as to him who alone had the legislative power. I have already instanced in Pope Boniface entreating Honorius to make a law concerning the election of the pope. Sergius also, patriarch of Constantinople, petitioned the emperor Heraclius to publish a pragmatic sanction, that no man should be admitted into the clergy but into a dead place. These things are so plain, that I may justly use the words of the fathers of the sixth council of Toledo', speaking of Chintillanus their king: "Nefas est in dubium deducere ejus potestatem, cui omnium gubernatio superno constat delegata judicio;" "It is impiety to call in question his power, to whom the government of all is certainly deputed by the divine judgment."—I therefore conclude this particular with the excellent words of Cardinal Cusanus": "It becomes not any man to say that the most sacred emperors, who, for the good of the republic, did make many constitutions concerning the election of bishops, collation of benefices, observation of religions, did err. Nay, we have read that the pope of Rome hath entreated them, that they would publish laws concerning divine worship, and for the public good, and against sinners of the clergy. And lest, peradventure, it be said, that the strength of all these constitutions did depend upon the approbation of the authority apostolical or synodical [viz. of the pope or council], I will insist upon this: although (let me say this), I have read and collected fourscore and six chapters of ecclesiastical rules of the ancient emperors, which were to no purpose to insert here, and many others of Charles the Great and his successors, in which many dispositions or appointments are to be found concerning the pope of Rome and all patriarchs, and the conservation of bishops and others; and yet I never read, that ever any pope was asked to approve these laws; or, if his approbation did intervene, that, upon that account, the laws did bind. But it is read, that some popes of Rome have confessed, that they had those imperial laws in veneration." And this thing is so true and so publicly known, that the French ambassadors openly told it in the council of Trent, that the kings of France, by the example of Constantine, Theodosius, Valentinian, Justinian, and other Christian emperors, made many laws concerning holy things, and that these did not only not u Lib. 2. Cath. Concord. cap. 40. t Cap. 14. VOL. XIII. 2 к displease the Roman bishops, but they put many of them into their canons that the chiefest authors of these laws, Charles the Great and Lewis IX., they thought worthy to be canonized and declared saints, and that the bishops of France, and the whole order ecclesiastical, have piously ruled and governed the Gallican church by the prescript of those ecclesiastical laws, which their kings had made. RULE VI. The supreme civil Power hath a Power of Coercion of every Person in the whole Order ecclesiastical. 1. He that says all must be subject, need not instance in particulars, and say that Titius and Sempronius, and the villagecurate, and the bishop of the diocess, must be subject. But yet because of the pretences of some, the fathers of the church have found it necessary to say, that even ecclesiastics must be subject; and that they are a part of the all. So St. Chrysostom, explicating the words of St. Paul, saith, "But Paul gives us those reasons which command us of duty to obey the powers; showing, that these things are commanded to all, not to seculars only, but to priests and monks: which he shows in the very beginning, when he saith, 'Let every soul be subject to the supereminent powers;' although thou beest an apostle, or an evangelist, or a prophet. For this obedience or subjection (be sure) will not destroy thy piety." That St. Chrysostom here speaks of secular powers, is evident in the whole homily; and it appears also in the words here reported; for he says, that even an apostle must be subject, who, because he hath no superior ecclesiastical, must be subject (if at all), to the secular or supreme civil power. And this place is so understood by St. Irenæus, St. Basil, St. Ambrose upon this place, and St. Austin, who expressly derides those that expound the "higher powers" of St. Paul by 'ecclesiastical honours.' 2. But this thing is evident by notoriety of fact. Theo * Homil. 23. in Epist. ad Rom. 2 In Constit. Monast. cap. 22. Lib. 1. cap. 24. Lib, de Cateoh. Rud. e. 21. and comtr. Parmen. lib. 1. c. 7. b doret tells of Eusebius bishop of Samosata, that when the imperial edict of banishing him from his see, and sending him into Thrace, was brought by a messenger in the twi light, he charged him to say nothing, lest the people should tear the officer in pieces. But the bishop, according to his custom, went to evening prayer; and then with one servant, with a book and a pillow went to the water-side, took a boat, and passed over to Zeugma. The people, having soon missed their bishop, followed him, found him out, and would fain have brought him back; but he refused, and told them it was the precept of the Apostle, 'to be obedient to the higher powers' and upon that he rested, and they returned. And the same was the submission, and the same was the reason, of St. Athanasius, as appears in his Apology to Constantius the Arian emperor; and the same subjection was professed by Justin Martyr to Antoninus the emperor; "Nos solum Deum adoramus, et vobis in rebus aliis læti inservimus, imperatores ac principes hominum profitentes;" "We only worship God, in other things we cheerfully serve you, as professing you to be emperors and the princes of mankind."—" Ego quidem jussioni subjectus," said St. Gregory to Mauritius; "I am subject to command:"-and then it is certain, he was subject to punishment, in case he disobeyed the command. "Ad hoc potestas super omnes homines dominorum meorum pietati cœlitus data est." He had no more immunity than any man else; for from heaven a power is given to the prince over all men.-The effect of this instance and these words of Gregory is acknowledged by Espencæus, "Gregorius Magnus agnoscebat imperatoribus concessum est dominari sacer dotibus;" "Gregory the Great acknowledged, that to the emperors it was granted to rule over the priests."-And the same was affirmed by Pope Honorius: "Sancta ecclesia legum sæcularium non respuit famulatum, quæ æquitatis et justitiæ vestigia imitantur;" "The holy church refuses not to obey secular laws that are equal and just." 3. But I undertook to evidence the truth of this rule by matter of fact and authentic precedents. Constantine re 1 b Hist. lib. 4. cap. 15. c Apolog. 2. d Epist. ad Mauritiam. e Comm. in Tit. 1. de Privileg. cap. Super Specula. cap. Innotuit, de Arbitr. cap. 1. de No. oper. nunc. cap. Constitutus de in Integr. Restitut. cap. Auctoritate, de Concess. Præb. in 6. f Vide Athan. de Synod. Socrat. lib. 1. cap. 25. Sozom. lib. 2. cap. 28. ceived the libels which the bishops at Nice had prepared one against another. He told them indeed, that it was more fit for them to judge him, than he them,-and therefore he burned the papers; but this signified nothing, but that it was a shame to them, whose office it was to reprove all sinners, to accuse one another of crimes before their prince. But that this was nothing but a modest redargution of them appears, because he did upon their condemnation of Arius. banish him, and recalled him without their absolution of him. He banished Eusebius and Theognis, whom the council had deposed, and took cognizance of the cause between Athanasius and the bishops his accusers; that it might appear what he had said to the prelates at Nice was but a modest reproof or a civil compliment, for it was 'protestatio contra factum If he said that, he said one thing and did another. His son Constantius caused Stephen bishop of Antioch to be convened in the palace upon the law 'de vi publica,' and the 'lex Cornelia de sicariis.' His lay-judges heard him, found him guilty, and commanded the bishops to depose him from his bishoprick and expel him out of the church. His brother Constans heard Narcissus of Cilicia, Marcus the Syrian, Theodore of Thrace, and Maris of Chalcedon against Athanasius and Paul bishop of Constantinople. Valentinian the emperor set a fine upon the head of Chronopius the bishop, and inflicted divers punishments upon the bishops of Ursicinus, Ruffus, Ursus, and Gaudentius, for making schisms to the disturbance of the public peace. Gratian the emperor deposed Instantius, Salvianus and Priscillian from their bishopricks and banished them, and afterward recalled them. Arcadius' the emperor heard St. Chrysostom's cause and banished him; and Pope Innocent, who found fault, because he gave wrong judgment, yet blamed him not for usurping of a right to judge him. Theodosius the younger imprisoned Bishop Memnon and St. Cyril of Alexandria. Indeed, the prince was misinformed by John of Antioch; but when, by the great Ephesine council, he was rightly instructed, he condemned John of Antioch, and afterward released the two bishops at the great and passionate " petition h Athan. Apol. 2. Theodor. lib. 1. cap. 20. id. ibid. cap. 31. Socra. lib. 2. cap. 14. Sozom. lib. 3. cap. 9. * Lib. 2. Quorum Appel. Cod. Theod. Vestra pia genua protensis manibus attingimus. m 1 Socrat. lib. 6. cap. 16. and importunity of the council of Ephesus. And when Ibas, bishop of Edessa, had excommunicated some priests of his diocess, they appealed to the emperor" and were heard. Theodoric, king of Italy, received accusations against Pope Symmachus, and sent Altinus a bishop to be the visitor of that see, and afterward remitted the matter to a synod. Justinius P the emperor gave judgment upon Dorotheus, bishop of Thessalonica, for sedition and homicide. Justinian banished Julian the bishop of Halicarnassus, Severus bishop of Antioch, Peter of Apamea, and Zoaras a priest: but he also judged the cause of Pope Sylverius, for certain treasonable letters; and recalled him from banishment, but so that he should not be restored to his see, unless he were found innocent of the accusation. I sum up 4. I could reckon very many more instances to the same purpose, but these are as good as more; especially being but particulars of that power, and just consequence of that authority, which I have proved, by the laws of God and the confessions of the church, to be inherent in the supreme power. this with the words of Balsamo": "Quia statutum est nullum per alium injuriâ afficiendum, ipse patriarcha ab imperatore,qui ecclesiæ habet potestatis scientiam, judicabitur forte ut sacrilegus, vel malè de fide sentiens, vel alicujus criminis reus: hoc enim judicialiter actum vidimus diversis temporibus;" "Because it is commanded, that one should not injure another, the patriarch himself shall be judged of the emperor, who hath cognizance over the power of the church, peradventure for sacrilege, or for heresy, or for the guilt of any other crime; for we have, divers times, seen such judicial processes." And to the same purpose, the seventh canon of the first council of Matiscon subjects the clergy to the secular judge in the causes of theft, witchcraft, and murder; and the council of Toledo does the like in the matter of robbery or cozenage. For either clergymen are not subjects, or they are bound by the laws of their prince, If they be not subjects, how come they free? If they be subjects, where is their privilege? or is the spiritual calling of a nature so desperate and estranged from the commonwealth, P Novel. 42. et ponitur in concil. Gen. 5. Act. 1. Liberatus in Breviar. cap. 22, |