries, and not by a pretended Bishop, who is a Worldly Prince, and hath ruined the Church. We see, that heretofore, a­mong the Pagans, Kings have been Sacrificers and Ministers of Re­ligion. Amongst the Jews also, at the beginning, we find, that the Heads of Families, who were Soveraigns, did take upon them the offering of Sacrifices, and performed Divine Service; but be­fore these latter times, which is the Sink of all Ages, it was never seen, that Priests plaid the Princes, and that People who ought to employ themselves only in Prayers, and Sacrifices, and whom Jesus Christ, and all the most pure Canons of the Church, do forbid to meddle in Secular Affairs, should compare themselves with, and raise themselves above Kings.

Is it not a comely sight to behold a Temporal Prince wearing Three Crowns one above the other, sitting in a throne covered with Gold and precious Stones, having the Arms both of Sea and Land, many Attendants following him, who are equal to other Princes: Such a Prince as this, I say, to be the Vicar of Jesus Christ! He is then a Carnal Messias, and such a one as the Jews do at this day [Page 49] look for: He is then a King of Concupiscence and of Iniquity. If it be so, the Jews had reason to accuse him for endeavouring to supplant Caesar; the Romans would have been in the right to put him to Death; and so he would not have been the Redeemer of Mankind.

This Pretension of the Popes, as we see, is a horrible Blasphemy, and which yields the Cause over to the Jews against us, and tends to justifie every thing they did against our Lord Jesus, and utterly to overturn Christianity. The pretence also which they have, that Ecclesiasticks ought not to be subject to their Natural Prince, and are freed from Obedience to him by Jesus Christ; This is to renew against our great Saviour the impious Accusation which the Jews brought against him, That he would have made himself a King, and perswaded others to Rebellion.

There are others who pretend that the evil is not so great that there is a Pope, as that General Councils are no more assembled; and so they say, that we should rather speak of assembling a Coun­cil, than talk of exterminating the Papacy; because they think that a Council would limit the Pope, and hold the Reins shorter over him: But this Papacy subsisting, how shall a General Council be called, but that they'le have a hand in't? And if they have, what will this Council tend to? The End of it will be like that of Trent, sad and miserable. And put the case there might be found a Prince zealous, strong, and prudent enough to cause a General Council to be assembled by an agreement of other Christian Princes, in spight of the Pope; what would this Council do against the Pope, who would have all the Bishops for him, both by the Oath which they have taken to him, and by Twenty Millions of Revenue which he hath, and which he would employ to corrupt all the World? What would you do with the Monks, who would be all for him, it being their Interest to maintain the Authority and Infal­libility of the Pope, because the Priviledges which he hath given to many of them, which are as ancient as their first Institution, are not confirmed by any Lawful Council, and so are null? And how long should the good condition of this Prince's Affairs last, or his good Correspondence with other Princes, to make the Laws of this Council be obeyed; and that the Pope, who will be all, or nothing, shall not hinder the Execution of his Decrees, and continue his Ty­ranny? And how will you in the mean time keep the Papacy with its hands tied, and what will this signifie? It is certainly better to [Page 50] cast off the Yoke all at once, than to let it continue without being sure that it shall do no more mischief. Tutius est perire non posse quam juxta periculum non periisse, says a certain Author.

We have the sad Example of the Councils of Trent and Constance; from that of Trent we could not hope for any great matters; but e­ven that of Constance, which seemed well inclined to a Reformation, as well as that of Basil, found such horrible resistance in the Court of Rome, and among the Ecclesiasticks, that it never could re-esta­blish the ancient Discipline. And that shews us, that we must wholly eradicate this Papacy, and that it is not enough to assemble a free Oecumenical Council, but that it must be some powerful, zealous, and resolute Prince, who fears nothing but God, and not the Court of Rome, who must begin, continue, and vigorously end the thing, without hearkening to pretended moderate Councils, which tend only to the Churches ruin. The Proverb here signifies nothing, That it is better to preserve the Commonwealth as it is, than to have none at all: For I maintain that here is no Common­wealth, but a perfect Anarchy; and that the Church, instead of be­ing governed, is devoured by a Faction of Villains, who eat the peo­ple of God like bread.

But say they, you speak of abolishing the Primacy in the Church; and nevertheless there is no Society, no Families, no Colledge but hath it: Without it these Societies cannot subsist. It is not so much the Primacy which I condemn, as the Tyranny which hath been joined to it. The Primacy of Place might yet be suffered, although Jesus Christ hath not instituted it in the Church; but that of Pope, is a Primacy of Jurisdiction, to which the Universal Church, and the whole World is subject, as they pretend. I condemn the Pri­macy of a Bishop who is a Worldly Prince, who hath more than Twenty Millions of Rev [...]nue; this Primacy, which is the Cause of all the Disorders of the Church; Whereas the end and ordinary use of Lawful Primacies, is to maintain good Order in all Societies. And I wish nothing more, than to see re-established in the Church that Primacy which Jesus Christ hath there instituted; ( viz.) that of Councils, and that they should be often assembled, as they were in the Primitive Church; for it is the want of these Councils which hath undone the Church. We see in the Preface of the Eleventh Council of Toledo, that the Fathers say, That having wanted the Light of Councils for the space of Ten Years, the whole World went astray, and the Church fell into disorder and confusion. How [Page 51] much more reason have we now to complain of that, we who for above these Hundred Years have seen none, and which is more, can never hope to see a Lawful one, whilst the Papacy shall subsist? Sub­stracta Luce Conciliorum integro decennie, Matrem Omnium Errorum igno­rantiam, otiosas Mentes occupasse, adeo ut Babylonicae Confusionis olla suc­censa purpuratae Meretricis incrementa Sacerdotes sequerentur, quia Ecclesia­stici Convenius non aderat Disciplina, nec erat qui Errantium Corrigeret partes, cum Sermo Divinus haberetur Extorris.

Is not this the cause of so many Superstitions, of so many Here­sies, Schisms, and Licentiousness, which we see in the Clergy? Is it not a ridiculous thing, that no more Councils shall be called, whilst we see the Monks, both Capucins, Carthusians and Jesuits often assem­ble their Congregations for the augmentation of their Societies? It is no wonder if the Church daily runs to ruin, whilst these Societies fortifie themselves. Is it not clear as the day, that if Pro­vincial Synods were called every year, National every three or four years, as heretofore they were under our great Kings; and Oecume­nical Councils, at least, once in Ten years, that Remedies would be found out for the Calamities of the Church? Might not a Patriarch in every State, aided by the Secular Power, excute the Decrees of the Church with more facility, less jealousie, and more security for Re­ligion and for the State, than a forreign Ambitious, and potent Prince, who resolves to take no care for Religion, but to model eve­ry thing to his own Interest? If this Patriarch should neglect his Duty, or carry it like a Master, should not the Prince chastise him, nor depose him? Experience shews us, that the Church never flou­rished but when she was Aristocratically governed, and when there was no other Primacy in the Universal Church than that of Coun­cils, and all Primates and Patriarchs were subject to them: But since the Patriarch of Rome hath had the sole disposing of Reli­gion in the West, we have seen nothing but Confusion, Anarchy, Schism, Heresies, Impiety, Atheism, Cruelty and Barbarity. Ipsa Ecclesia Vnus est Princeps, & Vnitati fidelium, non singulis haec Jurisdi­ctio a Domino conceditur, &c. Quia Vnitas Ecclesiae multo major est at (que) perfectior, quam Vnitas Vnius Regis aut Imperatoris terreni.

Thus did the Holy Council of Basil answer the false Reasons of Pope Eugenius his Orators, who pretended, That the Unity of the Church was preserved much better by a Pope than by the Council.

[Page 52]There are others who would have the Pope's Authority confin'd within the bounds which the Councils of Constance and of Basil had marked out for it; but they never understood the Moral Impossibili­ty that there is, not only of making the Popes consent to it; but suppose they were constrained to consent to these Rules for a season, to make them observe them always, or for any long time. And Experience confirms what I say, with reference even to these Coun­cils which have put no stop at all to their career; for they live in contempt as well of these as of all other Lawful Councils. Have not they called others in Italy, who have destroyed whatever these had established, even to treat with the Name of Heresie this Holy Doctrine of the Superiority of the Council? Have not the Popes been sufficiently Sacrilegious to raze out of the Roman Edition of General Councils, the Council of Basil from among the Oecumeni­cal Councils? It is then impossible, that with the Impiety and Am­bition wherewith the Court of Rome is wholly made up, and with the enormous power which the Popes at this time have, which e­quals that of the greatest Kings, that they should be reduced to sub­mit themselves to the Council of Constance. And even that would signifie nothing; for this Council gives them too much Authority; It gives them the power which belongs to the Emperors, of assem­bling General Councils, of presiding in them, and concluding, and of executing the Canons of Councils, in regard of particular Churches, and even of making Decrees, during the Inter­vals of Synods, and of being judged only by a General Coun­cil.

They ought then to be deprived of this temporal power, the Car­dinals to be abolished, and the Monks to be Enfranchised, and Re­leased from the rash Vows they have made to the Popes; the dis­posing of the Palls of Archbishops ought to be taken from him, and the faculty of Investing Bishops, and of dispencing with them for holding so many Benefices; with all the other Simonical Traf­fick which will still renders him the Tyrant of the Church, the Ma­ster of all States, and the Devil the possessor of many souls. It is much more easie to restore all at once the ancient Discipline. I pro­mote a Paradox, but my reason is, that there will never be a good change, but it must happen after some strangely surprizing, or if I may so say, some violent manner, such violence as forces its way into the Kingdom of Heaven. Whilest we stand upon treating, the Popes shall maintain themselves always with the times, either by [Page 53] Intriegues, or by some Devilish inventions, the most zealous shall grow cold upon the business, Ministers shall be corrupted either by money, or by Cardinals Caps, the Prince shall have other affairs found him to look after, or shall be killed by the hand of some Monk or other: All the Jesuits and the Monks shall be everlast­ingly for the Papacy, whatever shew they at this time make. Ger­son somewhere says that there will never be a Reformation if some zealous and resolute Pope doth not procure it by assembling a Gene­ral Council. For my part, I say, that if God doth not inspire some great Prince to do it, I say that a Reformation will come as soon by means of the Devil as the Pope. First of all, the Court of Rome professeth an abhorrence of calling General Councils. Concilio sem­per aborrito da Pontefici, says Palavicini: Besides that, they have estab­lished this fundamental Maxim, That the Pope cannot divest himself of the least tittle of his Authority, no not for the salvation of the whole world; for the Pope, say they, is not the Master but only the Guardian of this Authority. Nay, they go so far as to maintain that the Church would commit Simony should she desire to divest the Pope of this Authority, or of his profits, for the Salvation of Souls. Primato Apostolico, di cui non era Signiore, ma custode, says Cardinal Pa­lavicini, that he is not the Lord or Patron, but only the Guardian of the Apostolick Primacy. And in another place he says these words: Non Essendo egli arbitro e padrone della sua Maggoranza consti­tuta da Christo, e pero non potendo farle alcun prejudicio. Palav. lib. 3. cap. 12. He can do no wrong to his Authority constituted by Jesus Christ, because he is not the Patron and disposer of it. And again, Far una specie di Si­monia vendendo al Papa la recuperatione dell' anime a prezzo d' entrate e di giuridizzioni ritolte della chieza. It would be a kind of Simony to sell the Redemption of Souls to the Pope at the price either of Estates, or Jurisdictions taken from the Church. If a Pope would really Reform the Church, the Court of Rome would murther him. But as Peter of Blois says, this is the Chair of Pestilence, wherein peo­ple of the greatest merit are presently corrupted. They no sooner ascend this proud Throne, but straightways they forget they are men, and are by a just judgment of God struck with stupidity. We have the example of one Aeneas Silvius, who in the Council of Ba­sil was so zealous for the truth, and maintained so well the Interest of the Church against the Popes Tyranny; and nevertheless so soon as he was Elected Pope, he maintained that the Council was inferi­or to the Pope, and Excommunicated those who believed the con­trary. [Page 54] This Angel was no sooner raised to this mighty grandeur, but like Lucifer he became a Devil. Aristotle says in one place, that it sometimes falls out that a man loseth the habit of vertue by one only act of enormous wickedness; that there are men qui uno actu feritatis humanitatem exuunt, who lay aside all humanity all at once by one act of barbarousness and inhumanity. This befalls the Popes so soon as they are elected; they were sometime honest men before, but the Miter being fixed upon their head, they make themselves he adored by this Sirname of Most Holy, Collo pronome di sanctissimo, says Cardinal Palavicini; they are no more men, but the voice of God and not of men, as was said of Herod. Sixtus Quintus, who had been a Keeper of Swine, when he became Pope, Excommunicated King Henry the Fourth (of France.) This it was that made Marcel­linus the Second say, that he believed not that a Pope could be saved; and Pius Quintus, that when he was a Monk he had pretty good hopes of his Salvation; that being a Cardinal he began much to fear it; but when he was Pope he absolutely despaired of it. St. Hierom speaks of a certain young Consul at Rome who said, Facite me Vrbis Romanae Episcopum & ero protinus Christianus, Make me Bishop of Rome, and I will be a Chri­stian presently. We may say the contrary of those who for this long time have been made Bishops of Rome, That as soon as they have been so, they have ceased being Christians. The reason of that is not only this Tyranny which they exercise in the Church, and over the world in contempt of Jesus Christ, and of his Gospel, but also this Temporal greatness to which they are raised all at once, which turns their brain. We scarce see a man of a thousand Livres a year, whose reason is not blinded by his Estate, and he shall be puffed up with pride, even tho he were born to it; and we see but few rich men who are not insupportable either for their vanity, or for their vices; but few Princes who have any Religion, and in whom power hath not corrupted and defaced all the Idea's of Vertue and of Vice. How then shall a poor fellow behave himself, who is raised all at a clap to so high a Dignity that Emperors kiss his Slippers; and who so soon as he is chosen, is adored like God, even upon the Altars? This it is that brings down the curse of God upon all the Popes; and to speak of a good Pope, is like talk­ing of a good Devil. Observe this present Pope, who is a man the best inclined that we have had a long time; to what excess of pride is he arrived against our [ French] King, whom he hath threatned to Excommunicate; tho St. Augustin, whose Disciple they say he is, [Page 55] teacheth, that no Prince nor his people are ever to be Excommuni­cated. Aug. apud Gloss. Ordin. Multitudo non est Excommunicanda, nec Princeps populi, says he, Vbi parabola zizaniorum evolvitur.

But how, say they, will you be a Catholick without a Pope? Let there be one in Gods name, but let him be of the order of Si­mon P [...]ter, and not of Simon Magus, a Pope who makes no Traffick of the Graces of the Holy Ghost, and of Holy things, and who is not a Prince of this world; let him be a Pope who raiseth not himself above other Popes, that is to say, other Bishops, to give them Laws; let him be subject to his Prince; let him be subject as well to National as General Councils, and not turn all Religion to his particular profit; but to wish always to have such Popes as for these seven or eight hundred years have wasted the Church, a man must have no true Idea of Christianity; nay, he must have even lost the Idea of good and evil.

I knew a Prince in Germany, who was one of the most Catholick Princes in the world, who had abjured Heresie, and was really converted, having not done it for any carnal advantage, like many base people, who we see infect instead of edifying the Church. This most Catholick Prince abhorred the Papacy, and could not endure the Books of our Writers, when there was any thing in them fa­vourable to the Popes Authority. Those who were a little acquain­ted with the late Duke of Hanouer, know whether I speak truth or no. We know that Charles the Sixth, by the advice of the Divines of the Faculty at Paris, made no difficulty of withdrawing himself and all his Subjects from the Communion of the Pope, which last­ed during the Pontificat of John the 23 d. of Benedict the 13 th. and Gregory the 12 th. and even to give encouragement to all other Prin­ces to do as he had done; and he had much less cause to do it than we have at this time. You see his reasons in the Letters of the University of Paris in Theodore a Nyem, which were, that they would not consent that the disorders of the Church should be regulated by a free Council, and that they would not submit themselves to the Decisions of the Church. Are not we now again just in the same condition since the Councils of Constance and of Basil? For those which have been Assembled since, deserve not the name of Coun­cils, because there was no liberty in them, and every thing was there done by the Inspiration, not of God, but the Popes. France did but half free it self from this yoke, for quickly after we suffer­ed our selves to be drawn in, and have been like to have been un­done many a time since by it,

[Page 56]Nor do I make any great account of the Conduct of the Veneti­ans, which is so highly commended, who after having known the nature of the Papacy, and the Genius of this power, have but half freed themselves from this slavery, nay less than half. They have behaved themselves in this according to their ordinary custom, following moderate Councils, where excess was not to be feared, and where it could not be committed: Consilia media & quod inter ancipitia deterrimum est, nec ausi sunt satis, nec providerunt. For they have still this Viper in their bosom, which they stupifie as much as they can; but he may some time or other revive and devour them. They have every day a thousand difficulties with these cunning Ro­mans, who will be always spying out occasions to destroy them, and to reduce them absolutely under their yoke. They should re­nounce perfectly and for [...]ver all dependance upon this See, and thus shall they be better able to regulate their Clergy, which is as licentious as that of Rome, which they dare not reform, because it would be to be feared that to maintain themselves in this Roman Libertinism they should give assistance to the Pope to oppress the Republick, that they might always enjoy the full liberty of the children of the See of Rome: Vulgo dissoluta gratior est quam Tempe­rata vita & vivere ut quis (que) velit permisit, quoniam sic magna erit tali Rei­publicoe faventium Magnitudo. Arist. lib. 6. cap. 4. Et hoc Humanitas vocabatur ac ne pars servitutis esset, &c.

Will any man still say, Ought we not to be of the Roman Church? People are not contented with being in the Catholick and Aposto­lick Church, if they are not in the Roman; they seem desirous of having a share in the Abominations of this City, and of this Court; but the Romans are not at all desirous to be of the Gallican Church. I would fain know for what reason we should be rather of the Roman Church than the Romans of the Gallican Church. Rome is not as heretofore, it was the Seat of the Empire, and tho it were, we hold no longer of the Empire, and it is a contradiction for a man to be in the Catholick Church, in the Gallican, and in the Ro­man Churches both together; for the first is the General, and the other two are particulars. You may always have Communion with all the Romans who live in the fear of God, with the Pope of Rome himself if he be a Christian; but not to depend upon him, nor up­on Rome. You shall be as the Christians of the Primitive Church were for more than six hundred years. You shall pay no more Annates, you shall buy no more Bulls, nor Dispensations. You shall be much [Page 57] more Catholick than before, for then you may hold Communion with the Greeks and Protestants, by drawing them home to the Faith of the Church, whereas the See of Rome is at this time a wall of Separation between them and us.

THEY maintain that the Papacy hath heretofore done, and still doth a great deal of good to the Church, and to the world; this I can confute all at once, by a thing which the world knows, which is, that we have in no place so many true Christians as in those Catholick Countries where this power is least known, as in France, Flanders, and Germany. But let us see par­ticularly what good the Papacy doth. It is a common saying that there is nothing so bad but that you may make some use of it, ei­ther in its nature, or in conjunction with other things. Let us then examine the usefulness of the Papacy, omitting nothing that can be said to its advantage: It is, says Cardinal Perron, The Center and the root of Chri [...]tian Vnity. These are fine words, I confess, but we shall find but very little sense in them if we a little consider them; for I ask him, In what this Unity doth consist, and how the Pope is the center and the root of it? The Popes make no Uni­ty, there is no Unity among them. The Popes are wicked men. If this Unity be in the pure service of God, methinks that God should be the center of it, and not the Pope, and that it is also God who is the root of it; that is, the influencing principle over the will and strength of men to serve him and to do well. If this Unity be for doing what is evil, it is then but a conspiracy; and I do confess that in regard of wicked Clergy-men, who are the members of the Pope, he is the source of all their Impiety, Ambition, and Dissoluteness, and he is the cen­ter of the Unity of these people, who belong all to him; and as for [Page 58] themselves, he is the center of their worship, and would be so to all other men. Palavici. in his History of the Council of Trent. Palavicini says that the union and submission of all Catholicks to the Pope, makes a band, a life perfectly Politick, Vna, conjunctione di vita perf [...]tta mente Politica. He says, not a Christian, but a Politick life, and according to him it is the same thing. Palav. lib. 3. cap. 20. And in another place he says, the Church is the most happy Body Politick in the world: Corpo Politico il piu felice che sia in terra. This Unity, as I said before, consists only in their obedience to the Pope, Ibidem. whom they all honour for th [...]ir profit; looking upon him as the source of Riches, of Honours, and of all the pleasures whi [...]h they have ac­cording to the flesh, Secondo la carne. This Unity is in the confor­mity of judgment, which they all make of the riches of the Chur­ches Patrimony, which is, that they are good. It is certain, that it is not in their opinions; for what Clergy-man is there who cares for the Popes judgment, when it is contrary to his own? What Unity is there between the Jesuits and the Pope now reigning? What Unity is there among many Sects of the Monks who make war upon one another, and mortally hate each other? What Uni­ty is there of Morals among one or other, the Jesuits and the good Catholicks whom they treat as Hereticks, Apostates, Antichrists, and Devils? What Unity was there between the Jansenists and Pope Alexander the Seventh? We see that for twenty years last past the Popes are between these two Sects as between the Anvil and the Hammer, not knowing how to govern themselves, because on one side the Jesuits dispose of all the powers of Europe; and on the other, their Morals destroy Christianity and Humanity it self; in this they are opposed by the Jansenists, who are followed by all sorts of people that are not lost in Ignorance or Irreligion. How can they ever agree in their opinions? because the decisions of one Pope do often times overthrow those of another, and sometimes they are themselves Hereticks, as some people do accuse the present Pope of being a Jansenist, which is according to them worse than Here­tick? What Unity of Religion is there between the Spanish, the Ita­lian, and French Nations? whereof the two first have scarce any knowl [...]dg of God, but are almost all Idolaters; and the last is very different from them. Lastly, to judg of this Unity, we need only to read the Books of the several Doctors, and we shall find them of very different opinions even in regard of the Pope himself. The Divines of Italy make him a God on Earth; those of France and Ger­many believe nothing on't. The Universities of Rome and Bolonia de­termine [Page 59] that he is above the Councils; those of France and of Lou­vain prove very well the contrary. Gerson. The Italian Councils of Flo­rence, the Lateran, and of Trent, will have him above a General Council; those of Constance and of Basil maintain that it is a dete­stable Heresie to believe so. If there be a Unity, how comes it to pass that it is said, and that with reason too, that the Pope hath a differ­ent soul in every State where he governs? If there were a Unity, there would be but one Soul; they must have greater abilities than either St. Peter or St. Paul, who could not unite mens minds in the Churches of Corinth, of Philippi, and of Galatia, where we learn by the Gospel that many Errors were taught in these Apostles times. The Cardinal Palavicini says also, Lib. 8. c. 17. that Il Principiato Apostolico maintienne in unita, in regola & in decoro tutta la Chieza, the Apostolick Primacy maintains in Unity, in Order, and in Beauty, the whole Church. To know the truth of what this Cardinal says, we need only to con­sider what edification the Popes have given to the Church since Boniface the Third, Patriarch of the Popes, and first Head of the Church. Complaint [...] against the Pope. Was not the action whereby he got to be Universal Bi­shop, a good example to the Church? and that of Pope Zachary in regard of Chilperic? Is there any thing in the world that favours perfidiousness and injustice more than these Examples? See the Hi­stories of Platina, of Genebrard, of Sigebert, and many others; and you shall find that there are no crimes, excesses, nor abominations which the Popes have not committed to bring about their Affairs for many Ages. Is it not a matter of great consolation for honest men to see in this Seat, Children, Magicians, Atheists, Adulterers, and Sodo­mites, as History affirmeth, and not ten or twelve only in all, but fifty one after another? Baronius himself doth not deny it, if the Church had had such Heads as these, she would have been long since abolished upon Earth. But to make short work on't, Was it not they who ruined the Church and Religion among the Greeks, by giving them over as a prey to the Turks, because they would not submit to the Popish yoke, but demanded the observation of the Holy Canons? Were not they the cause of the loss of Hungary by their perfidiousness, having advised the King of Hungary to violate the Treaty made with the Turks? for which the Hungarians were by a just judgment of God cut all to pieces in the Battel of Varnes, as a Poet of those times relates, who brings in the King of Hungary speaking thus:

Can it be denied but that it was they who by their detestable Si­mony, and by their pride, have destroyed Religion in all those Coun­tries which are called Protestants? See but the Complaints which all great men for many Ages have made against this See, and those who have been in possession of it, and you may judg of the solidity of what Cardinal Palavicini saith, that they maintain the Church in Uni­ty, in Order, and in Honour. I will relate some Examples of it. John of Salisbury Bishop of Chartres, speaks thus, Joannes Sa­risbur▪ in Po­lycratico. The Scribes and Phari­sees are sate in the Church of Rome, imposing weighty burthens upon the people. The Soveraign Pontife is an insupportable grievance to all honest men. His Legates commit so many Enormities, that it looks as tho the Devil were let loose; whosoever doth not acquiesce in their Doctrine, is by them treated as a Heretick. And the Council of Rheimes Assembled under Hugh Capet, and Robert his Son, crys out thus, Shall it be said that an infinite num­ber of Bishops and Priests who are Illustrious for their merit, and for their knowledg, shall submit themselves to such Monsters? What means this, most, Reverend Fathers, What think you that this man is, whom we see sitting up­on a lofty Throne, shining all with Gold, and clothed with Purple? We have spoken of the Letter of the Emperor Barbarossa to the Princes of the Empire, Aventinus in Oratione Ar­chymistae ad Proceres Im­perii. which Aventine makes mention of; the same Author also produces the Speech of an Archbishop who presided in the States of the Empire held at Ratisbon; there are these words: The Pope teacheth us one thing, which is this, That there is this difference between Christian Princes and those who are not such, that the first bear rule over their Subjects, and on the contrary the Subjects (viz. the Popes) ought to rule over their Princes. Our Lord himself took upon him the form of a Servant to serve his Disciples, and to kiss their feet; but these Ministers of Babylon will reign themselves alone, and cannot suffer an equal; they will never be at r [...]st till they have laid all at their feet, till they sit in the Temple of God, and even raise themselves above God. He despiseth the H [...]ly Assemblies and C [...]uncils of his Brethren, and of his Masters. He is afraid of being compel [...]ed to give an account of what he hath committed against the Laws. He speak [...] of great things as tho he were God. His mind runs upon new d [...]signs of establishing an Empire for himself. He changeth the Laws of God, and makes others of his own head. He defiles all things, he robb [...]th, he deceives and murthers. Honor. Au­gustodun. in Dial [...]o de P [...]aede [...] & Libero A [...]bi­ [...]io. Honorius Bishop of Autun speaks of him after the same manner: Turn, says he, toward these Citizens of Babylon, and behold what th [...]y are, [Page 61] &c They contrive at all times to do evil, &c. and instruct others to do the same; They sell Holy things, and buy off Crimes, that they may not go a­lone into Hell; They defile the Priesthood by their Impurity: they seduce the People by their Hypocrisie; they reject all the Scriptures whereby we obtain Salvation. Consider also the Monks; they deceive men by their Habits, de­spising God, and provoking his Wrath by their Hypocrisie. Behold also the Convents of Nuns; they learn Immodesty from their Childhood, &c.

Petrus Ble­sensis in Epist. ad quendam Officialem. And Peter of Blois, Take away, Lord, the Idol from thine House, and bruise the H [...]rns of this man of sin; They pervert every thing at Rome, and give all sorts of liberty to the Monks, who give themselves over to all the Excesses of Sensuality, for which they have Absolution for a yearly Pension which they pay. Thus doth the Prince of Sodom gov [...]rn himself as well as his Disciples, who are sate in the Seat of Pestilence, &c. Bernard de Cons. ad Eu­gen. l. 3. c. 5. And St. Ber­nard, who cries out, speaking of Popish Tyranny, O mis [...]rable Spouse, says he, who art committed to such k [...]epers! They are not thine Husband's Friends, but Rivals: We see all H [...]nours heaped up upon them, and they are loaden with the Riches of the Lord, and yet they do him no H [...]nour. From hence come all these Ornaments of the Whore, these Actors H [...]bits, this Royal Equipage, &c. The Plague of the Church is within its Bowels, and incura­ble. Bernard su­per Psalm 9. v. 6. Ser. 6, A shameful Traffick hath been also made of Ecclesiastical Offices and Dignities; nor doth any body value th [...]m but for their profit. It is not the Salvation of Souls that they look after, but how to enrich themselves: 'Tis for that they are shaved, frequent the Churches, and say Masses. And in another place; It looks, Lord Jesus, as tho all the Christians had conspi­red against thee; and they themselves are the first to persecute thee, that seem to have the Primacy in the Church. And the like in many other places.

B [...]rnard E­pist. 91. He observes in his 91 st Epistle, that the Popes did already spoil every thing that was done in the Councils, which made him say, That he passionately wished to see a Council where Traditions were not defended with so much Obstinacy, nor obs [...]rved with Supersti­tion; because the Popes brought in great Abuses under the Pretext of Tradition. Ad illud Concilium toto d [...]sid [...]rio feror, in quo Traditiones non obstinatius defensentur aut superstiti [...]sius obs [...]rventur. Recedant a m [...] cui dicunt, nolumus esse meliores quam Patres nostri. These were not Oe­cumenical Councils, but such as Leo the Tenth assembled, from which the Apellatio U­niversitat. Pa­tisiens. contra Leonem. Sorbon appealed, by reason of the Abuses which were there established, and wrote to him, That his Council was not as­sembled in the Spirit of God, in the Name of the Lord. See what our Probus says, who was Bishop of Toul, under Honorius the Fourth: He cries out, Alas! how long shall these Vultures of Romu­lus [Page 62] abuse our Patience, or rather, Dullness? Petrarque in lib. Epist. sine Titulo. And the Great Petrarque, Who, I pray, is there that ought not to detest this Babylon, which is the miserable Habitation of all sorts of Vice and Wickedness, &c? I know it by Experience, that in it there is no Piety, nor Charity, nor Faith, nor Fear of God; nothing Holy, nothing Just, &c.

Isid. Pel. lib. 1. Epist. 323. It is now above a thousand years since, that Isidore Pelusiota commended a Priest for having refused to be made a Bishop, by rea­son of the great difference between the Bishops of his own time, and those of former Ages; because, says he, the Dignity of sweetness of Humour, and of Civility, was changed into Tyranny; For in former times they suffered Death for the Salvation of all; now they cause the Death of their Flocks, not by cutting their Throats (which would be a less heinous Crime), but by giving Scandal to the destruction of Souls; They then gave their Goods to the Poor, but now they turn to their own profit the very Por­tion of the Poor: They then mortified their Bodies by fasting, now they sof­ten them by Luxury; Then they honoured Virtue, now they persecute the Lo­vers of Piety: They then spoke greatly in commendation of Chastity, but now — I will not say any thing of the odious, &c. He here holds his peace, and gives you the liberty to think what he cannot with modesty express.

Alv. Pelag. de Planctu Ec­clesiae lib. 2. cap. 15. Alvarez Pelagius, a Portugal Bishop, after having made an ho­nourable mention of the first Bishops of Rome, complains thus of their Successors: It is now a long time since their Successors have raised themselves in Authority, but they are very different in H [...]liness, getting them­selves in to be Bishops of Rome ( would to God that this intrusion were made without a Devillish Agreement before-hand), enriching and raising their Neigh­bours, living themselves deliciously, conferring Dignities upon their Friends, building of Towers and Palaces in Babylon ( that is to say, Rome, ac­cording to St. Hierom), kindling of Wars, keeping up of Parties in Italy, tho there be but one Church, embezelling the Goods of the Church, putting un­worthy Men into Offices, vaunting themselves in their Chariots, Elephants, Horses, Costly Apparel, and their great Train of Guards and Worldly Pow­er; invading many times the Power of Temporal Princes, taking no care for the Salvation of Souls, and what not? wholly minding the desires of the Flesh.

That the Pa­pacy is an Ob­stacle unto Pi­ety. Besides these Subjects of Complaint, which are of great impor­tance, there is yet another, which cries more loud to God for Venge­ance, which is, That the Papacy is an Obstacle unto the Piety of those Christians who are subject to its Yoke. We are not of our own Nature virtuous; but on the contrary, we are born in sin, and [Page 63] without the particular Grace of God there is in us always a strong Disposition to do evil. If then men are not furnished with means to resist these ill Inclinations, it is evident, that they will let themselves be carried away by them: But if instead of furnishing them with these means, they have greater occasion given them to do evil, there is no doubt but we shall be so far from inspiring them with the love of Virtue, that we shall engage them in sin. Now the Papacy, ac­cording to the state wherein it now is, and for many Ages hath been, hath such ill qualities, that it takes away from Christians the Occasi­ons of doing good, and offereth them others of doing evil. It is one of the Properties of our Mind to be led very much by Example, especially by those who make a figure in the World, and have Autho­rity over others. Thus the behaviour of the Monks, and of the Priests, savouring scarce of any thing but Covetousness and Ambiti­on, the Natural Dispositions which we have to these Vices are by this means strengthned. I acknowledg, that Preachers do instruct the people, That to make themselves acceptable unto God, and to have a share in the Kingdom of Heaven, they must refrain from these evil Passions; and they build this Obligation upon the Precepts of the Gospel: but men acting exceedingly more by the hope and fear of present good or evil, than of that which is future, the efficacy of all the loveliness of a God, who gave this Precept, of the hope of Para­dice, and fear of Hell, becomes extreamly weakened in them, by the ill Example of those who by their Habit and Condition, seem, and ought to make profession of a Life more pure and disengaged from the Interests of this World. For altho they embrace not formally this Opinion, That there is neither God, nor Heaven, nor Hell; and that on the contrary, they hold these Doctrines to be very true; yet nevertheless this ill Example makes them act as if they did wholly reject them; this damnable Example having so mortal a poison in it, that it makes them believe, that their Teachers, being able men, would themselves live conformable to these Instructions, if they thought them Divine; and they themselves leading not this life, 'tis probable that they do not believe what they preach and teach. The Scripture also in many places highly enveigheth against Pastors of an ill Life, the disorder of their manners being a stumbling-block to those whom they have the care of. But tho the Irregularities of Pa­stors did not make so ill an impression upon the minds of the people, whilst persons who desire to be saved, and are humbled when they perceive within themselves a repugnancy to follow those ways [Page 64] which the Gospel hath marked out, hear speak of able men, and of almost whole Orders, whom, for instance, the Gospel enjoyns to be charitable, know that no more is employed that way than what re­mains to him who spares no cost to appear Great, and to keep up his Port, according to the Custom of the World, and other such like Interpretations of all the Precepts of Jesus Christ, do not they find themselves inclined to embrace these Explications, thereby satisfying their desires, and thinking to quiet their Consciences? Those who favour the Papacy shall tell you, That the Pope is so far from order­ing such pernicious Maxims to be taught, that he doth abhor them, and wish with all his heart, that they would teach and promote con­trary ones.

Besides, that many Popes have themselves entertained ill Opini­ons, I will grant it for the present; but the Pope, who pretendeth to be the only Head of the Church, and that it belongs to him alone to judge absolutely of E [...]clesiastical things and persons, not repro­ving them; nay, oftentimes shutting the mouths of those who would oppose them, who sow, and spread abroad such dangerous Maxims, doth uphold these pernicious Opin [...]ons; which we have the greater reason to believe, because he withdraws the Monks, and many of the Clergy, from the Jurisdiction of the Bishops. If it be said, That he cannot silence them, by reason of their too great Authority; it is then manifest, that the Papacy, such as it is, doth suffer the ill Example, and these pernicious Opinions, and is not able to hinder them, unless it be in matters of very small im­portance. And thus far it is an Obstacle unto Piety, since no body can apply a Remedy, whilst the Pope shall be acknowledged the Head and Master of the Church.

The Second Argument, which sheweth, That the Papacy is an Obstacle unto true Virtue, is, that it makes use of such practices as promote a false, and only seeming, instead of true Piety. Some Catholicks do teach, That Contrition is necessary to make Con­fession valid. But this Doctrine is not much followed; That which hath the Vogue, and reigns most in the World, is, that At­trition is sufficient, which is only a simple Sorrow for having sin­ned, and that too occasioned but by the fear of Hell. The people who are instructed in this Opinion, believe readily, that it is an ea­sie matter to be justified before God; and so think, that after having sinned a great while, they shall at their Death receive Absolution of their sins, by saying a Peccavi: For what man is there who is not [Page 65] afraid of being Damned? The great multitude of Plenary Indul­gences, and others, which are as common as Water, doth also mar­vellously contribute to the casting men into Impenitence, and to make them at the same time believe, that their Consciences are in safety, under pretence of observing those Exercises which pass for Pious, tho they are not so.

I could produce many other Reasons, to demonstrate the Truth of what I say; but let these suffice.

The Pope, pretending to be the only Soveraign Judge of Religi­on, not silencing these false and pernicious Teachers; nay, not be­ing able to do it, if he would; Is not then the Papacy an Obstacle unto true Piety, since it introduces a false one in its place? There are good people among the Catholicks, I confess; but the Papacy contributes nothing to that. On the contrary, those who believe, and live well, it is God, and not the Pope, who is the Author of their Piety, as well as of their Profession, which is rather destroy­ed than maintained by the usual Pride and Impiety of the Popes; from whence it comes, that no man now a days believes but what he will; so that the whole World is full of Deists, Socinians, Libertines, and impious persons.

Of the Popes maintaining the Exterior Vnity. But they say, That at least, the Papacy doth maintain the Ex­ternal Vnity, and that is a great Advantage. Yet I deny that; For what does it contribute to this outward Unity? But besides that, it serves only to cheat the World, whilst there is no inward Unity. If they mean the Unity in Ceremonies, First of all, this would be no great matter; for Ceremonies make not the Essence of Religion, but are only the out-side of it; and besides, they are very different, according to the several Countries; and the Popes are not the Au­thors of them: If they were, it were enough to condemn them. Besides all this, there are fewer Sects and Factions, less Divisions, and by consequence, more Unity among the Greeks, who have many Patriarchs, than among us. I acknowledge indeed, that it is rather Ignorance that unites them, than Reason or Piety.

Expence for the Conversion of the Greeks. B [...]t they tell us, that the Popes spare nothing for the Conver­sion of the Greeks and Protestants; they bestow on them both Money and Benefices. To that may be added, That they have not spared even the Blood of Hereticks for their Conversion, as History in­forms us. But if it be their Conversion which they do heartily de­sire, why do not they renounce the Authority which they have u­surped [Page 66] in the Church and in the World? Why do not they re-esta­blish things in a Christian manner, in the same State they were in, in the days of the Apostles, and of the Primitive Church? Why do not they condemn the Blasphemies which are spoken in favour of their Government, and destroy the Maxims by which they have ma­naged themselves so long? They answer, That then their lives would be in danger, and that the Court of Rome would destroy them, as they did Adrian the Sixth, who thought to have reformed the Church; of whom Palav. l. 2. cap. 3. & 7. Cardinal Palavicini gives this Account, That he was Ottimo Ecclesiastico, Pontefice Mediocre, a Good Priest, but an Indifferent Pope.

But if the Popes cannot find a Remedy for the Disorders which are so prevalent, because, as they say, their Authority is not sufficient, what are they then good for, and why shall we a­ny longer suffer this Tyranny in the Church? If they can find a Remedy, and will not, they are then not only unprofitable, but detestable Creatures. It is certainly one or other, or both toge­ther; for we see, that every thing is overturned in the Church. And what? If they are the Vicars of Jesus Christ, and Successors of St. Peter, ought they not to think them­selves happy, to die for the Glory of God, and Good of the Church? Is it better to be the Object of Mens Worship, to provoke the Jealousie of God, and to do so much mischief in the Church? Where is the Zeal of Moses, or of St. Paul, who would have died for their Brethren, and have been e­ven accursed; and of the first Bishops of Rome, who suffered Martyrdom so Couragiously? They love rather to give them Money, and Benefices, because that thus they put out all to great Usury; they sow that they may reap; they give what is none of their own, or else what signifies nothing to them. If it be true, that they are careful of the Salvation of these People, why are they not so of their own? Why do they not labour for the Salvation of Catholicks? That would cost them no Money: There needs nothing but to allow the Reading of the Holy Scripture every where, and recommend it, as God hath recommended it to us; to suffer Divine Service to be read in a Language which every body under­stands; For it cannot be denied, but that the want of these things doth produce among us great Ignorance, with which [Page 67] Piety is never to be found: But to give Money to convert People, it is the mark of a very prophane Spirit, and a very dishonest method, and an Example for Mahometans and Here­ticks to make use of, even towards Christians. And to give Benefices, it is yet worse; for by this the Clergy is filled up more and more with Hypocrites, and People of no Religi­on, who spend the Goods of the Poor upon Debauchery and Luxury, and most commonly are of no use at all to the Church.

They say, That they make Religion to be respected: But how? Is it by their own Piety, or Sanctity, or that of their Court, or by their Humility? No truly, these Vertues are wholly there Of the Popes making Reli­gion to be re­spected, and accommoda­ting the diffe­rences of Princes. unknown, and the contrary Vices have ruled the Rost long since; but their fine Court, and the Greatness and Magnificence of the Cardinals, are the things we hear of. But are these the things that ought to make men love Religi­on? Is it Gold and Silver, costly Furniture, Riches, Carnal Pleasures, which the Prelates glut themselves withal? Is it their Cavalcades to Montecavallo, their Horse and Foot-Guards, their Armies and their Fleets, which make Religion to be respe­cted? If it be so, both Jesus Christ, and his Apostles, deserved to be despised, in comparison of their Vicars; and the Christian Religion also was very contemptible in their days. Is it to Excommunicate all the World when they please, without Authority, without Cause, and against the Nature of the Gospel, which is Charity it self? But wise men are so far from respecting them for this, that they look upon them as Fools. Is it to hold a Chappel, or Consistory, where they treat only of prophane things, and of promoting of Cardi­nals? What doth this signifie, or what Relation hath it to the Glory of God, or the Salvation of Men? And what is there in all this, which the Patriarch of Venice, or the Arch­bishop of Lyons, might not do as well as the Pope, if he had a mind to it? We must not dissemble. All the Respect which men have for the Papacy, at least, they who hope for no advan­tage by it, comes only from the Respect, or from the Fear which they see Princes have of it. And this respect of Princes, if it be voluntary, proceedeth from great Ignorance of Religion, in [Page 68] which they have been brought up for that purpose, or from the ill Council of some Ambitious Clergy-man, who compasses his De­signs at the Prince's Expence. If this Respect be forced, as or­dinarily it is, it is then out of the fear which men have of the Popes Power; whereby he rules the vast Numbers of the Ecclesia­sticks, and especially the Monks, who govern the meaner People; who, as Palavicini says, are the disposers of the Religion of Coun­tries.

It is said, That they have the Power of making the Laws of God to be observed. If so, they ought themselves to give an Ex­ample; they ought to apply to themselves what our Saviour said to St. Peter, not to draw his Sword. It is a thing both ridiculous and horrible, that these People should have Armies, and make War. They do it in Germany, after the Bishop of Rome his Exam­ple; But where is it that they make the Laws of God to be obser­ved? Is there any place where they are violated more than where they have most Authority? Is Rome at this day better than Sodom? Do not they on the contrary, favour, as much as in them lies, the very Crime, by the Example of their Court, by their Expences, by their pretending to exempt all Clergy-men from the Jurisdicti­on of the Civil Magistrate; that so they may commit all sorts of Crimes, and go unpunished? But they say furthermore, That they make Kings stand in Awe, and hinder them from professing, Heresie. On the contrary, it is they who made them become Hereticks, as in England, Sweden, and Denmark, and who by their Tyranny, hinder them from returning into the bosom of the Church.

It is also pretended, That they are very useful for the composing of Differences between Princes, being looked upon as common Fa­thers to them all. On the contrary, their Artifices and Ambition, are so well known, that th [...]re is no Prince whom they are more di­strustful of. They never carried on their own Interest better, than during the Wars of Italy, Germany, France and Spain, which either they always began, or kept on foot. They are also constant Ene­mies to Great Princes. What is alledged might take place, if the Popes were not th [...]mselves become Temporal Princes, at the Ex­pence of the Empero [...], and other Princes, whom they have rob­bed. And it is k [...]own, that they have Pretensions over all Chri­stian [Page 69] Kingdoms; That there is no Court more refined in Policy than theirs, or that makes less Conscience of taking to them­selves what belongs to another. In truth, they think it not taken wrongfully, because they pretend that it is their Right; that the Pope is Sennor del Mondo; and they call him, Nostor Sennor [...], Our Lord, as well as Jesus Christ.

There is no State in Europe which they have not endeavoured many times to destroy, and which they have not greatly endamaged. M. Paris in Hist. Angliae. Matthew Paris relates to us that King John of England, because he would not receive an Archbishop of Canterbury whom Po [...]e Inn [...]cent the Third had Elected against the Canons, he was first Excommu­cated by Innocent, who accordingly gave away his Kingdom to Phi­lip the August King of France; and that poor King John was com­pelled to implore the Popes mercy, who received him very bounti­fully, on condition that from thenceforth his Kingdom should de­pend upon the Holy See, should be Tributary to it, and pay 20000 Marks of Gold every year. And that this King having recovered his courage, resolved to Abjure Christianity as an evil Religion, thereby designing to cast off the Popish yoke. Because he made himself the Popes Vassal, he was called the Apostolick King. I wonder why the Kings of France and Spain will not add to the Titles of Most Christian and Most Catholick that of Apostolick Kings at the same price as this King John of England did. 'Tis not his Holiness's fault, they may have it when they please.

They answer, The Popes have on at this time a disguise, wai­ting for an ad­vantage. We ought to be al­ways [...]. that it is true that they have heretofore caused dis­orders, but that it will never fall out so again, that it was some hot headed men; that amongst the Apostles themselves there was found a Judas. But I maintain that all these disasters proceeded not only from the pettish humour of any one Pope, but were the natu­ral effects of the Principles of the Papacy. And tho we do not see it visibly break forth every day by some bloody example, yet we ought not to believe that the habit or the will is ever the less, but that there is some external extraordinary reason which suspends the Action, and which does sometimes make them act directly contrary to their own inclination. Do not we see that the Inquisition it s [...]lf at Rome, that Impious Tribunal which hath the power of authori­sing the greatest crimes, and of Canonizing for the Popes Interest, even Parricides, and the Assassins of our Kings; as amongst others by a Decree of the ninth of November 1609, it did condemn the De­cree [Page 70] of the Parliament of Paris given out against John Chatel, who had attempted to Murther Henry the Fourth. This Tribunal, I say, hath not long since condemned the Jesuits Morals, tho they were perfectly conformable to the Principles of the Inquisition; and we see that the Jesuits of France are at this time in the Kings Interest against the Pope, which is absolutely contrary to their Maxims, and to all their former conduct; which shews, that it is not true, that be­cause an ill person does a good action he is no more to be feared: Tho a man be extreamly wicked, it does not follow from thence that every thing he does shall be so. We must not think that the habit is lost, be­cause we do not always see its acts: Philosophers tell us that it is often so. It is a sort of a Truce and not a Peace. Gellius. Non pax sed in­duciae, bellum enim manet, pugna cessa [...]. A Cobler, Horace. says Horace, is still a Cobler, tho his Stall be shut. [Et Alfenus vafer omni abjecto instrumento Artis, clausa (que) taberna, sutor erat. Thus the Pope remains still Pope, tho he sometimes do a good Action. Valeri [...] Max. Valerius Maximus says in a certain place that there are people, Quorum animus peregrinatur in ne­quitia, non habitat, whose minds light upon iniquity, but like a Tra­veller in an Inn they fix not; so may it be said of the Popes, Quo­rundam paparum animus peregrinatur in bonitate, non habitat; that they sometimes touch upon a good action, but cannot hold to it. The Viper is a very dangerous creature, tho she doth not always bite, when it lyes in her power. But it is never good to trust her. Nemo juxtae viperam securos somnos capit, quae si non percutit certe sollicitat. St. Hier. Says St. Hierom somewhere. The Papacy is just the same, it is the Chair of Pestilence, Cathedra Pestilentiae, where the best men are corrupted. It is what he very well understood, who said that the greatest harm he could wish a man was, that he were Pope. Petreius Chartr. And the Holy Carthusian Father that praises God that none of his Order had ever yet been Pope. How can any man maintain that Princes need not stand in fear of the Pope, when three Popes of this present age have condemned the opinion, that the Pope cannot depose Kings, as wicked and contrary to the Faith? Accipe nunc Danaum insidias & crimine ab uno disce omnes. Attempts of the Popes of this present Age upon Kings. These were Paul the Fifth, Innocent the Tenth, and Alexander the Seventh, of whom it may be said, that they were Ot­timi Pontefici, Ecclesiastici mediocri, that they were true Popes, but ve­ry indifferent Clergymen, who will be both Judg and party in their own cause, and pretend that their evidence must be taken, even when it tends to their own profit, and to the spoiling of those who be­lieve [Page 71] them. I could yet produce a later example, which is that of the present Pope, who with unsufferable rashness lately threatened to Excommunicate the Greatest King upon Earth, because he would Reign alone in his own State, and take away from some people who ought to employ themselves only in serving God, the dispo­sal of some Benefices which belong properly to the Soveraign of a State, who we see makes a more judicious choice of men fit to serve in these Employs, because he doth not sell them, nor give them to his Relations, as they did, who had but very little regard to the merit of those upon whom they conferred these things. Be­sides, of right, the Popes have nothing to do in the Dominions of other Princes; and there have been sufficient proofs given by this Great Prince of his zeal for Justice, and for Religion. But these men love to make people feel their yoke, and it may be well said of them, what Mithridates said of the ancient Romans, that it was not their love to Justice that made them fight against Princes, but the desire of their Authority, and of their Greatness, Tit. Liv. Non delicta Regum illos, sed vires ac Majestatem insequi. It is well known how ill they have treated Spain not long since, upon the account of the President of Castile, who had reason in what he did, and how at this time they handle the Venetians. Don't we know how Alex­ander the Seventh, and his Nephews, behaved themselves at Rome to­wards our King, in the person of his Ambassador the Duke of Cre­qui? We may remember how that under Henry the Fourth they wanted but very little to have utterly ruined France, and to have made the French all subject to the Spaniards; and if the Parliament at Paris had not been better Christians than the Pope, what would have become of the Posterity of Henry the Fourth? For Sixtus Quintus, whose first Employ was to be a Keeper of Swine, having gotten to be Pope, grew so insolent as to Excommunicate King Henry the Fourth, and to declare him uncapable to succeed to the Crown; but the Parliament nulled his Holiness his Bull, which broke the design for that time. Mezeray in the Life of King Henry the Third, pag. 367. Mezeray mentions the Bull, which deserves reading. There are these words, That the Autho­rity given to Saint Peter, and to his Suce [...]ssors, by the infinite power of the Eternal God is greatly above all powers of Earthly Kings, that it belongs to them to make Laws be observed, and to chastise those who oppose them, to overturn their Seats, and to tumble them down to the ground as the Mini­sters [Page 72] of Satan. He adds afterwards, That by the Indispenceable Duty of his Office, he is constrained to draw the Sword of Vengeance against Hen­ry the late King of Navarre, and against Henry Prince of Conde, the spurious and detestable off-spring of the Illustrious House of Bourbon. Wherefore being in this l [...]fty See, and in the full power which the King of Kings, and the Lord of Monarchs hath given him, he doth declare them Hereticks, &c.

Thus also did Pope Julius the Second Out the Grandfather of King Henry the Fourth of his Kingdom of Navarre, and made it fall to the Spaniards. O miserable and detestable Creatures, thus to abuse the simplicity and credulity of men, as to dare by a Dia­bolical pride to attribute to themselves an Authority which belongs only to God, and which Jesus Christ himself never exercised whilest he was upon Earth.

It is said in the Gospel, that Michael the Archangel disputing with the Devil, would not bring any railing accus [...]tion against him, but was content to say to him only, The Lord rebuke thee; because he looked upon God as him to whom judgment and vengeance be­longed. And yet we see that the Sons of Adam are bold and des­perate enough, not only to condemn, but to destroy Dignities, which they ought to Reverence, and to ruin them, together with whole States, as their fancy leads them; and that men give them­selves over to these Impieties, which is unconceivable; There must be in it an Enchantment not to be comprehended. By this you may see what judgment we ought to make of the Harangue which Car­dinal Perron made in behalf of the French Clergy, in the Assembly of the States at Paris, Anno 1616, he maintained that the Pope could Excommunicate and D [...]pose Kings, and make them be Assas­sinated, and that not to believe it, was as much as to say, that the Popes who had long enjoyed these Rights were Antichrist. And that for his part, and for his Brethren, they would volun­tarily suffer Martyrdom in defence of this Holy Doctrine. He desired to have his name inserted in the Martyrology of Garnet, and of Ra [...]illiac, and to go to the same Paradise. Ite truces animae & letho Tartara vestro pol [...]uite, & totas erel [...]i consumite poe­nas. This stroke of Cardinal Perron, confirms absolutely what Sancy says of him, that he did not believe in God; and that judgment ought we to make of him.

[Page 81]it. By all these Examples then we see that Princes, especially Kings of France, ought never to trust any Pope whatsoever; and that the Popes can never be the Mediators of those Differences which are be­tween them and other Princes.

The use th [...] Popes make of their Tributes. The Advocates for the Papacy do alledg also, that 'tis a great ad­vantage that the Popes draw Revenues out of Catholick Countries, because they make a good use of them, and with this Mony they assist the Catholick Princes against the Turk, and employ it to many other good uses. For Example, They say, that the present Pope hath this Year given a great deal of Corn to the poor People at Rome, and Portions to marry off several poor young Maids. But what doth this signify, to prove that the Popes are universal Vicars of Jesus Christ upon Earth, and Heads of the Catholick Church? I do not say, that to be Pope, a Man must lay aside all Humanity, and become a Devil; that Opinion suits only with those who believe the Pope to be Antichrist. Cicero l. 2. de Officiis. Cicero tells us, that even those who live only by their Crimes, cannot live without some exercise of Justice. It is a wonder­ful thing that the greatest part of the World, with the great Vene­ration which they have for the very Name of Popes, should be so ri­diculously favourable to them, as to admire them for very common Actions, when they ought always to surpass the most perfect Christi­ans in Charity, in greatness of Mind, and in contempt of the great things of this World, if it be true that they are the Vicars of Jesus Christ, and Successors of St. Peter; but to see how these People are extolled for the little Good they sometimes do, you would think they had a Dispensation from doing any good Actions. It is like those who commend the great Vertue of a Woman that does not prostitute her self to all the World, you would say that she might be dishonest for all that, and that for this there is no such great Commendation due to her: just so do People magnify the Pope, because they say he will give five hundred thousand Livers a Year to defend Poland against the Turks. But first of all, there is his own Interest in the case; for the Popes look upon themselves as chief Kings of Poland, as well as of other Catholick Kingdoms, and they think they lose so much Land and so many Subjects as the Turks gain from the Catholicks; but what is such a Sum as this to a Priest whose Revenue amounts to twenty Millions; how doth he employ the rest of the Churches Blood? I dare be bold to say he doth every Year plunder Poland of more than this Sum. But now in a time that People begin a little to know the Papacy, we must not wonder they endeavour by some [Page 82] good AAions to keep it from Contempt. As for the Corn which they give at Rome to the Poor, what a great matter that is? It is but just, that since the Papacy hath made them idle and lazy, it should maintain them. Was there ever yet a Tyrant who did not do some good? I do not inveigh against the Person of the present Pope, who, of all the Popes that have been in Possession of this See since Boniface the Third, is certainly one of the least wicked. It is the Papacy only which I oppose, that extravagant Authority which they make Men to adore, that never yet did any thing but Mischief; and I make a di­stinction quite contrary to that which ignorant People make of it, who say, that the Popes as Men, may be wicked, but not as Popes; for I maintain that as Popes, since Boniface the Third, they have ne­ver done any thing but ill; but as Men, they may sometimes do Actions that are morally good. If the Popes did their Duty as true Bishops, if they preached the word of God, if they instructed their Diocess in the knowledg of God, if they applied themselves to their Prayers, without being ambitious, without desiring Command and Authority, and playing the Princes at Rome, without abusing the World with their Dispensations, Induglences, false Reliques▪ Agnus Dei's, and other Fooleries; without drawing of Annates, giving of Bulls, and comparing themselves to Kings and Princes: If, I say, they behaved themselves like the first Bishops of Rome, I should honour and admire them, as a Souldier said heretofore to Nero, I loved thee Tacitus. dum ama­ri meruisti; sed postquam Parricida, Histrio, incendiarius extitisti, &c. whilst thou didst deserve it, but since thou wert a Parricide, a Stage-player, and destroyer of thy Country, I have abhorred thee.

Missions. They say furthermore, that were it not for the Pope, there would be no Missions to the Indies, and that those People would never be converted. On the contrary, by the Ambition, Pride, and carnal Pleasures which they keep up in the Church, Zeal and Charity are almost wholly extinguished. But what do the Popes do for these Missions? If they contribute any thing towards them, it must be, as in all other things, for their own Interest. But there were Missions to the Indies before ever the Bishops of Rome undertook to govern the Church: those who are now sent thither go only for Gain and Traffick; and by the Relations we have of them, they are the strangest Conversions in the World; they take no care at all to instruct these poor People, nor to teach them any thing, they baptize them only, without explaining to them the Virtue of that Sacrament, or what it signifies; nay without turning them from their former Ido­latry. [Page 83] They are contented instead of instructing them, to tell them that in worshipping their Idols, and doing all as they did before, it is sufficient if they direct the Intention to Jesus Christ, or to the Saints, and so they are no less Idolaters than they were before. These now are their Conversions.

Bishops in partibus Infi­delium. But, say they, does not the Pope create a great many Bishops in partibus Infidelium, in the Countries of Infidels. That may be done without the Pope; Metropolitans and Primates did heretofore create them, and Bishops may do so still. This tends to nothing but to flatter the Vanity of the Popes, who, not being able to establish them­selves effectually in those Countries, will however satisfy their Fancies, by this imaginary Empire which they attribute to themselves in dispo­sing of fantastick Bishopricks in those Countries. This is all but Farce. My Lord the new Bishop makes wry Faces, as if he were going to his pretended Diocess, where the People shall be Greeks, Pagans, or Mahometans, he prepares his Equipage to be gone, and whilst he is just ready to depart, his Holiness hath a tender Affection for his dear Son, commends his Zeal and his Piety, to go to hazard himself among the Infidels, dispences with him as to his Journey, and for a recompence of his Devotion, he gives him good Pensi­ons and Benefices, wherewith the good Prelate lives jollily at Rome in Pleasures and in Honours. They have by this Principle of Vanity created four Patriarchs at Rome to make themselves amends because they could not make the four Greek Patriarchs submit to them.

Pagans and Mahometans al­so have a Head of Religion. There are some People also who pretend, that the necessity of a visible Head of the Christian Church is proved by this, that the Ma­hometans have one, and the Pagans also had one: And they say, that the Mahometans, who have a Musti, and had heretofore their Cali­phes, the Pagans their Pontifex Maximus, as the ancient Romans had, will have less Aversion for Christianity when they see in it a Head of Religion like their own. But there is a great deal of diffe­rence; for these never did usurp the Temporal Power of Princes like the Popes; they never exacted Oathes of Allegiance from their Clergy, nor pretended to a share of the Princes Authority, as the Popes do in Catholick Countries. The Ambition of the Popes will ever keep them back more than this Conformity will induce them to embrace Christianity. But Men must not form to themselves such car­nal Ideas of the Religion of Jesus Christ, who is all Spirit, Truth, and Holiness; it is a sort of Idolatry to believe that Jesus Christ hath such [Page 84] Vicars. It is to be wholly ignorant of God, and to make Jesus Christ the Minister of Sin.

It may be yet said, that the Popes keep Princes and great Men in the Catholick Religion by the conveniency of Dispensations, which they many times gives them very opportunely, and such as they could not find in other Religions; Palavicin▪ lib. 19. c. 6. lib. 2 [...]. c. 8. as Cardinal Palavicini maintains, that if the Pope did not give these Dispensations to those who possess and change many Benefices, they who enjoyed them would offend God, and be uneasy in their Consciences, and that it is because that God should not be offended that the Popes have found out the Secret of Dispensations. But these Dispensations are either against the Law of God, or they are not: If they are, then Princes are so much the more to be blamed to address themselves to the Pope; for this is manifestly to mock both God and Men. I know very well, as I have already observed, that there are some good People who maintain, that the Popes can make that a Sin which is not a Sin, and that not a Sin which is a Sin; but I do not think that any Prince was ever so simple as to believe so; thus the Action of a Prince who hath recourse to the Popes for Dispensations authorizeth this abominable Impiety, and by his Example, makes it pass for an Article of Faith, making him­self the shameful Instrument to establish the most pernicious and the most infamous of all Impostures. If the thing be not contrary to the Law of God, there is no need of a Dispensation for any what­soever. And furthermore, be they necessary or unnecessary, the mean­est Bishop hath as much right to grant them as the Pope, nay more, since that, as I have already said, the Popes being Temporal Princes can not be in the Christian Religion either Bishops or Priests; they have forfeited this Character, and have no calling under God, since God hath not instituted this monstrous Authority. Besides, these Dispensations are only for the Popes advantage; for by them he raiseth and maintains himself in Credit, not only other above Bishops his fellow Brethren, but even above God himself, abrogating his Laws, and fastning Princes with his whole Families indispensably more and more to their Service, it being their Interest to maintain this pretended Authority of the Pope, without which, their Actions would appear shameful and scandalous; and as many times it is for their Marriages which they are dispensed with, their Children would be il­legimate, which would confound the order of the Succession. Thus does every thing turn to the Popes advantage, who are always of his opinion, who said in Epictetus Epictetus, cap. 38. [...] [Page 85] [...], that where Profit is there is Piety. Tacitus. Omnia retinendae Do­minationis causâ honesta. They do not only give Dispensations to Princes which are many times very unjust, but they also give them to every Body for Mony, which makes Hereticks abhor the Catholick Religion, who in this have much more respect for the Law of God, never practising any thing like this, and if there be amongst them a Licentious Person, who hath some great Affair to compass, he must be­come a Catholick; then making his Addresses with a good grace to the Pope, his business is done: this is not Simony, because that which he obtains is in premio del denaro donato a Dio, a Reward for the Money which he hath given to God, as Palavicini, lib. 1. cap. 2. Cardinal Palavicini says, Idem. He also makes them give Mony as a Punishment for their Sins as the same Jesuit says in another place. How could Men arrive to such Excesses of Impiety, as to suffer such things as these? A Pagan heretofore said, that Maxima Salust. fortuna minima licentia est, that they ought to give themselves the least liberty who are Masters of the greatest Fortunes. Our Popes on the contrary, believe that they may do any thing, because that every thing is subject to them, which bold­ness the long continuance of their Empire hath caused Tacitus. Vetustate Imperii coalita audacia, and as they found that the People easily swallowed down their Impostures, they by degrees invented more enormous ones. When People have once passed some certain Bounds, they have afterwards no shame left them, neque metus ultra, Tacitus. neque pudor est. But it is a strange thing that no body opposes such horri­ble things, that they are suffered to be done in the Church, and in the Name of God too, which the whole World ought to acknow­ledg to be Holiness it self: Every body hath seen it, doth yet see it, says nothing of it, but by silence approves, nay applaudes it. I be­lieve for my part, that People please themselves with fancying that God is like the Popes, and that they may come off easily with him in their Affairs. That which is as bad too as all the rest is, that pro­portionably other Ecclesiasticks, at least many of them, do attribute to themselves some part of this Authority of the Popes, of dispencing against the Law of God, and that after the Popes Example, who have infected all the others. Horace. Sicut Grex totus in agris, unius sca­bie cadit. This it is which hath produced those fine Morals which reign so much in the World, and have done so much Mischief. They will rather dispence with some great Crime against the Law of God and Nature, than with an indifferent thing, against which either they or their Predecessors have made some rash Decree; for by either [Page 86] of them, they raise their Almighty Power above Heaven it self. In the first they raise themselves above God, by dispencing with the Obedience to his Law, and by the other, they make that a Sin which is not so in its own nature, which belongs only to God; and so they put themselves in his place. What Reason is there (for Example) in what Pope Innocent the Third established, Innocent extra. de Biga­mis tit. 22. c. quia circa. that a Priest may be dispenced with for keeping many Concubines, but not for being twice married? upon which the Glossary makes this just Observation, No­tandum mirabile quod plus valet hic luxuria quam Castitas. What reason is there that at Rome the best Benefices are disposed of in fa­vour of wicked Wretches, Atheists, Poisoners, and Sodomites, Fel­lows that are known to be such, and not to one only, but a great num­ber of them; and that in France such Benefices as those cannot be possessed by a Prince and natural Son of a great King? I am not ig­norant that there are some Canons which are against it; but why shall People observe so scrupulously a Canon of a Council upon a thing almost indifferent, whilst that the Popes do every day violate many Canons of the most Sacred Councils, in things that are Essential, and even in this very Point; for there is no body who knows Italy or Spain, but must acknowledg that there are a great many, who, not only possess Benefices, but Priests and Bishops who are Bastards, born even of double Adultery, begotten by Priests upon married Women. I do affirm, that I have my self known more than four of them; and even in France, our own Country, which is a very religious place, in comparison of Italy or Spain, who is there but knows that there are People of this sort in Possession of Benefices? Horrible Maxims of Ita­lian Divines concerning▪ Sodo­my in a Priest. The Roman Divines maintain, that a Priest is not irregular for Adultery and Sodomy, yet it would be irregular to let a Prince enjoy Benefi­ces, because his Father did not beget him by his lawful Wife. Navar. quest. 2. de defensi­one proximi. See in Navarre the great Canonist, he shall tell you that Sodomy causeth no irregularity in a Priest, but that Marriage does, because Pope Innocent the Third hath so established. After he hath spoken of those cases which causes Irregularity, he asks the Question, whether Sodomy be one or no. Dubitarûnt an voluerimus etiam nefandum Sodomiae crimen comprehendere; sequitur respondendum esse, non comprehendi, primo quia irregularitas nisi ob casus jure expressos non incurritur, secundo quia verba illa sunt Innocentii. Facit etiam quòd nos intelleximus quod in Italiâ ubi, ut fertur, plus hoc malo laboratur, quam oporteret, nullae de eo Dispensationes quaeruntur. He concludes that Sodomy makes not a Priest irregular. Tolet. cap. 61. lib 1. de in­stitutione Presbyt. And the Cardinal Tolet does [Page 87] maintain it to be the common Doctrine of the Divines at Rome, that all Orders, even Priesthood it self, may be conferred upon Children, and those who have not yet the use of Reason. Omnes Ordines, says he, etiam & Presbyteratum conferri posse Infantibus, & nondum usum Rationis habentibus, est communis Doctrina Theologorum. We see clearly by this, that when in France these People refuse to grant Benefices without Cure of Souls, upon the account of pretended Irre­gularities, that it is more out of Pride than Religion, and that they take pleasure, as I have already said, to make People feel their Yoke, this they call super Aspidem & Basiliscum ambulare, to tread upon Serpents and Dragons.

Those who maintain the Popes Authority do moreover affirm, that we are obliged to the Popes for the Holy Tribunal of the In­quisition, without which the true Religion would have sup­planted by Heresy, in Italy, Spain, and Portugal, Palav. lib. 14. cap. 19. Cardinal Pala­vicini does assure us so. Il Tribunal dell' Inquisitione, dal quale, l' Ita­lia riconosce la conservata integrita della sua fide. It is to the Holy Tribunal of the Inquisition that Italy owes the preservation of the Integrity of the Faith. Wherein truly they do a great deal of Honour to God and to the Christian Religion, to imagine that God hath no other means to preserve his Church, and that he needs such cursed Instruments as those to maintain it. The Inquisi­tion. That you may make the better judgment of it, it will not be amiss for me to speak briefly a word or two concerning the manner how this Tribunal proceeds a­gainst Heriticks, upon what they call the Directory of the Inquisitors, made in the Year 1585. you must know that this Directory was made for the Execution of the Bull de Coenâ Domini which is to be seen Lib. 1. in summâ Francisci Tolet. de instructione Sacerdotum, where there are eighteen sorts of Excommunications; the first against He­reticks, Favourers of Hereticks, those who read or keep their Books without the permission of the Holy See. And under this pretence these Fellows have caused two of our Kings to be murthered. It was this rare Excommunication that ruined Religion in England, and it is a wonder that it does not destroy it every where else. Idem. In his 20 th Book you find that all those are excommunicated, who say and con­fess that the Council is above the Pope, and who appeal from his Decrees to the Council, so that a Man cannot be a true Christian, without being excommunicated by the Pope. We must no longer believe the Gospel, but become the Popes Creatures to avoid these terrible Excommunications. In the 21 st Chapter of Cardinal Tolet his [Page 88] Collection, there is a Bull which does excommunicate all Princes who lay new Taxes upon their People without the Pope's permission. This was not much amiss indeed, for by it you see that all Soveraign Princes are made Slaves to the holy See. A Man must have lost his Senses not to see that it is the Spirit of the Devil which possesseth this Gene [...]ation of Vipers. Idem. In his 27 th, 28 th, and 29 th Chapters, all Chancellours, Presidents, Councellours, and Soveraign Courts of Justice, are excommunicated if they hinder the Clergy in any manner whatsoever to exercise their Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction against all Per­sons, according to the Decrees of the Council of Trent, whereby they will destroy all Political Authority, and make the Clergy Masters of it; for you must know that the Council of Trent, whose Decrees were all made at Rome before ever matters were proposed at Trent, established Ecclesiastical Immunities, according to the Decretals of Bo­niface the Eight: This it was that made many worthy Prelates in France formerly press so hard to have this Council received there; and that wicked Wretch Miron Archbishop of Angiers, write so insolently against the Parliament, for which he very well deserved to be hanged. At length having thundred out a great many other Excommunications, they declare, that whosoever shall remain a whole Year in these sorts of Excommunications, shall for their Contumacy be declared Here­ticks. Chap. Cum Contumacia de Hereticis in 6. and it is a favour too that they do not turn them into Hobgoblins. There is nothing in all this but what is sottish, horrible, and diabolical, yet there are People who at this day dare not publickly detest it. Nay, there are several in France, who shall maintain it at their utmost peril, and even die for it, as almost all the Monks and many others who for the sake of Jesus Christ himself would not lose this Point. Hi­therto this Tribunal of the Inquisition hath been abhorred in France, but no thanks to the Monks, but the Parliaments; they say, Ecclesia mavult suffundere sanguinem quam effundere. And during the Minority of Lewis the thirteenth all the Chairs of the Doctors and Preachers rung with this impious and abominable Doctrine, that the Pope was the Monarch of the Church could excommunicate, depose and put Kings to death. And to the end that these Holy Laws should be put in Execution, these infamous Creatures have wrote a Book, which they call the Directory of the Inquisitors in the the Year 1585. where­in they establish, that they are all impious Persons, and Enemies to the Church, who do not allow of the Extravagants of Boniface, and all the Decretals of the Popes who declare, that the Church hath the [Page 89] Power of both Swords to destroy all those who will not submit to it. In the third part of this Directory, Commentary the thirteenth; there are three methods of proceeding against Hereticks, viz. by Accusati­on, by Delation, and by Inquisition. In Matters of Faith, Accusa­tion is not allowed of, because they say that it is very dangerous, and full of Contention; the Crime of Heresy must be proved Judicially, and Canonically, which cannot be done without some difficulty; so that the Treasurer of the Inquisition becomes the Accuser, for this reason, quia non est obnoxius poenae talionis, because he is not obnoxi­ous to the Punishment of Retaliation, neque aliis poenis quas falsi Ac­cusatores pati solent, nor to any other Punishments which false Wit­nesses are wont to suffer. So that there is no other way but by Dela­tion and Inquisition; and let a Man but apply himself to the Syndic of the Inquisition, or to the Inquisitor to accuse any body and there's an end of him. In this third part of the Directory, Commentary the 28 th, towards the latter end there are these words; In crimine Hae­reseos propter ejus Enormitatem omnia testimonia recipiuntur, omni­um (que) voces & interpretationes audiuntur, etiam & inimicorum homi­num, perjurorum, lenonum, meretricum, & infamium: In case of Here­sy, by reason of the Enormity of the Crime, all Evidences are allowed of, and the Word and Accusation of all sorts of People are to be heard, even of Enemies, those that are perjured, Pimps, Whores, and those of the worst Reputation. And that which is as good as this, is, that two Witnesses of this sort are sufficient, even against a King, and without being obliged to let him know who the Witnesses are. See Commentary the 23, 48, 120, 124. there are these words; Quod si reus instaret postularet (que) ut sibi concederetur defensio secundum Juris Ordinem, & per consequens ut Testium nomina simul cum dictis eorundem sibi ederentur, audiendus non esset; & si fortassis ob id gra­vari se diceret, & appellaret, talis appellatio non esset admittenda; sed eâ non obstante imo vero eâ rejectâ tanquam frivolâ & injustâ ad ulteriora Judicii acta est intrepidè procedendum; That if any guilty Person doth insist upon, and require liberty to make a Defenee, according to the ordinary course of Law, and by consequence, that the Names of the Witnesses, together with their Depositions, should be delivered him, he is not to be heard; And if, for th [...]s reason, he shall say that he is hardly dealt with, and shall appeal, such his Appeal is in no wise to be allowed, but that notwithstanding, nay, it being wholly rejected as frivolous and unjust, he is vigorously to be proceeded against, even to the utmost Acts of Judgment. And the good natur'd Inquisitors give this Con­solation [Page 90] to People that are condemned; Nec quisquam dicat se in­justè hâc ratione condemnari, nec conqueratur do judicibus Ecclesiasti­cis, vel de judicio Ecclesiae ita statuentis: Nor let any Man say that he is condemned unjustly upon this account, nor complain of the Ecclesi­astical Judges, or of the Church so ordaining: (These Hangmen will make the Church accessary to their Barbarities.) Sed si injustè condemnatus sit, gaudeat potiùs quòd pro veritate mortem patiatur; but if he be unjustly condemned, let him rejoyce rather that he suffers Death for the Truth. What could the Devil do worse if he were incarnate? Yet this is the Churches Head, the Vicar of Jesus Christ, the Holy See, the Apostolick See, it is his Holiness who hath made and decreed these things. They do yet worse than this to Kings and Princes, for they make use of secret means, for fear they should get notice of them, and by their Power prevent their wicked Designs. They employ ignorant Creatures that are loaden with Iniquity, such as Ravilliac, who was a Murtherer by Profession, and a Sorcerer too, as was commonly said, they give these People Absolution from all their Crimes, and promise them Paradise if they perish in the Execu­tion, or, if they are taken, after it. They have for such purposes as these in Italy, those whom they call Crocesegnati, and in Spain los Fa­miliares. Suarez. in def. fid. Cath. c. 4. l. 6. n. 17. See in the Book of Francis Suarez the Spaniard, called Defensio fidei Catholicae. By the way, we are very much obliged to this Loyal Loyolist, for calling these Maxims the Catholick Faith. If what he said were true, it would be no great advantage to be a Catholick. It would be perfect Manicheisme, a Man must believe two contrary Principles, good and bad, God and the Devil, at the same time. There is a certain Author, called Guliel. Nubrigensis, who relates the Story of a Monk, who dethroned his natural Prince and sat himself in his place, he had engraved upon his Seal, Ferus ut Leo, mitis ut Agnus. This Monk was Villain enough, thus to usurp the Autho­rity of his Prince; but he was a thousand times better than any of these Thieves at Rome. For my part, I will all my Life-time hold Communion with the Catholick Gallican Church; but for the Bull de Coenâ Domini, the Inquisition, the Superiority of the Pope above the Council, and the Morals now in fashion, I declare I do detest it as a thing dangerous to Salvation, to hold Communion with them who believe and maintain these things, and that I believe them as far from being saved as the Mahometans.

Who can believe that Jesus Christ, who gave himself for the Salva­tion of us all, and who is all Charity it self, can approve of it, that [Page 91] People should be put to death for Religion; or, that he does not de­test the Barbarities which these Monsters exercise under the Name of Vicars of Jesus Christ? How contrary are these Practices to those of Jesus Christ and of his Apostles? See after what manner our merciful Saviour spoke to his Apostles, who would have forsaken him, What, and will you also leave me? upon which St. Chrysostom makes this Reflection, * [...]· He asks them, saying, Will ye also go away? which was the voice of one taking away all force and compulsion.

And in truth they did all abandon him; yet after his Resurrection he received them as kindly as tho they had followed him to the very Cross; and we see that when he gave his Apostles the Power of the Keys, he ordered them only to teach Men, and not to compel them by force; and on that occasion, when the Apostles were discontented with the Samaritans, and would have called down Fire from Heaven upon them, he says to them, Ye know not what Spirit ye are of: the Son of Man is not come to destroy Mens Lives, but to save them. But the Popes, who make a quite contrary use of this Power, are come to destroy both Souls and Bodies too. We see that the Apostle St. Paul followed these holy Rules of Charity when he wrote to Titus; teach­ing him the Duty of a Bishop, he says to him only, A Man that is an Heretick, after the first and second Admonition, reject. He says not, do him Injustice, kill him, ruin him by Violence, or by Craft, break your word with him, according to the Maxims and Practices of the Court of Rome. Chrysost. l. 1. de Sacerdote. According to these Principles, St. Chrysostom says these words; Apud nos non cogendo sed suadendo id agendum est ut qui malus est melior evadat, ne (que) enim ad coercendos peccatores Po­testatis jus nobis datum est; & si datum maximè esset, locus non esset juris istius exercendi, cum Deus coronet non eos qui necessitate, sed qui voluntate liberâ à malo abstinent: We must not endeavour to make a bad Man better by Force, but by Perswasion: For we have no Authority to compel Sinners; and if we had, we ought not to make use of it, seeing God crowns not those that abstain from Evil out of meer necessity, but those that do it out of free choice. And hence it comes that St. Hierom, comparing a King to a Bishop, says, Ille nolentibus praeest, hic volentibus. The one rules over those that are unwilling, the other over those that are willing. And Gregory Bishop of Rome, writing to the Bishop of Constantinople, says to him, Nova est & inau­dita ista praedicatio quae verberibus exigit fidem: That is a new and [Page 92] unheard-of sort of Preaching that requires Faith with Blows. The Fathers abhorred not only that Men should be put to death, but that any Injustice should be done to them upon the account of Religion; for to make this use of Religion is to betray it, and it is a sure means to make Hereticks more obdurate: for it is certain, that they who do thus, have only the Name of Christians; and People readily believe that a Religion is nothing worth which they are forced to embrace by such ways as these. St Athanasius speaking of the Religion of the Arrians, who persecuted the Catholicks, driving them out of all Em­ploys, depriving them of the means of getting their Living, prohi­biting them the Exercise of their Religion, and doing them many other Wrongs by Violence and Fraud, and by groundless Accusations, even to the bringing some of them to Death, says very well; At (que) seipsum quàm non sit Pia, nec Dei cultrix manifestat: and shews it self how it is neither pious, nor worshipping God. The same thing may be said of the English at present. St. Chrysost. to the Ephesi­ans, 4.17. St Chrysostome also says, Errantis poena est doceri; the Punishment of the erroneous is to be instructed. The Em­perour Antoninus, tho a Pagan, was much more a Christian than the Popes, and their Inquisition, when in his 9 th Book he says; Si potes meliora doce, si non potes, memento in hoc tibi lenitatem datam. Ipsi Dii lenes sunt talibus: If thou canst, teach me better; if not, remem­ber Gentleness▪ was given thee for this very purpose. The Gods them­selves are gentle to such. If the Christian Religion did establish the Inquisition, if she justified the Perfidiousness and Inhumanities which the Court of Rome and Hereticks commit every day upon the account of Religion, I should make no difficulty to declare it an abominable Religion, and that we ought not to be of it one moment longer: and if People went to Heaven by such ways as these, I should be soon of the Americans mind, who said they would not go to the same Para­dise whither the Spaniards went; nor would I go to the Paradise of the Popes and the Inquisitors. I do maintain that the Popes have ruined the Church in those Countries where their Inquisition hath been set up, more than all the Heresies in the World together ever could have done. We need not but consider the good Effects which it hath had in those Countries, where in truth there is no Religion, at least Christianity scarce there to be found; and how should it with that Ignorance which the Inquisition brings along with it, which hath produced nothing but Superstition, Impiety, Hypocrisy, dissembling of Opinions, a thousand Cruelties and Treacheries, and all sorts of abominable Vices, which are scarce known but in Countries of the [Page 93] Inquisition? And where we find them in other Countries, they have been brought thither from Rome by those that were devoted to the Papacy, through the too great Commerce which Princes suffer with Rome. The Hereticks may well say that they are obliged to the In­quisition that Holland is no longer Catholick. If the Inquisi [...]ion be advantagious to Christianity, Why do the most Christian Nations of Europe the best regulated both in their Religion and their Manners, de­test it? Compare the French Nation, Germany, Flanders and Poland, with the other, Slaves to the Inquisition, and you will say that the latter are not worthy of the Name of Christians in comparison of the former. And for the Hereticks, I esteem and Heretick that is an honest Man, and that fears God, a hundred times more than a Ca­tholick who lives disorderly, or that knows not what Religion is. I know no worse Heresy than to be without the knowledg of God; and how can He be known where the Holy Scripture is not allowed to be read, where the Clergy are wholly lost in most abominable Vices, and know nothing at all? where it is Crime enough to be burnt, to discourse about Religion? where Mens Minds are filled with a thousand Fooleries that have no relation at all to Piety? Set a Spaniard or an Italian, who hath gotten a little Sense, to discourse on Jesus Christ, and he shall not fail to tell you, that Jesus Christ was a great Politician; Christo era Grande Politico, because he sees that his Vicar under the pretence of Religion hath made so great Con­quests, and subdued all Catholick Princes to himself. This is the Idea which they have of Jesus Christ, and which they form to themselves upon what they see in the Court of Rome, and in the present State of the Church; for, as for the Holy Scripture they know less of it than of the Alcoran. And their Divines teach them, that the Church is the most happy Body Politick upon Earth, Corpo. Politico il piu felice che sia in terra, as Cardinal Palavicini says Pal. l. 3. c. 18. of his Hist. of the Council of Trent.. And the same Cardinal says in another place, that Jesus Christ would have his Church governed, as great Polititians govern their States, and that he came down from Heaven upon Earth to make her happy as well in this World as in the other, by heaping upon her Honours, Riches, and Pleasures, Lib. 7. cap. 9. secondo la carne, according to the Flesh. And of the Papacy in particular, he says, that it is the abundant Source of Temporal Felicity. Il Principiato Apostolico fonte d'utilita Tempo­rale secondo la carne in quel modo chi e piu conforme etiandio all huma­na felicita: Lib. 23. c. 3. lib. 1. c. 23. The Apostolick Primacy is the Fountain of Temporal Profit, and in such a manner as is most conducing to Human Felicity. [Page 94] Nor do the Portuguees understand things better; they are more than half Jews, and yet know not what either Judaism or Christianity is. There are a great many of them who look for a sort of a Messias, who by his great Conquests ought to make them Masters of the World; this is one of their Kings named Sebastian, whom they have made a Saint, he was killed in the Battel of Alcazar going to assist one Moorish King against another, and because his Body was not found after the Battel, they pretend that he is not dead, but that he roams up and down the World, and that he will return suddenly again to conquer all the habitable Earth, and make it subject to the Portugal Nation. This is the Faith of the Christians in that Country, and they learn it insensibly of the Jews. It is not long since a Man might have borrowed a considerable Sum of Mony in Portugal payable at the return of St. Sebastian. That which doth produce this horrible Ignorance among these People is, not only that they read not the Holy Scriptures, but because the Inquisition suffers there no Religion but its own; for by this means, there is no body who can accuse ei­ther the Inhumanity of the Inquisition, or the Vices and Incapacities of the Clergy. If some other Sect had liberty among them, the Contradiction of this Sect would oblige them to study, and to in­struct themselves, which would make the Study of Divinity and other Sciences flourish among them; and seeing every Man would have as many Censurers of his Religion and of his Manners, as there were Men of contrary Opinions, this would make Men take care of their Behaviour; that their Lives might be more conformable to true Christianity. Wickedness would be greatly abated, Men would be ashamed of those horrible Crimes which the Italians now make their diversion; there would be much more knowledg of God, more Industry and Perfection in the World. I know that this is not at all agreeable to the Humour of the Popes and their Clergy, who make their Markets better by Ignorance and the Inquisition. I know by my own Expe­rience, and what I have heard say by many good People in England, that the expulsion of Catholicks, would destroy amongst them all Devo­tion and Religion, because they would have no Adversaries to awaken them, and to oblige them to take care of themselves; their Mini­sters would become ignorant and debauched, and so proportionably the People. But, say they, the Inquisition doth prohibit all ill Books; you must know too that the Word of God is of the number of these ill Books that are prohibited; and that there are many other Books forbidden, which have not only no ill in them, but which are [Page 95] very excellent, only because they are contrary to the Ambition of the Court of Rome; and that there is an infinite number of abo­minable ones allowed of, which are fit for nothing but to be burnt as well as their Authors. By this same Principle they have razed out of the Bookes of the Fathers those Passages which were not for their purpose.

They yet insist for the justifying of the Inquisition, That the diver­sity of Religion is the Cause of Civil Wars in a Nation. But what Mischief doth not the Inquisition do? All Princes, in whose Countries it is, are Slaves to it. It is true, that among them there are no Civil Wars for Religion; but it is as true, that they must absolutely depend upon the Court of Rome; otherwise if they pretend to ex­amine their Orders, the Popes shall use them like Dogs. How many times hath the Republick of Venice been like to be destroyed by these People, only because they had a mind to keep some Liberty to them­selves, and not to suffer certain Excesses of their Tyranny? And yet do they every day insult and attempt against all the Rights which God and Nature have given them.

It is furthermore said in favour of the Papacy, That the World is greatly obliged to it for all the different Orders of Monks, and of Nuns, which are a great Ornament and Advantage to the Church. It is true, that the Popes have instituted almost all of them, and that it is no fault of theirs that there are not twenty times as many, espe­cially in the States of other Princes; for by this means they erect Imperium in Imperio, their own Empire in the Dominions of another, thereby gaining to themselves so many Subjects in all Catholick Countries, who are at all times ready to do any thing for their Ser­vice. Now since there is nothing in it but this, all these Institutions of so many Sects of Monks ought to be suspected by us. Besides, it is not the Popes who have inspired these People with the thoughts of retreating, and of Severity to themselves, they knew only how to apply it to their own use and service. The Inclination which these Men have to this sort of Humour and Life is well enough known; and that in all times, and in all Countries, and in all Religions, there have been great numbers of Men who have embraced this sort of Life, pretending to live more austerely, and to avoid the trouble of worldly Business, affecting to be singular in their Clothes, their Diet, whip­ping themselves, and other outward Mortifications of their Flesh. There were a great many of them among the Jews, especially to­wards the latter end, and when Religion fell most into decay; we [Page 96] see by their Authors, that besides the Pharisees there were the Essenes, Dositheens, and other Sects of Religious Jews. There were many of them among the ancient Romans; there is in Juvenal an admi­rable description of their Manners and Customs. It is of them that he says, Fronti nulla Fides, and qui Curios simulant & Bacchanalia vivunt; he represents them with short Hair, & supercilio brevior coma, and with all he says, that they lived after a very licentious manner. There are also many of them at this day among the Pagans, there are great numbers of them to be found among the Mahome­tans, Greeks, Nestorians, Eutychians, Maronites, Abyssins, and Cophties. The Popes then have made cunning use of the Humour of these People, whom they have supported as far forth as they could, and even canonized them to augment their own Power, by the Credit which they gave to these People, who became their Creatures, and who for their parts served the Pope with all the Power and Credit they had. People had them in great Veneration at Rome, this Vene­ration spread it self every-where abroad, so that the World did almost adore them; every thing that they either said or did, was as highly esteemed, as what ever the Apostles themselves had said or done; and as time served them when they had sufficiently tried the Credulity and So [...]tishness of Mankind, they came to that excess of Impiety and Im­pudence, as to compare their Authors to our Lord Jesus; nay, to give them the Preheminence. Read but the Life of St. Francis, and a Book that was printed at Brussels in the Year 1630, with this Title, Korte beschrijvinge van het Aerd [...]s-broederschap van de Koorde Saint Franciscus; and so did other Orders speak as great things of their respective Founders. People thought they could not obtain Salvation without the Monks, they attribute particular Graces to their very Habits, which, the better to impose upon the World, were of an extraordinary fashion. Nay, there was sometimes as much im­puted to them as to the Blood of Christ it self; whosoever took this Habit they said it was as much worth to him as a second Baptism; when any body was sick they desired to die in this Habit. These were People who did more good than God commanded; and we see that all these Impieties are yet vented by the Monks of our own time, who pretend that they do more Good than is necessary for their own Salvation, and that they can impart a share of their Merits, and Works of Supererogation to whomsoever they please▪ provided that they contribute somewh [...]t towards the maintenance of the Kitchin; [...]nd for that they have fo [...]nd out the Invention of the [...]r Fraternities.

[Page 97]The Heads of these Sects, as I have already said, were very useful to the Popes, and the Popes for their parts made them be esteemed by the People, and at length, by the Ignorance and Sloth of Princes, they exempted them from the Obedience due to their Soveraigns, to their Bishops, and to the Law of God it self, and so they acknow­ledg none but the Pope. By little and little, making a great noise like the blind Men at Paris, many of these Sects got great Estates, others loved rather to beg, like those sturdy Vagrants, who prefer a begging and a lazy Life before any other. They who have any wit among them employ themselves in writing fabulous Legends of the Life of some or other of their Order, and in composing a great many wicked Books about Religion. They are all listed to the Pope, who pays them in Pardons, and Indulgences, and in Reliques, of which they make a good Market, in Canonizing people of their own Or­der, and in exempting them from the Laws of their Prince and of their Bishops, so that there is Impunity for them for all sorts of Crimes, they are only forced to go out of the Province where they committed the Disorder into another. We may look upon every Convent of Monks, as so many Garrisons which the Pope hath in all Catholick Cities to keep them under the Yoke of his Obedience; and every diffe­rent Order, so many different Regiments clothed in different Fashions, and wearing different Liveries, who all live at the good Mans Expence, but cost the Pope not a Farthing, having found out many Secrets to pull off the Feathers without making the Fowl cry. They are certainly of great use to the Popes, but I demand what Good they do us? Are there not Clergy-men enough to perform the Service without them? Are there not People enough to be maintained who are really poor, without the begging Monks, who are the most ridiculous and the most vicious Wretches upon Earth? If they are necessary to the Church, as some say, how comes it to pass, that in the Pri­mitive Church, where there was so much Piety, there were none of them? or at least very few, and they too quite of a contrary Cha­racter to those now a days; but that now in this languishing State of the Church, every place swarms with them. How comes it to pass that their numbers are much less in France, Flanders, Germany and Poland, where Christianity flourishes a thousand times more than in Italy, Spain, and Portugal, where it is almost extinguished? For tho there be Canonizations and Beatifications oftentimes performed for People of these Countries, it signifies nothing else, but that the Pope hath finger'd their Mony, or that these Saints were in their Life-time [Page 98] greatly devoted to the Holy See. This is done upon false-accounts given of the Lives of these Persons by some Monks of their Order, and it is very easy to impose upon People in these Countries, by reason of the extream Ignorance among them, and of the Inquisition which would burn those who should dare to contradict it. In France where People are much more understanding, and where there is greater Liber­ty, it is not so easy to impose upon and delude the World. Besides, the Protestants would not fail to discover the Cheat and to lay it open, from whence also it comes to pass that there are but very few Miracles wrought in France, and fewer at Paris than in any other City in the Kingdom, because People are not there so easy to be deceived. I do maintain, and every Man that hath observed it must agree with me that there is incomparably more Vertue and solid Piety in the honest People of the World than among the Monks. Converse with them, and you shall find nothing but Grimace and false appearances of a Devotion that signifies nothing, a base Devotion that hath nothing of true Piety, applying themselves to the outward parts of Religion, neglecting, or else not knowing the true form of Piety, and upon this they are puffed up with a value of themselves, they are presumptuous, full of Contempt one of another, ambitious, worldly and voluptuous, which we see in them where they have a little Liberty, as in Spain, Portugal and Italy, there is nothing so unruly as their Behaviour, their Lives are most licentious, there is no Villany nor Abomination which they do not commit. In France, our own Country, where they are Saints in comparison, there is no roguish Story of a Debauchery and Villany, but they are at one end of it. Compare them with our Fathers of the Oratory who are Seculars, and who yet trouble themselves with Secular Affairs less than they, and for Knowledg, for Humility, Purity, and lofty Sentiments of Religion, there is as great a difference as can be between a worthy and a judicious Person, and a superstitious soft­pated Fellow, or rather between an honest Woman and a Whore. I acknowledg that here and there you may find a Man of a great worth among the Monks, but it is one among ten thousand, and he must have a great deal of Strength and Courage to keep himself innocent in these places where there is so much Corruption. I believe that it is much more difficult to obtain Salvation there, than in the World, tho to those, who have not narrowly enquired into their Lives, it ap­pears otherwise. They among them who are ingenious do own it, tho they are ordinarily Hypocrites and would deceive and make us be­lieve, that they all agree that Men must have extraordinary measures of [Page 99] Grace, and would perswade the World that they themselves have them. The most unsufferable of them, as I have already said, are the Men­dicants, those Pharisees who act wholly contrary to what St. Paul taught and practised, who would have all Christians apply them­selves to labour, yet they pretend to be of a better sort than the others. St. Paul, whom St. Augustin calls the first of all Saints, says in the 20 th Chapter of the Acts, ver. 33. that he had coveted no Mans Silver, Gold, or Apparel, and that his Hands had ministred to his Necessities, and to those who were with him, and makes his Glory to consist in this, that he had been a charge to no Man: He, I say, orders all People to labour, and repeats what our Saviour had said, that it is better to give than to receive. Yet our lazy Monks have at this day Maxims that are quite contrary: They had rather have nothing at all of their own, that they may eat the Bread out of poor Peoples Mouths, upon whose Sweat and Blood they live and grow fat. Of all the Monks that ever I yet heard of, I have a value for no Order of them but those of La Trape, by the account the World gives of them. First, they are all kept to work, they trouble not themselves with Confessions, no more than the first Monks in the Primitive Times. They study, they haunt neither Courts nor Cities, they are not covetous of Legacies, nor do they pry into Peoples Wills, they are not Beggars, they sell not holy things, they live fru­gally, upon a wholsom Diet to keep themselves in Health, which makes their Minds more fit for the Service of God, they are not de­sirous of News, nor of the Secrets of Families to make advantage by it, they read the word of God carefully, making holy things their ordinary Entertainment, and have no Commerce at all with Wo­men. Provided that this could continue without Vanity, and with­out Discontent, it is a School of Holiness. For the others I find, that instead of being advantagious to the Church, they dishonour it, and give the Protestants just reason to despise us. With People that have any Understanding these Fellows Habits make so strongly against them, that Men are apt to believe that there is both extravagancy and weakness of Mind in those that wear them; these are marks of Di­stinction, which shew them not to be French Men, but that they be­long to another Prince; What good do these ridiculous Singularities do? If this Habit be necessary to make a Man really better, we ought all to take it; if not, they are to be laughed at thus that dress up them­selves, and so much the more when they think they merit by it. These People ought all to be reduced to one and the same Hab [...]t, and this ridiculous variety of diverse Habits, and monstrous Fashions [Page 100] ought to be taken away as well as the variety of Institutions, that war [...]ant some to beg and allow others to be rich, and to be continu­ally [...]e [...]ping up o [...] Wealth, and others to eat and drink till they bu [...]st. It is reasonable that they should be well clothed and fed, but it is [...] that they should beg at least if it be voluntary; and for that [...] their number ought to be diminished, and they of them that a [...]e [...]ich should keep them that are poor; let them all apply them­selves to work and to study as heretofore they did. It would be very well done ab [...]olutely to retrench some of these Orders that are so chargeable to the People. Pope Alexander the Seventh did very well in suppressing two Orders that were as good as those that are now remaining, the one was called the Order of the Cross, and the other of [...]he Holy Ghost. And in Spain they have done very well never to endure among them the Capucins. The Council of Toledo did here­tofore ordain, that no new Religious Order should be suffered to be established in the Church, ne nimia Religionum diversitas gravem in Ecclesia Dei confusionem parturiat. There are no People that hate or destroy one another more than the different Orders of the Mendi­cants, because they hinder one anothers Trade; and there are no Peo­ple in the World that debauch the Women more than they; the Secu­lar Priests are Angels in comparison; they are in so good Credit and Esteem, that they are not endured in the Court of our Kings, and they have no access to it. Their Principle of blind Obedience is both foolish and impious, which may cause, and many times hath been the occasion of horrible Disorders in the Estates and Families of our Kings. It is a Principle which makes the Pope, whom their Supe­riors implicitly obey, Master of our Lives and of the State; for these Superiors are always as ready to inspire the Monks with all sorts of Opinions, how horrible soever they be, provided they serve the Pope his Designs; for this reason I have often wondered that some Law hath not been made in the State against the perfidiousness of the Monks and Jesuits, from the example of two of our [French] Kings whom they have murthered; and that it hath not been declared, that if any such thing shall happen for time to come, all these People should be driven out of the Kingdom: There is no other means to hinder the Court of Rome from doing the same things hereafter. The Parlia­ment of England hath lately enacted somewhat like this to secure the Life of their King against the Monks. No Clergy-man ought to be received without subscribing the Condemnation of the impious Bull de Coenâ Domini, which is a bottomless Gulf of Impieties, Heresies, [Page 101] and Inhumanities. And till the Monks and Jesuits shall solemnly re­nounce and condemn this accursed Bull, it will be no great Injustice done them, to accuse them of attempting against the Lives of Kings. If any Man did suspect me to be an Arrian, and I knew it, and could justify my self from such cursed Opinions, and did it not, the World would have reason to impute to me all the Consequences of th [...]s per­nicious Heresy. It is well known that all the Monks, and particularly the Jesuits have by their fourth Vow obliged themselves to the Exe­cution of this infernal Bull. It was the Monks, who, living in Idle­ness, corrupted and falsified many Ecclesiastical Books, they have coun­terfeited many other Books full of Lies, and set them out under the Names of good Authors. They are every where known for People who, by their Artifices under pretext of Religion, are the ruine of most Families, whose Substance they cunningly suck in them­selves. It is they who have vilified and discredited the true Ortho­dox Priests, drawing the People after themselves by false appearances of Mortifications. They are good for nothing but to move Sediti­ons, and to bring People to Disobedienee, and when ever the Interest of their Monarch the P [...]pe, is concerned, they think the Blood of their Enemies as meritorious as that of the Cross. The Humility they boast of is a very pleasant thing, when at the same time they take place of their Elders, and of People of Quality. They pretend to have re­nounced Vanity more strictly than the Secular Priests, and yet these Asses are called Father, Father, as heretofore the Pharisees, Rabbi, Rabbi, they cause themselves also to be stiled Reverend Fathers, and pretend to have Merit enough besides to obtain their own Salvation, and to impart the overplus to others. They call themselves Father Raphaels, Father Cherubims, and Father Seraphims, with such like Names, which are Marks of Vanity and Folly, with which there can be nei­ther Humility nor Piety. Their Generals also manage the matter fairly, to have the same Respect shewed them in the Courts of Princes as the Ambassadours of the greatest Kings. These Gentlemen are all sworn Enemies to the Holy Scripture as well as to the Court, and they do all they can to render the reading of it suspicious, they here­tofore did what they could to abolish it, because it made as much a­gainst them as the Popes. In the Year 1192. they made a new Gospel upon the Dreams of a Carmelite named Cyrill, this was to suppress the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and their own they called the Eternal Gospel, wherein they taught that God the Father reigned under the Law, God the Son under Grace, and that the Holy Ghost [Page 102] was now going to reign by the Establishment of four Orders of Men­dicants, and that for the future Men could not be saved but by this Gospel, that that of Jesus Christ was imperfect, and that the Sacra­ments were of no great use. This Gospel was preached almost all Europe over by the Jacobines and Franciscans, and it was very near being received in the University of Paris, but there remained yet some worthy Men who opposed and made it be condemned, but see­ing these new Evangelists had the favour of the Holy Father, the Doctors of the University were forced to go to Rome, where at length they ob­tained that this Book should be condemned and burned, but privately▪ for fear of decrying the four Orders of Mendicants, and also that the Book of the University of Paris should be burned; much after the same manner as heretofore at Bezancon at the beginning of Luther's Revolt, which drew many Towns after it, the Magistra [...]e of Be­zancon fearing that this Fire should reach thither, forbad all sorts of People to speak of God either Good or Evil. And there falling out lately a Dispute between some Divines of the Sorbonne at Paris, some of whom do hold with the Jesuits, that we may be saved with­out loving God, and others on the contrary, that we ought to love God; whereupon both the one and the other were forbidden to speak of it so that the matter yet remains undecided, whither we ought to love God or no, or whither the Gospel of the Monks, or of Jesus Christ be the true one. The Author of the Book against this new Gospel is called William de St. Amour, de periculis novissimorum Temporum: See in Matthew Paris Mat. Par. in Hist. Angl. in Hen. 3. & in lib. de Antichrist.. At length the Monks had Credit enough, having procured several Bulls to be given out against the Book, to obtain one by which the Author was forbidden to set foot again in France, and the Sorbonne to receive him. Scilicet sic Petrus sactitabat, sic Paulus ludebat. The Court of Rome, as well as the Monks, was mortally grieved that this new Gospel could not pass, and had it not been for the University at Paris, we should in all likelihood have never known what the Gospel of Jesus Christ was, and the Monks would have been our Saviours.

I have heard say that in all the rich Convents there is a Father that keeps the Evidence-Office, whose whole Employ it is to find out good Titles when they want them, to joyn their Neighbours Field to their own▪ and there is no harm in that, because it is for the Church. There are some of these Orders, the Benedictines for example, who have their Pensioners in the Parliament at Paris, like the Excise-men in the Courts of Aydes to help them gain their Cause: From [Page 103] whence come all the Enterprises which they daily make upon their Neighbours Goods, stripping them as often as they can of them. People of very good Credit, and who know the thing very well, have assured me, that this one O [...]der gave more than two hundred thou­sand Livers a Year in Pensions to divers Officers of Parliament; judg then what Disorders that makes. I know not why the Monks have not been kept to read the Holy Scriptures, and to study Divinity and Morality, rather than so many ridiculous ways of Mortifying them­selves; if they studied or worked hard, they would need no other Mortification, but they have invented whipping since they have left off working, which is the most extravagant thing in the World. The reading of a Chapter of Scripture would be much better than that; as an excellent Man said, It is not the Severities of the Body, nor the Agitations of the Mind, but the good Motions of the Heart that are meritorious, which shall be excited much sooner by Medita­tion of the Word of God, than by all their Follies. Wherefore I have reason to ask what the Monks are good for? The poor Orders as they are also lazy, are a burthen to the State, they of them that are rich take no care of the poor, and both the one and the other are unprofitable, nay, prejudicial both to Church and State, they ought to do quite otherwise than to plunge themselves into Idleness, so dan­gerous both for their Souls and Bodies, and to be so chargeable to the Kingdom that keeps them and fats them up without receiving any Service from them; they are good for none but themselves and the Popes, whose Tyranny they support; thus the Popes in maintaining them do good only to themselves, when certainly the Monks at pre­sent might easily spare the Popes. Wherefore I yet once more de­mand what Service the Popes do to the World?

As for the Nuns, Of the Nuns. tho there be not by much so great Disorders a­mongst them as amongst the Monks, because generally they have no share at all in the Affairs of a Civil Life, yet I think I may safely say it, That Fathers and Mothers who are desirous of their Childrens Salva­tion, ought not to send them to such Houses, and that there is more re­al Piety, Chastity, and Purity of Heart among Secular Women than among the Nuns, by reason of the little Liberty that is given them: All the good they can do there is by Force and by Constraint, it is a place of Slavery and of Torment. People imagine that in these Houses where they have so much time to employ in reading and in­structing themselves, they ought to be very knowing, yet they are more ignorant and superstitious than Women that live abroad in the [Page 104] World. Their Abbesses are ordinarily chosen for their Quality, not for their Merit, and are either covetous or extravagant, fantastical, without Humanity for these poor young Women, without Conduct, and almost always without Piety. I have known many of them in my time, but never saw any that was worthy of this Employment but Madam de Fontevrault, Daughter of King Henry the Fourth. In those Houses where the Superiours of the Nuns are Elective or Triennial, there are continual Factions and Intrigues, that the Electi­on may fall on her that every particular Woman likes. It would be very well that these Elections were abolished, provided that Persons of real worth were placed in their stead. The number of these Nuns is also too great as well as of the Monks, and they ought to be re­duced, so that those who remain should have 200 Livers a Year for their Subsistance, and that the King should dispose of these places to whom he pleased, for the succour of many Families, and the over-plus of so many rich Convents Revenue might be employed in the building of many Hospitals. Nor should any young Woman be admitted to take the Vail till 25 Years old, for the Tyranny of Fa­thers and Mothers, and the want of Consideration in young Girls throws a great many of them into Dispair. They ought also to be allowed sometimes to go home to their Fathers and Mothers when their Health requires it, and to refresh their Spirits which are some­times over-born with Grief and Vexation either by the Tyranny of their Superiours, or by their too long Confinement in this Prison; without this a Convent is a perfect Shambles both for the Body and Soul. It must be acknowledged that this sort of Relig [...]ous Life is unproportionable to the weakness both of our Bodies and Minds, and is much less proper to produce true Piety than a Secular Life. Thus the Popes are so far from being Serviceable to Mankind, that they are matter of scandal to us, and stumbling Blocks to turn us out of the true way of Salvation. Of what use then are they to the World?

An Italian will tell me that they are serviceable to Italy, by their inriching it. But it is at the Expence of other Countries which do this Honour to Italy; which, having now lost its Temporal Empire, hath by the Popes means raised a spiritual one to make amends for it; but still this is at our Expence.

It is certain that all the Italians in general look upon themselves as having a share in the Glory of this Empire, and pretend that they have more Wit and Merit than other Nations▪ which they have in this respect subdued, especially those of Rome, who for this reason give [Page 105] themselves the liberty of speaking contemptibly of Catholick Princes, whom they look upon as their Tributaries; the very Coblers come in for their share, and are mightily pleased that the Pope rules in all places. And I have observed, that they have more respect and value for those Princes that have shaken off the Popish Yoke, as if it had been the Effect of their Courage; nay, for the very Strangers of those Coun­tries, as English, Swedes, and Danes. This may seem strange; for it is well known that otherwise they bitterly hate these Nations that no longer yeild them any thing. You would say that they were of the Humour of Tiberius, who was even vexed at the abject Patience of those who were most suhmissive to his Tyranny. Tacitus. Illum qui li­bertatem publicam nollet, says Tacitus, jam abjectae Servientium pa­tientiae taedebat. But to return to our Modern Romans; when they hear the King of France called the Eldest Son of the Church, whereof the Pope is the Spouse, who calls Kings his Sons, they esteem them­selves so much the more by half, and shew an equal proportion of Disrespect for those Kings. For my part I was disgusted, I own it, when I heard them say, that all Christian Kings were the Popes Children, and that the King of France was his Eldest Son; and my respect for Royal Majesty did as insensibly diminish, as theirs for the Popes increased; nor could I ever digest that Abuse to hear that such a Cardinal was Protector of France, and such a one of Spain, &c. What, thought I, must pitiful Priests or Bishops, who for the most part are good for nothing, by the Humour of People of their own stamp become one day the Monarchs of Monarchs, and their Ser­vants Protectors and Guardian Angels of the Kings and Kingdoms of the Earth, and that too against all Reason, both Divine and Hu­man! Yet all the World submits to it, as to an Eternal Truth. I know not what Protection they give, nor in what, nor against whom they do protect. Never was there any such Folly in the World, and yet they are payed for it too.

That the Popes are hurt­ful to Italy. But let us examine a little whether the Popes are good for Italy, or no; the Mischiefs they heretofore did the [...]e are notorious. It is known that the Republick of Venice hath been like to be destroyed by them, that they have oppressed the Liberty of the City of Rome; that they have usurped and gained, by Craft and Violence, the greatest part of those States which they possess in Italy; that which they call the Patrimony of St. Peter, Vrbin Ferrara, Castro, and the King­dom of Naples, which they have made Tributary: It is known that they exact a Tribute all over Italy by the same contrivances as [Page 106] from all other Catholick States, that by their Inquisition they keep it in Slavery, whereby these Provinces are kept in monstrous Ignorance of Religion, and in so great corruption of Manners, that the Vices of other Nations are Vertues to them, and theirs not fit to be so much as mentioned in any other place. The Italians may well say what Tacitus said, speaking of another sort of Inquisition which reigned in his time at Rome; Tacit. in vità Ag [...]ic. Scilicet illo igne vocem Pop. Rom. & libertatem Senatus & Conscientiam Generis Humani aboleri arbitra­bantur; expulsis insuper sapientiae professoribus at (que) omni bonâ arte in exilium actâ, ne quid usquam honestum occurreret. Dedimus profectò grande patientiae documentum, & sicut vetus aetas vidit quid ultimum in libertate esset, ita nos quid in servitute adempto per Inquisitiones lo­quendi audiendi (que) commercio. This is the true Representation of the Inquisition, and of the Slavery which the Italians now suffer. It is clear that this modern Inquisition is taken from the Example of the wicked Roman Emperours, from whom they have also borrowed ma­ny other things. 'Twas from the Romans that they took this Maxim of keeping the People in Ignorance, for among them there were those who said, de actis Deorum reverentius visum est credere, quàm scire. Tacit. It seemed a greater piece of Reverence to believe well con­cerning the Actions of the Gods, than to know them. The Popes do no good even to the City of Rome, but have ruined it, tho they pretend that the Romans are obliged to them for many Contrivances which they have found out, to make the Water run to their Mills, as amongst others, the Jubilee, which is a general Fair of Pardons and Indulgences; but the Popes did this to get by it themselves: For if the People make any Profit at this Fair by the innumerable multitude of poor Christians that come there to obtain the Popes Indulgences, qui preconan vino y venden vinagro, that cry Wine and sell Vinegar, all that returns back into the Popes Purse and their Nephews, who drain this City by an infinity of Imposts, so that it is one of the poorest Towns in all Italy. The People at Rome, as well as the Popes, having been used to live by the Folly of other Nati­ons, now know not how to apply themselves to work. There re­mains not in all this Town one spark of their ancient Generosity and Nobleness of Mind, that made them be heretofore respected more than all their Power. All the greatness of those ancient Heroes is now vanished, since the Priests became Governours. And all those Vertues which made Rome the Admiration of the whole Earth, have been succeeded, by Sloth, Effeminacy, Sodomy, the Art of poisoning, [Page 107] Treason, and all sorts of Artifices of Monkish Tricks, a base and knavish Policy, and they now reign by nothing but Vice and De­bauchery. Voluptatibus, quibus illi plus adversus subjectos quam armis valent. Hitherto we cannot find what the Popes are good for.

Of the Popes calling of Councils. There are some ignorant People who say, that the Church is ob­liged to the Popes for the holding of Councils, because that without them there would be none assembled; and they insist particularly upon that of Trent, wherein the true Catholicks were so well tryed and esta­blished, and Heresy opposed, so that since that time it hath made no progress. All they who have read History a little, know that the Popes hate Councils more than the Devil does the Cross. We have already seen that Cardinal Julian complains of the Popes that they would not call any Councils, Ne auferat, says he, temporalitatem nostram, lest they should take away our Temporality. Palav. lib. 14. cap. 12. Cardinal Palavicini says enough to confute these People in his History of the Council of Trent, that the Popes ever abhorred National Councils, Concilio Nationale sempre aborrito da Pontefici; and another Jesuit says, that in the Mystical Firmament of the Church, there cannot be a Conjunction of a more dangerous Influence than that of a General Council. P. Diego Lai­nes, lib. 16. cap. 10. Nel Cielo mistico della Chieza non si puo imaginar Con­junzione di piu periculosa influenza che un Synodo Generale.

Council of Trent. Now for the Council of Trent in particular, all they who have read the History of those Times, know that it was sorely against the Popes Will that it was called, and that they never consented to it till the very last extremity, having a great while eluded the Instances and Remonstrances made by the Emperor, the King of France, and other Princes for the assembling of a Council. They demanded a free Council for the Reformation of the Church, and principally of the Court of Rome, and to bring into the Bosom of the Church those who were gone astray from it. The Court of Rome who had more reason to fear than hope from the good Intention that appeared in many Prince [...] so desirous of a Reformation, would not consent to the calling a Council, till at length having without success employed their utmost skill to hinder it; they at last managed the matter so that the Pope was to convene it, Charles the Fifth having basely parted with the Right he had to assemble it; that it should be called in an Italian Town, and that the Popes Legats should have the management of the whole Affair; from that time there was no good to be expected from this Assembly. In truth the Popes Legates did rule all a [...]cording to their [Page 108] own Fancy, almost all the Bishops who assisted at it were Italians, and the only Mark they all hit at was, more and more to establish the almighty Power of the Pope, wherein they easily succeeded: except in this one point, God did not suffer Heresy to triumph there. But as for the Popes who were the Soul and only Organ of it, sending every Week the Holy Ghost in a Cloak-Bag, if the Heresy of Lu­ther would have served their turn they would have chosen it. [...]. Chrysost. Gal. 5.

Nay, without all doubt, if the Mahometan Religion would have conduced to the augmenting of their Power and Riches, both they and all their Court would have embraced it presently.

This Council hath done the Church a thousand times more harm than good, for it hath given the Protestants plausible Reasons of Obduracy, and to us no greater assurance of the goodness of our Religion; for as they carried it, they made it a Work perfectly Hu­mane, Intrigue and Policy did all. The Pope was there a Party, and became himself the Judg. The Protestants could not be there, seeing the Pope was the manager both of the Convocation and of the Suffrages, which he got for Mony distributed about in Germany and Italy, before the Assembly began: And because he would be master, some good Bishops who knew not how to manage it so well, inesperti del maneggio, as Cardinal Palavicini says of them, offering to speak against the Popes Interest, were treated many times unworthily by the Legates, who gave no sort of Liberty. Christian Princes, as the Emperour Ferdinand, Charles the Ninth, and Albert Duke of Bavaria, to whom they granted not one of their just Demands had no more reason to be satisfied. To convince the World that it was only the advantage of the Popes which the Court of Rome sought after, and not the Glory of God, nor the Salvation of Men: It is not necessary to relate at large all the base Intrigues which were un­worthy of the Legates, but only to consider the Decree which was there made against the reading of the Holy Scripture. By this De­cree all People were forbidden to read it without leave given them by their Ordinary, who was to allow it to none but Clergy-men; that is to say, the People who were in possession of Benefices, and whose Interest it was to maintain things in the same condition they were in. Thus did the Legates forbid what God had commanded generally to the whole World. And as Tyrants live in continual fear, they thought themselves not yet secure, but fearing that they had granted too much, they made another Decree whereby they ab­solutely [Page 109] forbad all sorts of People to read it. All their fear was, that by the comparing the Papacy with the Kingdom of Jesus Christ, People should discover the Imposture which they have put upon the Church, whose Face they have disfigured and changed its very Nature, making the Government of the Church a piece of Knavery, and a Device to supplant all the Kings and Princes of the World, confounding Heaven with Earth, and destroying all Order both Di­vine and Humane. The Hereticks make a more Christian Use of it; for tho they have been so inconsiderate as to reject many Books of the Old Testament, which are Canonical, as the Apocrypha; yet they do not only allow, but recommend the reading of them, and we find them bound up with their Bibles to be there read as well as the rest. I make no doubt but that if the Legates had dared to do it, they would have suppressed the Holy Books, or at least razed out, or changed all those places that were against them, as the Inquisition hath done by many of the Ancient Authors. How are they who are gone away from us scandalized at such Conduct as this? What shame hath it not brought upon our holy Religion? they cannot look upon us without abhorrence, because we suffer such Abominations. Expe­diret ut suspenderentur molae asinariae in collis eorum▪ ut non scandaliza­rent pusillos istos. It were expedient that Mill stones were hanged a­bout their Necks, that they might not scandalize these little ones. This Example alone proves sufficiently, that it was a profane and worldly Spirit that reigned in this Counc [...]l: It was the same Spirit that made them give a Ball at Trent to Philip the Second, where it may be said, Palav. lib. 11. cap. 13. that the Pope also danced in the Persons of his vene­rable Legates. It was also the same Spirit that made them give up Religion wholly to the Popes Fancy which is evident by this, because that having made many Decrees, they say that they shall be of force without prejudice to the Authority of the Apostolick See, that is to say, that they shall have place no farther than the Pope him­self pleaseth, whereby they make the Council subject to the Pope, which is a devilish Heresy, condemned by the Councils of Constance and Basil. The Popes did in effect get by this Council as well as by the others dispencing both with them, and themselves when they pleased; as Palavicini says, that if the Pope should be bound to ob­serve Laws, the Fountain of his Beneficence would be half drawn dry. Introduct. cap. 11. Se'l Papo vuol osservare quelle leggi, il fonte della sua Bene­ficenza asciugarsi per meta. He says in another place, that the Council would not bind his hands, who was able to do all things.

[Page 110]This Worldly Spirit is yet farther to be discerned by the Ambigui­ty which they have affected in many places, which shews us that they had oftentimes no other design than to throw Dust in our Eyes; they have also forbidden that any body should pretend to interpret, reserving the knowledg of them only to themselves.

It is then clear by this account, that there is never any good to be expected from any Council which the Pope shall call together, or where he or his Creatures shall preside, or which shall be assembled in Italy; not only because of the multitude of Italian Bishops, who would spoil all, but because a Council of worthy Men would not be there in safety; for the Italians would run to all sorts of Excess and Violence, rather than suffer that the Spiritual Empire, which they claim over all other Nations, should be taken from them, because they come all in for a share of the Plunder: just as we see the Inhabitants of Barbary are concerned for the preservation of the Town and Pi­rates of Algier, because they taste of their Riches, and have all a share in their Robberies.

The further insist for the Popes Advantage, that they have built a great many fine Churches at Rome, whose admirable Structure doth greatly edify Believers, and is of it self capable to convert the Infidel Princes, as Palavicini says, Palav. lib. 8. cap. 17. Tali opere basterebbeno per render ammirabile la nostra Religione alli sguardi di tutti i Monarchi Ma­hometani e Gentili. Such Works as these are enough to make our Religion be admired by all Mahometan and Gentile Monarchs. He makes Religion to consist in these Buildings. It is the same thing that they say, who pretend that the fine Musick of the Churches, the fine Ceremonies, and the costly Ornaments are capable of converting People. I am bold to say, that if any Man be converted by these, he is a Fool; and I know that upon People of Understanding, who apply themselves to solid things, and grow in Spirit and Truth, this hath a contrary Effect; for these things do debauch the Mind, and set it on wandering. The enquiry is about seeking God, and finding him in those places; and it is not the sight of the fine Gilding, or the excellent painting of an Edifice, nor the hearing of a sweet Harmony, but rather the lifting up of our Minds above sensible Objects, and se­parating them as much as possibly we can from Sense and Imagination; it is the fixing the Eyes of our Understanding with a Religious Atten­tion upon that invisible Spirit, upon that Sun of Justice; and when we do it with that Love and Reverence that is due to it, we shall never f [...]ll of seeing and hearing the most delightful things; we there [Page 111] s [...]e lumen in lumine, we there also hear that sweet Voice that says, My Son, thy Sins are forgiven thee. But for the fine Churches of Rome, the Popes in building them have built their own House, and these Material Temples have ruined the Spiritual Temples of the Church, Malus vos pa­ri [...]tum amor ac­cepit, malè Ec [...]le­sias in t [...]ctis ae­dificiis [...]; venera­mini, &c. Palavicini does acknowledg it. The Fathers were of Opinion, that Antichrist should one day seize upon the most magnificent Tem­ples of the Christians, this was the Opinion of St. Hilary, and of St. Hierom, Hil. contra Au [...]e [...]tium. Hie­ron. ad M [...]rcei­lam viduam. this last mentions the very Rock of Tarpeius. There­fore the Popes ought not to glory overmuch in their Buildings, since Antichrist shall one day place himself in them. I know not whether other Men are of the same Mind as I am; I like well enough to see such fine things as these; but I confess that I have more Devotion in a little Church without Magnificence or rich Ornaments, then I have in such places. I find that my Devotion does insensibly divide, and that Sense does sometimes carry away a part of my Mind, and transport it to sensible Objects which do not deserve it, and that my Affection is thereby weakened whatever care I take to g [...]ther it up and unite it. This hath a much more dangerous Effect upon the common People, who have no Knowledg, and whose Religion lies only in their Eyes and Ears; they do in horrible manner fasten on these things which are only obvious to their Sense, and go no higher. There was much more Piety heretofore when the Churches were not so m [...]gni [...]icent, which in my Opinion does more harm than good. Dicite Pontifices in sacris quid facit aurum? There was infinitely more Zeal in the time of Pope Zephirin, who ordained that the Blood should be con­secrated in a Chalice of Glass: and St. Hierom does inform us, that in his time Exuperus Bishop of Thoulouse did consecrate the Holy Sa­crament in Calice vitreo & vimineo canistro, in a Chalice of Glass and a wicker Basket. Then it was as Gregory the Great says, that the Bishops were of Gold, but now their Chalices are of Gold, they themselves are become Wood, ( cum aurei ess [...]nt Sacerdotes, Calices habuerunt ligneos; nunc cum lignei sint Sacerdotes, Calices volunt ha­bere aureos.) That is to say, within, for witho [...]t they want no Gold, It is only the Gold of the true Faith which they som [...]time [...] w [...]nt, but they look upon that as a small matter.

[...] a [...]t oblig [...]d for ma [...] Reas [...]s, to abo­lish t [...] Pa [...]a [...], Having then proved, as I h [...]ve done, that the Popes are good for nothing, that they are the cause of the Churches Desolation, and of the Damnation of so many Millions of Souls which daily perish, as well by Heresy as by Ignor [...]nce and Vice, the [...] [...]main [...] nothing [Page 112] more for me to prove, but that it is the indispensible Duty of Chri­stian Princes, who are the Protectors of the Faith, and to whom God hath committed the Defence of his Church, to deliver this same Church from the Papacy that destroys it. This is what they owe to God, to the Church, to their Subjects, to themselves, and also to Húman Society.

In regard of GOD, we know that Princes were commanded un­der the Law to take care that nothing should be received against the pure Service of God, and we also see that good Kings, as Josias and Jehosaphat were so careful in this Point, as to depose the High-priests themselves, who were instituted by God, which the Popes are not. And now under the Gospel they are the Guardians of the two Tables of the Law, as the Concil. Paris. Council of Paris says, so that whether the Dis­cipline of the Church be augmented or delayed, God will call Kings to an account for it, to whose care he hath entrusted it; and according to this the Emperours did depose the B [...]shops of Rome as well as others, when they neglected their Duty. Leo the first, Bishop of Rome, does not deny it, when he wrote to the Emperour in those times. Debes incunctanter advertere, regiam Potestatem tibi non solum ad Mundi Regimen, sed maximè ad Ecclesiae praesidium esse col [...]atam. You ought always to r [...]member, that the Regal Power is g [...]ven to you, not only for the Government of the World, but chiefly for the Safe­guard of the Church.

As for the Church, if they are the Protectors of it, as they ought to be, and without doubt are; if the Church be trod under foot, if Ambition, Luxury, and Ignorance seize upon the Ecclesiastical Mini­stry, if the Bishops neglect their Duty, are incapable of teaching, and look after nothing but spoiling and turning all to their own par­ticular Profit, if they will make the Church a Den of Thieves, if they sell Holy Things, and keep the Price to themselves, shall not Princes punish such Villanies? Shall they bear the Sword without be­ing able, even for the Good of the Church, to make use of it against the Popes, who do all these things? Aug. contra Crescon. Gram. lib. 3. It is in this, says St. Austin, that Princes are well pleasing to God, in doing those things which none but Kings can do; In hoc ergo serviunt Domino Reges, cum ea faciunt ad serviendum illi quae non possunt facere nisi Reges. Accor­ding to this they did heretofore depose the Popes, they made them give an account of their Faith, they did assemble Councils, autho­rise their Decrees, and made them be observed; and the Popes cannot alledg any Treaty made with Princes, nor any Prescription; for there [Page 113] is no Prescription against the Service which we owe to God, nor no Agreement which can bind the Hands of Princes when it is against the good of the Church; for if at any time they have surprised Princes, taking advantage of their Ignorance or Weakness, it is then a greater Crime to observe these Treaties which are against the Glory of God and the good of the Church, than it is to violate them. Here the saying is true, that interdum scelus est fides. No Man whatsoever ought to have his Hands tied by any Treaty from advancing the Glory of God as much as he is able by lawful means.

Nor are Princes less obliged for their Subjects sake, to do their ut­most endeavour to extirpate the Papacy, for they are the Preservers both of Religious and Civil Society, being the Heads both of the one and the other in their own Dominions. It is on this account that they receive their Tribute, and for this end were they by God or­dained, that we might live in Peace and Quietness in all Godliness and Honesty. And there is no Subject but may demand it of his Prince, that he would enfranchise him from the Tyranny of the Pope, or else let him renounce the Right which God hath given him over him; for the Prince hath no Right to give his Subjects over to another, and at the same time to reserve his own Power over them upon any pre­tence whatsoever, this is against Nature and the Law of Nations, but he ought to defend them against all Oppression, of either Foreign or Domestick Enemies. Now the whole World knows that the Popes for many Ages past have dealt unworthily, as well by the Subjects as the Persons of Princes they have smitten whole Kingdoms together with their Anathema's, they have drained them by their Indulgences, they plunder them by their Dispensations and by their Annates, they make them stoop to them by their Bulls, and oblige many of them to take Oath [...] of Obedience and of Fidelity to them, and have in many places destroyed a world of People with the Torments of their Inquisition. They may well apply to themselves this saying of Taci­tus; Subje [...]tos nos habuit tanquam suos, viles ut alienos.

Princes are f [...]rthermore for their own [...]akes obliged to abolish the Pa­pacy not only as they are Members o [...] the Church which is oppressed by it, but beca [...]e that they are God's Vi [...]egerents they ought to acknow­ledg none [...] the great God above [...], who is the only King of Kings and Mon [...]ch of Monarchs. Th [...] P [...]p [...] have no more right to call themselves so, th [...]n those mad Men [...]h [...]t say they are som [...]times God, and sometimes Kings of France [...] he who und [...]r th [...] p [...]nce at­tempted ag [...]inst the Life of H [...]n [...]y [...] F [...]th. O [...]t. lib. 3. S. Op [...] [...]ays very w [...]ll; Cum super Imperatorem n [...]n [...] nisi so [...]us [...] Impera­torem, [Page 114] dum se Donatus super Imperatorem extollit, jam quasi hominum [...]xcesserat metas, ut se ut Deum, non ut hominem aestimaret. There being none above the Emperor, but God who made the Emperor, seeing Do­natus lifts himself up above the Emperor, he hath passed beyond the bounds of Men, that he might look on himself as God and not as Man. At this day the Bishops of Rome have this Right as they pretend, to fling down Kings from their Thrones, as a Fowler shoots down a Bird from the branch of a Tree. They are Masters of all the Kingdoms of the World and can give them to whomsoever they please; they not only say so, but do it; they have done so by England, France, and Navarre, they have done so by the East and West Indies, which they have shared between the Spaniards and the Portugals, having outed the lawful Princes. They have dealt thus with many other States, and are still ready to do the same thing again. It is then the Interest of Princes for many respects that this Tyranny should be abolished; since as the Fathers say, they have none but God alone above them, they ought not to depend upon these Scoundrils. It is a thing unworthy of their Ma­jesty, and contrary to their Soveraignty to be under the Yoke of any Man living. It signifies nothing to say that they are so only for the spiritual part, for that is yet less to be allowed of. Jesus Christ hath reserved that to himself; and they suffer the Church to be undone by their Sluggishness and hinder those who are gone astray from it from being converted, nay, they destroy the very Popes who damn them­selves in the foolish Opinion which they have of their Power; they must be cured of their Presumption, and have good done them whe­ther they will or no, as we do to Children, a communi ed a fanciulli convien fare il loro bene senza lor voglia. It is fit to do good to the common People and to Children, tho it be against their Will. Pope Marcellin did not believe it possible, that a Pope could be saved, nor did Pius the fifth think otherwise. People do not consider that it was for the sake of the Temporality that the Popes have invented the Spiri­tuality, and that without the one, they would not trouble themselves with the other, as is apparent to the World; for what shall we call Temporal if the Annates are not? and the Mony for Dispensations, the Oath which the Clergy take to the Pope, the Oath which Kings take to the Holy See, that is to say, to the Papacy, and so many other Acts of the basest submission of Princes (some of which do even border upon Idolatry, as the kissing the Slipper of these wretched Creatures) and so great a Superiority of the Popes, that Princes are become wholly contemptible? For my part, I wonder that those, who have heard of Jesus Christ and his Gospel, do not condemn this Pride to [Page 115] the severest Punishments. No Man that had the least Fear of God would ever be Pope to act so horrible a part, not to mention the Disorders of the Church, and the destruction of so many Souls that shall be imputed to him. That the Pa­pacy is against Humane Society. Princes then ought not to defer their Endea­vours of freeing the Church from this Monster, and at the same time to deliver themselves from Tyranny, and not suffer these Strangers to rob them of their Subjects, and as they owe this to themselves, they owe it also to Human Society; for they are also obliged not only to punish those who injure their own Persons or their Subjects, but likewise those Crimes which do not touch themselves in particular, but yet notoriously violate the Laws of God, of Nature, and of Nations, or of the Church, or of the Authority which God hath set over his Peo­ple. I demand whether the Popes are not guilty of these Crimes, they, who, under the Title of Vicars of Jesus Christ, which they inso­lently assume, have cast the Church into the most deplorable Desolation, and have ravaged all Christian Kingdoms; who authorise all sorts of Vice and Disorder both in the Church and in the World, dethrone Kings the anointed of God, tread upon the Necks of Emperours, dispence with the Oaths of Allegiance in their Subjects, dispence with the Laws of God and his Gospel, hinder Christians from reading the holy Scripture without which we cannot be Christians, and unmercifully murther Men for their Religion by their Inquisition; ought it to be questioned whether such People as these should be exterminated? Innocent. c. 3. quod s [...]per his devoto Arch. Flor. 3. part tit. 22. Sect. 5. Sylvanus in ver­bo Papa Sect. 7. Pope Innocent himself and many others are of Opinion, that we may destroy those that sin against Nature: Aug. lib. 5. de Civitate Dei. And St. Augustin says, Opinantur sce­lera facienda decerni, qualia si quis terrena Civitas decerneret, genere humano decernente fuerat evertenda. Seneca 7. de benef. Seneca hath also a fine saying upon this; Si non Patriam meam impugnat sed suae gravis est, & sepositus a meâ gente suam exagitat, abscidit nihilominus illum tanta pravitas animi. In fine, no Man can doubt whether those who curse their Father and Mother and tread them under their Feet, or those that live upon Humane Flesh, or Pirates upon the Sea without Commission from any Prince, ought to be extirpated, and whether all Princes have not a right to destroy them if they can; I maintain that the Popes do all this and worse, I have already shewed it in what I have related. But besides all this, what can a Man think of these Men, who call themselves their Holinesses, which is a Title that belongs only to God, and is one of the most excellent of all his Attributes; who call themselves Vicars of Jesus Christ, to dethrone Jesus Christ from his Church and govern it at their own fantasy; who say that they are infal­lible and above the Councils, that they can open Heaven and shut up [Page 116] Hell, put out the Fire of Purgatory when they please, save and damn whom they please, who make themselves be called God and the Di­vine Majesty, and cause themselves to be worshipped. I demand whether there be any thing like this in the Crimes of others the most vile and miserable Creatures, and that which is the most terrible of all, is, that the Popes do every day cast down many Millions of Souls headlong into Hell. Do not such things as these deserve the Vengeance of Princes here on Earth? The Insensibility and Stupidity of Christians must be very great, this their Lethargy to me appears monstrous, and certainly there must be in it somewhat supernatual; [...] as Hippocrates says of some strange Diseases, which are wholly unknown. If the Interest of God and his Church were here only concerned, it would not be so surprising; for usually Princes seldom trouble themselves with that; they cry Tacitus, Deorum injuriae diis curae; but here where they are robbed of their Majesty to dress up a pack of Rascals with it, where they are made Tributary, where their Authority is limited, where part of their Subjects are withdrawn from them by Exemptions and base Laws, which make them contemptible as well to those who thus plunder them, as to others who secure themselves under the Covert of this Ty­ranny; It is unconceiveable that Princes should have so much Patience; for tho the Primacy of St. Peter could be proved that he was Bishop of Rome, and left there his Succcessours either as he was an Apostle, or a Bishop, must, I say, such People as these be his Successours, and make all these Crimes their common Practise, and go still unpunished? They shall as soon make me worship the Devil as believe it. And I really believe, that it would be no hard matter to make them who adhere to the Papacy, both receive and serve him. They would soon relish the Reasons of the Manicheens, who said that there were two Principles, the one good and the other bad; or the Argument of those Indians, who believed they ought to worship the Devil, because he could do them hurt, and that God, being all good of himself, could do them none, and so it is not necessary to adore him. This now looks very amazing, but they who are so much in love with the Pa­pacy would soon receive it, if any Man of Sense would give a little colour to it, and there were good Benefices to be hoped for by it, which could not otherwise be obtained; if they might have fine Churches, and re-establish the fine Ceremonies of Numa Pompilius, if their only care might be to divert the Eyes and Eares of the People with Musick and rare Shews, as heretofore they did to those miserable Jews, who brought their Children to Moloch, and whilst they burned they played upon all sorts of Instruments, and entertained them with the most de­lightful [Page 117] Musick, that they might not hear the Cries of their poor Children.

Can we think it strange as things go, that the Protestants are not converted? There would be in my Opinion greater reason to wonder if they should embrace the Catholick Religion whilst the Pope should ex­ercise this horrible Tyranny; for I do maintain that there is no Man of Honour, that hath any Modesty or Sense of Christianity, that can digest this Article of the Almighty Power of the Pope, if at least it hath not been riveted in him from his Childhood, and he been brought up in this Opinion all his Life-time without ever making any Reflection upon it. But for the Protestants, we must never pretend to make them believe that the Popes are Heads of the universal Church established by Jesus Christ to govern it as it is governed, there is no Man of Sense will ever be perswaded to believe this. But it may be said that the great Truths which the Cathol [...]ck Religion teaches, give us so great an advantage over the Hereticks, that they ought to make no difficulty of passing over such an Error as this to enter into the Communion of the Church. For my part, I am of Opinion, that a Man's Conversion is a work supernatural, and from the hand of God, who, filling the Heart of Man with Light and Courage, makes him overcome Dark­ness and his natural Weakness; and that a true Conversion is always ac­companied with Zeal towards God, and Charity towards our Neigh­bour. This being supposed, I maintain that they who are converted by these Principles do in effect embrace with their whole Heart the Catholick Truths; but that their Charity and the Zeal towards God, which animates them, shall always make them resist and oppose to the utmost of their Power all Impostures and Falsities whatsoever, that they shall chearfully lose their Estates and Lives, to deliver the Church from so miserable a Slavery as the Papacy is. It is a great un­happiness that the Protestants have separated themselves not from the Pope, but from the Church, and that they have invented Novelties to fortify their Schism which at the beginning had no other Original than the Tyranny of the Pope; for without these Novelties the Church would in all likelihood have joyned with them, because that many People saw clearly the Cheat of the Papacy, and that it had no Foun­dation, neither in the Scripture nor in Reason; but the Op [...]nions which they began then to spread abroad, to which from time to time they added somewhat or other new, ut nemo fit repente turpissimus ▪ put the Catholicks out of all hope, and made them continue as they were; and it were now foolish enough to think our selves in the wrong, to acknowledg that the Protestants are right in this Article, and that we [Page 118] have not courage enough to get off this Abuse and to detest it as well as they, wherein we do great Prejudice to our selves, to Religion, and like­wise to the Protestants whom we destroy by it; for they, seeing that they have Reason on their side in this Point, cannot believe that we have it in others, and so remain obstinante. For my part, as I am assured that their Religion is contrary to the Gospel, so I cannot but confess (and I think my self indispencibly bound in Conscience to do it) that concerning the Article of the Papacy, they have more Reason on their side than can be imagined.

But if we find that we have too little Courage or Strength to under­take to abolish and utterly destroy this Monster, we ought at least to en­deavour to send him home to Rome, and secure our selves from all the Mischief he is able to do us, and not to endure any more his Approaches. I say this only to prevent the Objection which People make, that it is ex­tream difficult to bring about such an Enterprise; that this great Machine is so well joyned together, this Babel hath so many Props and Arches, that they who should undertake to pull it down would be in danger of being swallowed up in its Ruins. Mille annorum fortunâ disciplinâ (que) compages haec coaluit, quae convelli sine convellentium exitio non potest. It would ever be a glorious thing, both before God and Men, to un­dertake so great a thing, tho it were without success. But I do not think the danger so great as People imagine; for I am perswaded that this work doth not exceed the Strength of any great, vigorous and zealous Prince who would manage the thing with Prudence. I own that no Prince can undertake such a Work, who is not assured that his Neigh­bours shall not oppose him, and that his Clergy and People shall not be against him: As for his Neighbours, he may easily know their Disposition both as to their Will, and the Means they have either to assist or hurt him. And for the Clergy, the Contrivance should be to let them peaceably enjoy their Benefices, and to make them understand their Rights; that according to the Gospel all Bishops are equal, and that they owe to the Pope no more than to any other of their fellow Brethren, that the Popes have usurped over them the Authority which they assume to themselves of giving Bulls, and the Oath of Fidelity which they ex­act from them, and that these things overturn the Gospel; and that for the Oath, if they have taken it to the Pope, it is null in it self, being a­gainst the Law of God, as St. Austin says, si ad peccatum admittendum fides adhibeatur, mirum est si fides appelletur. And for the People, they must be gently used and made to understand, if they are capable of Reason, that all the Popes of Rome, as well as other Bishops, have Authority only in their Diocess, according to the Gospel and ancient [Page 119] Canons; that the Authority which they exercise, serves for nothing else but to make them Masters of the whole Earth, and turns to no­thing but their particular Profit: They must also be shewed the Disor­ders which this Power hath caused both in the Church and in the World, as I have represented it in some places of this Work. If once the People were made to comprehend this, the Monks could never do any Mischief; for they are dangerous only among the People whom they govern, provided they do not come nigh Princes. This being done, a potent and prudent Prince would easily perswade other Princes all that I have said of the Papacy, of its uselesness, of the Mischiefs it hath caused in the Church and in the World, of the Shame which it draweth upon them by keeping them always under the Yoak, of the damage which it causeth to their Estates, of the Danger they are conti­nually in depending upon the Popes Humour, who can excommunicat [...] them when he pleaseth, of the Account they will have to give to God for so many Souls that perish, as well Catholicks as Hereticks, the one by Ignorance, and the others by the Obstinacy which the Papacy causeth; and that Religion hath no Connection with the Papacy, that we should be more Catholicks than we are if there were no Pope, and that the Church would be Aristocratically governed, as in the first Centuries by the way of Councils. There is no Prince who hath com­mon Sense, but would joyn with another truly Catholik Prince that would propose this; and by this means we should soon see the Prophe­cy of the Revelation fulfilled, Rev. 11.15. which says, that the Kingdoms of the World are become the Kingdoms of our Lord, and of his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever. But, say they, the King and the Bi­shops have The Oath taken to the Pope. sworn Fidelity to the Holy See. I answer with St. Am­brose, Amb. Offic. 1. cap. ult. That it is ever unjust to observe an Oath made against God or our Neighbour: And St. Augustin said above, that if an Oath tends to a Crime, it is contrary to Faith to keep it. I have proved that the Papacy is a Mystery of Iniquity; and that so Princes as well as others would make themselves the Instruments of the Popes Crimes, of their Sin against God, and of the Ruine which they draw upon the Church. Seneca says very well, Si in omnibus obediendum est patri, in eo non est obediendum, in quo efficitur ne pater sit; Tho we ought in all things to obey our Father, yet he is not to be obeyed in those things wherein he ceaseth to be a Father. The reason then is much stronger, that we ought not to obey a common High-way-man, who hath de­ceived and seduced us to make us Complices of his Crimes. When a Vow or an Oath is lawfully made, yet where the thing vowed, or the Oath taken doth hinder a greater Moral Good, Orthodox Divines are of [Page 120] Opinion that the Oath is null, because that we owe to God a Progr [...] in well doing so that we cannot deprive our selves of the Liberty of making this Progress: Besides, every Oath of a Christian hath this under­stood, Provided that this be to the greater Glory of God, Edification of our Neighbour, and our own Salvation: So that quod propt [...]r Cha­ritatem fit, non debet contra Charitatem militare. That which is made for Charity's sake, ought not to militate against Charity. The Lawyers say, that sacra alienari non possunt; Holy things cannot be alienated. And what is there more sacred than the Zeal with we ought to have for the Glory of God, for the Propagation of the Faith, and the spiritual good of the Church? So that there is no Oath, Treaty, nor Agreement, but ought to give place to the good and safety of the Church, and the Salvation of our Souls. This is l [...]ke the Oath which Pirates or Robbers on the High-way force them to swear whom they take Prisoners, who, to save their Lives, promise to be faithful to them, and to t [...]em what Service they can; The Lawyers do maintain that these Oaths are not binding. Paulus Juri­siconsultus L. si quis ingenuam § 1. cod. Tit. Idem Ulpian L. Hostes. D. de captivis. A piratis aut latronibus capti, liberi permanent. Qui a latronibus captus est, servus latronum non est, nec postliminium illi necessarium est. It is an undisputable Maxim Non posse Deum obligare creaturam ad non obediendum sibi. The Lawyers also say, that a Man cannot renounce the Right he hath to defend him­self which is natural, much less a Prince.

Thus there is no Reason Divine nor Humane, but doth indispencibly ingage Princes to renounce the Papacy, and to re-establish the Church in that Liberty which Jesus Christ hath left to it. But as for the Papacy, it is like the ancient Idols of Paganism, which, when the Christians did renounce, they kn [...]w well their Va­nity, when they examined into the thing, but they still reserved a certain tr [...]mor fa­tuus & lepori [...]us, fear and impli [...]i [...]e respect, as Gers [...] says, for them; because that from their Infancy they had their Minds greatly a [...]ected with the Power of these Idols. It is just the same thing with us and the Pope [...]er still Idolum nihil [...]st in M [...]do. And I am perswaded that we should have a great deal of difficulty before we could turn him briskly away. It were to [...]e wished that he would do himself Justice, and give Glory to God; but what li [...]lihood is there of that? They will always ke [...]p the Titles of H [...]ad and Spouse of t [...]e Church; if they would be con­tented with the latter, there might be found out a way to be rid of them, which would be for the French Church to give them once for all the same Portion, as P [...]ilip the Second gave to his Eldest D [...]u [...]ht [...]r, wh [...]n he married h [...]r to the Duke of [...] he gave her a Cru [...]i [...]x an [...] an I [...]age of our La [...]y, but upon cond [...]tion, that he sh [...]uld never h [...]ar her speak [...]f a [...]y t [...]ing [...]ore, and that sh [...] sho [...]l [...] re­nounce for ever all other Pret [...]nsi [...]ns, [...]oth f [...]r her s [...]lf [...]nd all [...]r [...] as this Princess did; but if th [...]y will not [...]e the Spouse at thi [...] P [...]i [...]c [...]; the sure [...]t way is absolutely to [...]reak with th [...]m, and to [...]nd them to the Who [...]e of Babyl [...]n ▪ l [...]st a [...] length G [...]d c [...]nsume us als [...] in thi [...] [...].