disavowed it: for, besides the condemnation of Pope Honorius for heresy, the thirteenth and fifty-fifth canons of that council are expressly against the custom of the church of Rome. But this particular is involved in that new question, whether the Pope be above a council. Now since the contestation of this question, there was never any free or lawful council that determined for the Pope, it is not likely any should; and is it likely that any Pope will confirm a council that does not? For the council of Basil is therefore condemned by the last Lateran, which was an assembly in the Pope's own palace, and the council of Constance is of no value in this question, and slighted in a just proportion, as that article is disbelieved d. But I will not much trouble the question with a long consideration of this particular; the pretence is senseless and illiterate, against reason and experience, and already determined by St. Austin sufficiently as to this particular, "Ecce putamus illos episcopos, qui Romæ judicaverunt, non bonos judices fuisse. Restabat adhuc plenarium ecclesiæ universæ concilium, ubi etiam cum ipsis judicibus causa possit agitari, ut si male judicasse convicti essent, eorum sententiæ solverentur." For since Popes may be parties, may be simoniacs, schismatics, heretics, it is against reason that in their own causes they should be judges, or that in any causes they should be superior to their judges. And as it is against reason, so is it against all experience too; for the council Sinuessanum (as it is said) was convened to take cognizance of Pope Marcellinus; and divers councils were held at Rome to give judgment in causes of Damasus, Sixtus III. Symmachus, and Leo III. and IV. as is to be seen in Platina, and the tomes of the councils. And it is no answer to this and the like allegations, to say, in matters of fact and human constitution, the Pope may be judged by a council; but, in matters of faith, all the world must stand to the Pope's determination and authoritative decision: for if the Pope can by any colour pretend to any thing, it is to a supreme judicature in matters ecclesiastical, positive, and of fact; and if he fails in this pretence, he will hardly hold up his head for any thing else: for the ancient bishops derived their faith from the founVid. postea de concil. Sinuessano. sect. 6. n. 9. ⚫ Epist. 162. ad Glorium.

tain, and held that in the highest tenure, even from Christ their head; but by reason of the imperial city it became the principal seat, and he surprised the highest judicature, partly by the concession of others, partly by his own accidental advantages; and yet even in these things, although he was 'major singulis,' yet he was 'minor universis.' And this is no more than what was decreed of the eighth general synod; which, if it be sense, is pertinent to this question: for general councils are appointed to take cognizance of questions and differences about the bishop of Rome, "non tamen audacter in eum ferre sententiam." By 'audacter,' as is supposed, is meant' præcipitanter,' 'hastily and unreasonably:' but if to give sentence against him be wholly forbidden, it is nonsense; for to what purpose is an authority of taking cognizance, if they have no power of giving sentence, unless it were to defer it to a superior judge, which in this case cannot be supposed? For either the Pope himself is to judge his own cause after their examination of him, or the general council is to judge him. So that, although the council is by that decree enjoined to proceed modestly and warily, yet they may proceed to sentence, or else the decree is ridiculous and impertinent.

5. But to clear all, I will instance in matters of question and opinion: for not only some councils have made their decrees without or against the Pope, but some councils have had the Pope's confirmation, and yet have not been the more legitimate or obligatory, but are known to be heretical. For the canons of the sixth synod, although some of them were made against the Popes and the custom of the church of Rome, a Pope awhile after did confirm the council; and yet the canons are impious and heretical, and so esteemed by the church of Rome herself. I instance in the second canon, which approves of that synod of Carthage under Cyprian for rebaptization of heretics, and the seventy-second canon, that dissolves marriage between persons of differing persuasion in matters of Christian religion; and yet these canons were approved by Pope Adrian I. who in his epistle to Tharasius, which is in the second action of the seventh synod, calls them "canones divine et legaliter prædicatos." And these canons were used by Pope Nicolas I. in his epistle 'ad Mi

Vid. concil. Chalced. act. 15.

Act. ult. can. 21.

chaelem,' and by Innocent III. '(c. a multis: extra. de ætat. ordinandorum).' So that now (that we may apply this) there are seven general councils, which by the church of Rome are condemned of error. The council of Antioch, A. D. 345. in which St. Athanasius was condemned: the council of Milan, A. D. 354. of above three hundred bishops: the council of Ariminum, consisting of six hundred bishops: the second council of Ephesus, A. D. 449. in which the Eutychian heresy was confirmed, and the patriarch Flavianus killed by the faction of Dioscorus: the council of Constantinople under Leo Isaurus, A. D. 730: and another at Constantinople thirty-five years after: and, lastly, the council at Pisa, one hundred and thirty-four years since. Now that these general councils are condemned, is a sufficient argument that councils may err: and it is no answer to say they were not confirmed by the Pope; for the Pope's confirmation I have shewn not to be necessary; or if it were, yet even that also is an argument, that general councils may become invalid, either by their own fault, or by some extrinsical supervening accident, either of which evacuates their authority. And whether all that is required to the legitimation of a council, was actually observed in any council, is so hard to determine, that no man can be infallibly sure, that such a council is authentic and sufficient probation.

6. Secondly; and that is the second thing I shall observe, There are so many questions concerning the efficient, the form, the matter of general councils, and their manner of proceeding, and their final sanction, that, after a question is determined by a conciliar assembly, there are perhaps twenty more questions to be disputed, before we can with confidence either believe the council upon its mere authority, or obtrude it upon others. others. And And upon this ground, how easy it is to elude the pressure of an argument drawn from the authority of a general council, is very remarkable in the question about the Pope's or the council's superiority:`which question, although it be defined for the council against the Pope by five general councils, the councils of Florence, of Constance, of Basil, of Pisa, and one of the Laterans; yet

h Vid. Socr. 1. 2. c. 5. et Sozom. 1. 3. c. 5. Gregor. in Regist. lib. 3. caus. 7. ait concilium Numidiæ errâsse. Concilium Aquisgrani erravit. De raptore et rapta dist. 20. can. de libellis, in glossa.

the Jesuits to this day account this question' pro non definita,' and have rare pretences for their escape. As, first, it is true, a council is above a Pope, in case there be no Pope, or he uncertain: which is Bellarmine's answer, never considering whether he spake sense or no, nor yet remembering that the council of Basil deposed Eugenius, who was a true Pope, and so acknowledged.-Secondly: sometimes the Pope did not confirm these councils: that is their answer. And although it was an exception that the fathers never thought of, when they were pressed with the authority of the council of Ariminum, or Sirmium, or any other Arian convention; yet the council of Basil was convened by Pope Martin V.; then, in its sixteenth session, declared by Eugenius IV. to be lawfully continued, and confirmed expressly in some of its decrees by Pope Nicolas, and so stood till it was at last rejected by Leo X. very many years after; but that came too late, and with too visible an interest: and this council did decree 'fide catholica tenendum concilium esse supra Papam.' But if one Pope confirms it, and another rejects it, as it happened in this case and in many more, does it not destroy the competency of the authority? And we see it by this instance, that it so serves the turns of men, that it is good in some cases, that is, when it makes for them, and invalid when it makes against them.-Thirdly, but it is a little more ridiculous in the case of the council of Constance, whose decrees were confirmed by Martin V. But that this may be no argument against them, Bellarmine tells you he only confirmed those things quæ facta fuerant conciliariter, re diligenter examinata:' of which there being no mark, nor any certain rule to judge it, it is a device that may evacuate any thing we have a mind to, it was not done conciliariter,' that is, not according to our mind; for conciliariter' is a fine new-nothing, that may signify what you please.-Fourthly, but other devices yet more pretty they have; as, whether the council of Lateran was a general council or no, they know not (no, nor will not know), which is a wise and plain reservation of their own advantages, to make it general or not general, as shall serve their turn.-Fifthly, as for the council of Florence, they are not sure whether it hath defined the question satis aperte;' aperte' they will grant, if you will allow them not 'satis aperte.'-Sixthly and lastly, the coun

cil of Pisa is neque approbatum neque reprobatum:' which is the greatest folly of all, and most prodigious vanity. So that by something or other, either they were not convened lawfully, or they did not proceed 'conciliariter,' or it is not certain that the council was general or no, or whether the council were approbatum' or 'reprobatum,' or else it is 'partim confirmatum, partim reprobatum,' or else it is 'neque approbatum neque reprobatum;' by one of these ways, or a device like to these, all councils and all decrees shall be made to signify nothing, and to have no authority.

7. Thirdly there is no general council that hath determined, that a general council is infallible; no scripture hath recorded it; no tradition universal hath transmitted to us any such proposition: so that we must receive the authority at a lower rate, and upon a less probability, than the things consigned by that authority. And it is strange that the decrees of councils should be esteemed authentic and infallible, and yet it is not infallibly certain that the councils themselves are infallible, because the belief of the councils' infallibility is not proved to us by any medium but such as may deceive us. 8. Fourthly: but the best instance that some councils are, and all may be, deceived, is the contradiction of one council to another: for in that case both cannot be true, and which of them is true, must belong to another judgment, which is less than the solemnity of a general council; and the determination of this matter can be of no greater certainty after it is concluded, than when it was propounded as a question, being it is to be determined by the same authority, or by a less than itself. But for this allegation we cannot want instances. The council of Trent* allows picturing of God the Father: the council of Nice' altogether disallows it. The same Nicene council, which was the seventh general, allows of picturing Christ in the form of a lamb: but the sixth synod by no means will endure it, as Caranza affirms. The council of Neocæsarea confirmed by Leo IV. dist. 20. de libellis,' and approved in the first Nicene council, as it is said in the seventh session of the council of Florence", forbids se cond marriages, and imposes penances on them that are married the second time, forbidding priests to be present at such