III.

CHAP. longith to hem bi her presthode, and for to juge querelis, and pleintis and causis and strives, if eny such rise among summe of tho prestis, and for to redresse the wrongis whiche prestis doon to her parischenys, or ministris, if thei eny such doon. And above manie Biscopis of a large cuntree, or a province is oon Archibiscop, for to in liik maner overse and attende, that tho Bischopis lyve and do as it longith to her bischophode, and for to juge querilis, and pleintis and debatis if eny such arise among tho Bischopis, and for to redresse the wrongis which the Bischopis doon to her prestis, if they eny such doon. And liik maner above many Archibischopis is oon Patriark for to overse and reule and amende the gouernauncis of tho Archibischopis. And above manie and alle Patriarkis is oon Pope for to overse and reule and amende the gouernaunces of tho Patriarkis, and for to redresse wrongis, &c. Al this now rehercid gouernaunce and policie in the Clergie, summe of the lay-peple deemen and seien to be naugt, and, that it is brougt in bi the Devel and Anticrist; so that thei wolen alle priestis to be en oon degree, and noon of hem be above other of hem, and thei wolen that undir prestis be dekenys, and no mo ordris, statis, or degrees in the Clergie at al. And bicause, that suche bifore rehercid statis and degrees above prestis ben in the Clergie, thei bacbiten and detracten the Clergie, cleping the hige Pope Anticrist, and cleping all the othere louger rehercid statis, above prestis, the Antecristis lymes or membris.

Dial. lib. iv. 40. Dr. Wiclif thus delivered his opinion. Unum au

c. 15.

dacter assero, quod in a primitiva Ecclesia, vel tempore Pauli, suffecerunt duo ordines Clericorum, scilicet, sacerdos, atque dyaconus. Similiter dico quod tempore Pauli fuit idem presbyter atque episcopus. Patet 1 Tim. iii. et

a The same was asserted by the two Archbishops, the Bishops, &c. of the Church of England, in the reign of King Henry VIII. The trouthe is, say they, that in the Newe Testamente there is no mention made of any degrees or distinc tions in Orders, but only of Deacons or Ministers, and of Priestes or Byshops. The Institution of a Cristen Man, fol. 41. b. 42. a.

III.

ad Titum i. et idem testatur ille profundus theologus Hie- CHAP. ronymus, ut patet lxxxvii. dist. c. olim. Tunc enim ad inventa non fuit distinctio papæ, et cardinalium, patriarcharum, et archiepiscoporum, episcoporum, et archidyaconorum, officialium, et decanorum, cum cæteris offitiariis et privatis religionibus quorum non est numerus neque ordo. Elsewhere he observed, that there are three kinds of min- Ibid. c. 26. isters of the Church. The first and lowest are simplices laborantes, mere labourers, or the common people; the second are potentates, the defenders of the ordinances of Christ in the Church; and the highest and last ministers are Christian priests, who truly preach the Gospel. This part, he says, ought to be as the soul to the body of our mother; whereas in them, he observes, there is the greater deceit, since Antichrist has, under the species of Clergy, twelve proctors plotting against the Church of Christ; namely, popes, cardinals, patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, archdeacons, officials, deans, monks, canons, false-friars introduced just now last of all, and pardon-mongers. All these twelve, and especially the ↳ Cæsarean prelates and Quastores friars, are infallibly the disciples of Antichrist, because they take away the Christian liberty, and lay burdens on the holy Church, and hinder the law of the Gospel from having so free a course as usual.

b

41. Our Bishop in justifying the several orders of the Clergy, and their different degrees, only pleads here for those of the pope, patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, priests, and deacons. "This gouernaunce of the Church," he says, "holy Scripture werneth not, and letteth not; as "neither doth doom of cleerli disposid resoun in kind; "and therefore he concludes, the seid governaunce is "leeful."

42. Having thus asserted the divers orders of the Clergy, our Bishop proceeds particularly to defend the supremacy of the Pope, which is the fifth governance mentioned by him, as opposed by the Wiclifists. It was observed by the English Bishops and Clergy, A. D. 1537,

b Prelates endowed by Cæsar with secular honours and offices.

Prælati Cæ

sarei.

III. The Institution of a Cristen

b.

cell. lib.

xxvii. c. 3.

66

66

66

CHAP. that, "it was many hundred years after Christ, before the Bishop of Rome could acquire or get any primacy or governance above any other Bishops out of his province in Italy; but that since that time he hath ever usurped Man,fol.47.66 more and more." To the same purpose the learned De Benefic. French lawyer Duarene; who, though he says that in anlib. i. c. 10. cient times the principal see of the Bishops was in the Roman Church, yet observes, that at first the Bishops of that see used that honour and dignity with great moderation, so that they always reckoned the other Bishops as their brethren and colleagues, and never had it in their thoughts to bear rule over them, like kings and princes. But as riches and temporal honours flowed in upon them, through the generous piety of the Emperors and others, and their own crafty and indirect management, this meekness and lowliness of mind soon wore off, so that a heathen Amm. Mar- historian of those times observes, "they rode about in "chariots, wore very rich clothes, kept profuse tables, and A. D. 367. " exceeded even the Emperors in their entertainments.” Who now can wonder, that by degrees their heads were so turned as to fancy themselves the Emperor's superiors, and that the extent of their jurisdiction was equal to, or rather exceeded, that of the Emperor, himself. But, notwithstanding this, we have evidence, that above 200 years after this time, the British Bishops disowned the Pope's supremacy over them, and absolutely refused paying any subjection or obedience to them as their head. Nay, when on account of Austin the Monk's being sent hither, by Pope Gregory, to convert the English Saxons, he and his successors acknowledged the primacy of the Bishop of Rome, and professed to pay obedience to him, it does not yet appear that, for above six hundred years after, any of them were required at their consecration to take an Bp.Burnet's oath of fidelity and obedience to their lord Pope. There of the Ordi- is no such oath in any of those ancient rituals or ordinals nations of which are published by Morinus; so that it seems though of England, there was such an oath framed by Pope Gregory VII. about 1075, yet it was long before it was generally re

Vindication.

the Church

p. 87.

III.

ceived, or put into the forms of ordination: At first the CHAP. Popes were so modest as to exact nothing but a promise of obedience, such as all inferiors gave to superiors; though even this was more than they had any right to require. Then there was a particular vow, made by such as the Popes sent in missions; such an' one probably was made by Austin to Pope Gregory I. when he was sent by him into England. But Pope Gregory VII. pretending to A. D. 1079. a higher power, not only over Bishops, but secular Princes, framed an oath for the Bishops to swear, which is almost the same with that in the Pontifical. A little after, the Council of Lateran, under Pope Paschal II. appointed a more modest oath in the form of an anathematism, in which having anathematized all heresy, &c. the Bishop elect promised obedience to the lord Paschal, Pontifex of the apostolic see, and to his successors under the testimony of Christ and the Church, affirming what the universal Church affirms, and condemning what she condemns. But this oath, as modest as it was in comparison with the other, Panormitan, Archbishop of , in Poland, signified to Paschal, that the Kings and grandees of that Decret. kingdom were struck with admiration, that the pall was tit. vi. c. 4. tendered to him by his d Apocrisaries on such a condition, that he would take the oath which they administered to him, as set down in writing by the Pope. That they ob

c That from that time forward he would be faithful to St. Peter, and Pope Gregory, and his successors; that he would neither assist nor advise in taking away the life, dismembering, deposing, or imprisoning the Pope; that he would come to his synods, when summoned by his nuncios or letters, and be obedient to the canons thereof; that, saving his order, he would defend and assist in maintaining the Roman Papacy, and the regalia of St. Peter; that he would not disclose the councils of the Bishops of Rome, to their prejudice, whether committed to him by themselves or their legates; that he would be assisting to their legates coming from, or going to Rome; that he would not knowingly communicate with those, who were by name excommunicated by the Bishop of Rome; and that when he was called thereto, he would by a military force assist the Church of Rome.

d Apocrisarii dicti præsertim qui a Pontifice Romano, vel etiam ab Archiepiscopis, ad comitatum mittebantur, quo res ecclesiarum suarum peragerent, et de iis ad principem referrent. Du Fresne Gloss.

Greg, lib. i.

III.

CHAP. jected to it, that all swearing was forbidden by the Lord, and by the Apostles after him, and could not be found ordained in any of the Councils. To this Paschal replied, that they might as well wonder at Jesus Christ on this account, who, when he committed the care of his sheep to Peter, did it with this condition, saying, If you love me, feed my sheep. If the maker of consciences and the knower of secrets made use of this condition, and that not only once but twice, and even to the making Peter sad, with what solicitude ought we to commit so great a prelacy of the Church to the brethren, whose consciences we do not see? As to all swearing being forbidden by the Lord, he asks what follows what our Lord says? To which he answers himself, Whatsoever is more is from evil. For, says he, evil forces us, by his permission, to require this oath: is it not evil to withdraw from the unity of the Church, and from the obedience of the Apostolic See, and to break forth against the determinations of the canons, which many have presumed to do even after their taking an oath? by this evil and necessity are we compelled to require an oath for fidelity, for obedience, and for unity. As to the objection, that this oath was not found decreed in councils, the Pope answers, As if, says he, any councils had prefixed a law to the Church of Rome, when all of them are held by the Pope's authority, and have their sanction from him, and in their decrees the authority of the Pope is manifestly excepted. He therefore concluded, that since the Archbishop required the ensigns of his dignity, which are taken from the body of St. Peter alone, from the Apostolic See, it is just that he also should pay to the Apostolic See the signs of due subjection, which declare him to be a member of St. Peter, and to keep the unity of the Catholic Head.

43. Of this reasoning of the Pope's, let any one judge who can distinguish betwixt truth and falsehood. In the first place, he manifestly perverts and abuses our Saviour's words to St. Peter, as if his asking him whether he loved him, was the same as imposing an oath of fidelity on him;