pamphlet was approued wherein among many other is this sentence and therefore no more approued then the rest so that this shall be no more de fide then all the booke Some also obserue that that fourth Councell called Palmare was assembled to giue an end to the imputations which were laid vpon Pope Simachus which were not of matters concerning his gouernment but of matters meerely personall of adulteries c. as the Lord Cardinall Baronius doth well deduce It was therfore intended by Ennodius that such like delights shold be remitted to diuine judgment which thing also Gerson and he that followeth his opinion doth admit And that this is true in those very Actes of the fift Councell where Ennodius booke was approued Pope Simachus thanking the fathers for their defending him proceedeth on that for the time to come he ordeineth that the like course be obserued not onely for the Bishop of the Sea Apostolique but also for all other Bishops of Christendome for which without making new decrees there are already the auncient that the sheepe cannot reprehend their Pastor vnlesse he be found in fault in matter of Faith neither accuse him for any matter vnlesse it be for his injustice The sentence of Ennodius is too generall for by that it would seeme that the Pope were not subiect to humane judgement no not in case of Heresie for he saith absolutely that in all causes he is reserued to diuine judgment and therefore wisely Pope Simachus after he had saide that he extended the selfe same to all Bishops according to the auncient Canons excluded the case of heresie and of iniustice And without all this discoursing the book of Ennodius placed among the decrees Apostolicall hath this title In the name of the Father of the Son the holy Ghost the preface of Ennodius c. and afterward It was composed against them which had presumed to write against Synods that neither against the Bishop of the Sea Apostolique nor any other Bishop any man presume such matters as were presumed against Pope Simachus Wherefore the Parisians say that this place serueth to proue the doctrine of Gerson and doth in no wise crosse it It may well bee thought that the author as being of eminent learning perceiued well the weakenes of his argument and therefore made no mention neither of the history nor of the Synod Palmare nor of the approbation of the whole book of Ennodius neither of extending the case of Simachus to all other Bishops much lesse out of the place alleged would draw any conclusion As touching the eight Councell it had beene better that the author besides his telling vs we read in the seuenth action had added also whose the wordes were which hee hath read for they are the words of Adrian Pope of Rome spoken in a Synod of Rome and rehearsed together with many other thinges Vpon which not withstanding the Councell determineth nothing But wee reade in the Canons of the same eight councell determined by it these words Besides if an Vniuersall Synod shall be assembled any ambiguity and controuersie shall arise also concerning the holy Church of the Romans it is meete with venerable respect and conuenient reuerence to inquire of the question proposed and to receiue solution or to proceede and giue order So yet as not audaciously to giue sentence against the high Bishops of the elder Rome So that they allow of a sentence not beeing audacious There followeth another proof out of the Councell of Lateran vnder Alexander the third in the chapter Licet de electione Where a decree being to be made of the manner of choosing the High Bishop it saith that in this election there must be vsed very especiall diligence because if they commit error there is no recourse after to be had to any superiour there being none on earth superior to the Pope The Author hath handsomly added these wordes of his owne There being none on earth Superior to the Pope which are too significant That chapter of the Councell saith nothing else but that recourse to a superior cannot be had It sufficed to alledge vnto vs the bare words of the councell and not to add of his owne as a matter out of the Councel just that which is in controuersie But this place maketh against our Author hauing said so often before that a doubtful Pope is subject to the councel much theÌ„ more a Pope intruded Where therefore it saith if there bee error in the election there is no superiour whom to haue recourse vnto it is not ment that the Councell is not Superior nay rather as well by his owne as by the generall opinion so often as there is difficulty doubt in the electioÌ„ the iudgmeÌ„t beloÌ„geth alwaies to the couÌ„cel The meaning therfore of the said chapter Licet is this that there is no superiour actually in being by reason that the councel is not alwaies assembled whence we see that the author contrary to his owne proper meaning hath added here there being on earth no Superior to the Pope For whensoeuer there is error or doubt of error in the election himselfe affirmeth that there is on earth a superior to the Pope and that this is the councell To the councell of Lateran the Lord Cardinall Bellarmine in the second book de auct Concil cap. 13. saith that it hath most expressely defined this controuersie But because some doubt whether the councell were generall therefore the question stands on foot still euen among the Catholicks And in the 17. chapter it appeareth not whether to câ—ntradict himselfe or to confirm the same he saith it is a doubt whether the saide councell haue defined this thing as a decree of the Catholick Faith It seemes therefore superfluous to bring an authority against Gerson which suffereth by the doctrine of himselfe that bringeth it so many perplexities and doubt being also made of the authority of that councell and withall of the determination But Dominicus Soto speaketh of it well and clearely For lib. 6. de iust iur q. 1. a. 6. he disputes against the Monti di picta which are very expresly approued in that councell with these words Sacro approbante Concilio declaramus definimus Montes pâ—etatis c. And it commaunds vnder paine of excommunication Latae sententiae that no man be so hardy as to dispute against them neither in words nor writing And the said Soto seeing how much this was against his opinion who doth condemne them makes answer that all the acts of that councell are not receiued nor put in practise But the Parisians say moreouer that in that Councell there were neuer present one hundred Bishops and particularly in that second Session here alleged by the author counting the Assistances in Coct and the Titulars without diocesse there were threescore and four Bishops all in a manner of places round â—bout Rome They add that it can not be called the determination of a councell whatsoeuer is saide
Faults escaped in the Printing PAge 3. line 6. for these read those p. 5. l. 3. for cerul read serui l. 2◠〈…〉 read that p. 9. l. 30. for each read those p. 10. l. 22. for illustrissime 〈…〉 p. 13. l. 1. read and Blanchâ— p. 14. l. 3. leaue out for that cause â— 15. for sinnes read sinne l. 9. read as Caietan in that place p. 1â— l. 31. for motioâ— mention p. 18. â—â— for the read no. p. â—2 l. 26. for The read That p. 23. l. 〈◊〉 say read saith p. 24 l. 20. f◠〈…〉 l. 22. for iâ—â—ead in p. 2â— l. 15. read 〈◊〉 turne l. 35. for his r. this p. 30. 〈…〉 do because l. 23. 〈◊〉 out then AN APOLOGY OR APOpologiticall answere made by father Paule a Venetian of the order of SERVI vnto the Exceptions and Obiections of Cardinall BELLARMINE against certaine Treatises and Resolutions of Iohn Gerson concerning the force and validitie of Excommunication Printed in Venice by Robert Meietti 1606 IT being necessary as I conceiue to answere the obictions made against the two Treatises Frier Paâ—â—â— concerning the validitie of excommunication written by Iohn Gerson a man famous both for holines of life and learning and that not so much to vphold the reputation and credit of the author as to deliuer the true vnderstanding iustifiable both in Law and Diuinity of a matter of this nature and moment and to maintaine the lawfull power and authoritie which God hath giuen to soueraigne Princes I haue resolued to doe it but with all modesty and reuerence auoiding all biting and reprochfull speeches which I hold very vnseemely in all occasions that occurre betweene Christians and especially betweene Religious or Ecelesiasticall persons in matters concerning the saluation of soules And herein I will not trouble my selfe to repell or retorte any iniurious speeches vttered against so famous a Doctor as Gerson was knowing that himselfe if he were aliue would according to his owne Doctrine and instruction to other men be readie to follow the example of our Sauiour * Qui cum malediceretur non maledicebat Neyther intend I to propose or set on foot any other doctrine then the same which was first taught by the holy Apostles and after them by the holy Fathers and other Catholicke Doctors which haue from time to time vntill our age expounded the diuine Scriptures and instructed Gods people which notwithstanding I will euer submit to the iudgement of our holy mother Church that cannot erre And proceeding in this manner I am verily perswaded that I shall be able to satisfie not onely mine owne conscience which is the chiefest respect that mooues me but all other men likewise that shall see and read this my Apologie who I am sure would as much dislike impertinent raylings and cauelling speeches as they will now be well pleased that I doe with all sinceritie of heart and singlenes of speech vndertake a defence of this kind for the glory of God and the edification of my neighbour And to auoid that tediousnesse which commonly groweth by the repetition of titles though due iustly belonging I that intend to bend my selfe and my discourse chiefely to the substance of the matter I handle resolue to forbeare to name the opponent with his attributes of honour that were fit to be vsed vnto him and to deale with him in all this Treatise by the onely name of the author reseruing neuerthelesse vnto his most honorable and reuerend Lordship that due and humble respect that at all times belongs vnto him and which I haue long ago professed to beare him when I had occasion to treat with him euen before he was made a Cardinall The proeme of Bellarmine whom he calls the Author How true that saying is of our Sauiour Christ Qui male agit odit lucem Iohn 3. May euidently appeare in this man that hath translated into Italian and published in print two little Treatises of Iohn Gerson For knowing in his owne conscience how many vntruthes he had heaped together in one preface of his though a verie short one and that in the two little Treatises themselues which he translated there were errors of no small importance And withall to how litte purpose those Treatises serued him for the end which he pretended he was ashamed to make either his owne name knowne or the Printers And which is more the better to couer and disguise it he faines that he wrote it from Paris Whereas it is but too wel knowne that it was both written and printed in Venice Now therfore least this man should abuse the simple readers with his hypocrisie we will proceed to examine first the words of his preface and after the words of Gerson which hee hath translated though not so faithfully as he pretendeth Certainely the translator had no cause at all to be ashamed as if Gersons considerations were impertinent to the busines that is now in question Answere Frier Paulo For if his whole works had not beene extant printed aboue a hundred yeeres ago I for my part should easily haue beleeued that these two treatises had beene compiled at this time and vpon this occasion So directly particularly do they touch all those points that are materiall to be touched and handled in this question And indeed it was commonly so beleeued in this country when they came first out vntill many men had compared them with the Ancient copies printed in Paris 1494. But now these old impressions giue vs cause rather to think that there was in Gerson some propheticall spirit ioyned with that extraordinary portion of learning and piety wherewith he was indued And of this euery man that reades him shall easily iudge But in sooth if Gersons treatises be nothing to the purpose now in hand why doth the Author take so much paines and trouble himselfe so much about them Why doth hee labour so much to confute them Euermore hee contradicts his doctrine but no where he goeth about to proue that it is not pertinent to the present case and question Whether the considerations of Gerson containe error or not wee shall see hereafter when the obiections that are made against them shall be examined all which obiections or oppositions do either presuppose things that by the booke it selfe appeare to be false as that Gerson wrote those considerations in time of scisme or they presuppose and assume that which is in controuersie and the very question it selfe as namely that the Popes commandement to the Venetians is iust and lawfull or else taking some ambiguous and doubtfull terme that may haue a double vnderstanding and accordingly setling a position in the one sense which is true and so purchasing it some credyt and assent in the readers minde in the end the obiection concludes in the other sense which is false The preface of the translator of Gerson containes no other doctrine then is contayned in the Bookes themselues Therefore I see no reason why of necessity
the family ouer him Saint Cyprian saith that the supreame power of choosing such Priests as are worthie and refusing vnworthy doth principally rest in the people and if the author will read the place he shall perceiue that hee speaketh of Bishoppes particularly though in the wordes alledged he mentioned Priests and withall that it is not onely Cyprians Epistle but the Epistle of 36. Bishoppes and written to the common people of Leon Asturia and Emerita and if hee will let him read the 14. Epistle of the 3. Booke such authorities as these wee ought to alledge for the maintenance of our cause and not come in with such misticall and those inforced explications as the author doth in this place where if he had bin disposed to deale sincerely hee should haue alledged that place of Saint Luke intirely Quis putat est fidelis dispensator prudens quem constituit Dominus super familiam suam vt det illis in tempore tritici mensuram and then it maketh against the author for this seruant cannot bee a generall dispenâ—er of all the Lords treasure to whom he hath committed nothing saue onely the distribution of the Corne there are many other things to bee distributed as meat drinke and apparrell all which his Lord will commit vnto him if hee behaue himselfe faithfully in this particular office for thus he saith Beatus ille Seruus quem cum venerit dominus inuenerit ita facientem vere dico vobis quoniam super omnia quae possidet constituet illum Let him read the place and see whether it can receiue any other interpretation If either the Pope or any other to whome the charge of all thinges is already committed be that faithfull Steward what are those other thinges which shal afterwardes bee committed vnto him for hauing so wel discharged his duty in this administration if the author will say that wee are to vnderstand those wordes of the Coelestiall Paradise wee must answere that the charge thereof is peculiar to Christ and the Angels the holy Popes entring into the kingdome of heauen receiue from God a rewarde of their labours but their gouernments they leaue behinde them and are for euer exempted from labour as for the wordes that follow Quod si dixerit seruus ille in corde suo c. From whence the author will gather that if Gods high Steward doth misbehaue himselfe hee reserueth the punishment of him to himselfe and will not impart it to his family I answere that the consequence doth not hold in all Stewards neither can the example which hee bringeth of a vice roy availe him to this purpose it is one thing when the father of a family being absolute Lord of it doth commit the gouernment to another but if the father of the family shall giue leaue to his family to choose them a gouernour with such and so great authority ouer their Maisters treasure as hee himselfe shall set downe it is a case of far different consideration in like sort different it is when a King who hath no dependence of his kingdomes shal constitute a Vice-roy and when he giueth leaue to his subiects to choose theÌ„ one with such authority as hee himselfe shall prescribe for in the first case I acknowledge that the family hath no power ouer their gouernour nor the subiects ouer the Vice-roy but in the 2. case as the family hath power to institute him so hath it also power to censure his actions And the subiects in like sort the actions of the Vice-roy and as the Cardinall Bellarmine saith that the authority which the Church hath of choosing the Pope is nothing els but an applying of the power to the person so Gerson in his book which he writeth vpon this occasion saith that when the Church doth iudge the Pope it doth no more but separate the power from that person if Christ had so instituted the Popes as it should haue bin in their powers to appoint their successors peraduenture that might haue followed which the author would inferre that the Church should haue no power ouer the Pope but hee which affirmeth that God hath giuen power to the Church to annexe power to the person should also haue shewed that it hath not the selfe same authority to remoue it but the common doctrine that the pope hath no authority of electing a successor doth euedently declare that he is not a gouernor of the first sort deputed immediatly from the father of the family but of the secoÌ„d elected of the family by the fathers appointment and with this doctrine doth Gerson answere that of Pasce oues meas and all other places of Scripture like vnto it Namelie that although hee which is by the owner appointed to bee ouer the flocke is not subiect to the flocke yet if it be such a flocke as hath power to chuse a sheepheard the sheapheard when he is chosen shall be subiect vnto it the faithfull flocke of Christ ought to resemble sheepe in humblenesse and innocencie yet ought they not to be so sheepish or foolish as to forgoe the authority which their owner hath bestowed vpon them either of choosing them a good sheapheard or of judging a wicked Saint Augustine doth proue with reasons vnanswerable that doctrines are to be grounded only vpon the literall sense of the scripture and not vpon any mysticall interpretation whosoeuer will read all that chapter shall easily vnderstand the meaning of our Sauiour and the literall sense of the Gospell Hee spake to his disciples and consequently to all Christians beginning at those words about the middle of the chapter dixitque ad discipulos suos that they should not take thought for the things of this world because God had prepared another kingdome for them that they should be watchfull in wel doing as not knowing wheÌ„ the Lord will cal that if the goodman of the house knew at what hower the thiefe would come hee should find him watching in like sort they should be prepared because Christ will come at an hower when we thinke not then Peter said vnto him Master tellest thou this parable to vs or euen to all Christ replied who thinkest thou is that dispensator fidelis prudens c. inferring therby that he spake to all whereas if it had bin spoken onely to his Viccar it would follow that the commaundement of watching of not regarding the thinges of this world of waiting for the kingdome of heauen and the vnexpected comming of Christ should haue beene giuen to him alone but because such commaundements as these are equally giuen to all the faithfull the litterall meaning is that they all are these faithfull stewards which God hath commaunded to exercise their charity by imparting their goods and other abilities which God hath bestowed vpon them to the rest of his familie this is that measure of wheate and that office for the faithfull administration whereof God will multiplie his blessinges vpon them this then as all interpreters
do agree is the litterall sense of this place howbeit besides this generall exposition some men with an argument a minori do as it were by a singularity applie it to the pastors but the author doth well to conceale that all the fathers when they apply this place to the pastors add these words also Quod si coeperit percutere seruos ancillas edere bibere inebriari c. and make long digressions against their faults and errours And peraduenture this percutere seruos ancillas is that which wee see is come to passe in the present occasion Gerson therefore will not denie but this parable spoken to all but more especially to Pastors is most properlie to be appplied to the Pope and therefore let it be saide vnto him that if he giue himselfe ouer to surfetting and to iniury his neighbours the Lord will come and punish him when he lookes not for him howbeit we cannot conclude that he is therefore subiect to no other punishment for by that reason it would follow that no fornicatour or adulterer could bee punished of men because it is written Hebreues 13. Fornicarios adulteros iudicabit Dominus by that reason no sinne is punishable by man because it is written iustum impium iudicabit Dominus Ecclesiast 3. in like sort it is not permitted to meÌ„ to judge because our Sauiour in the 5. of Iohn saith Omne iudicium dedit filio it is not well that the scripture should be thus wrested and peruerted all these texts are to be vnderstood of the iudgement of the world to come wheruÌ„to it is not repugnaÌ„t that there shold be punishmeÌ„ts in this world both Ciuil Ecclesiastical neither is there any commoÌ„ persoÌ„ so ignorant but doth vnderstand that these ordinary phrases God shall iudge God shall punish c. tend not to the excluding of humaine iudgements and corrections and thus we see that this text serueth not to proue that the Pope is exempted from the ceÌ„sure of the Church and consequently of the councell and Gerson doth not insist vpon the parable but vpon the litteral sense of the place now let vs examine our authors other proofes wherein he proceedeth after this manner Vnto this truth which we haue proued by Scriptures Bellarmine the sacred Councels do also beare witnesse at what time Pope Saint Marcelinus for feare of death committed that sinne of offering sacrifice to Idols A great Councell was assembled in Sinuessa to treate of that matter but al that councell did acknowledge that it had no power to censure the Pope Prima sedes a nemine iudicabitur of this councell Pope Nicolas doth make mention in his epistle to the Emperour Michaell in like sort a Romane Councell assembled by the Pope Sainte Siluester in the last Canon of it doth declare that the first Sea namely the Sea of Rome is not to bee judged of any the Councell of Calcedon which is one of the foure first generall councels in the 3. Act of it condemned Dioscorus the Patriarch of Alexandria together with the whole second Councell of Ephesus because they tooke vpon them to iudge the Pope of Rome Now if that Patriarch which after the Pope possesseth the highest place in the church together with the whole Councell haue no authority to iudge the Pope it plainely followeth that the Councell is not aboue the Pope otherwise they might haue iudged him After this the 5. Roman Councell vnder Pope Simachus approued that opinion of Ennodius as if it had beene an opinion of their owne Aliorum hominum causas Deus voluit per homines terminari Sedis istius Praesulem suo sine questione reseruauit arbitrio Voluit Petri Apostoli successores Coelo tantum debere innocentiam in the Act. 7. of the 8. generall Councell we reade thus Romanum PontificeÌ„ de omnium Ecclesiarum Praesulibus iudicasse de eo vero neminem iudicasse legimus Paulus Emilius in his 3. book of his story writeth that a great CouÌ„cell of Bishops being assembled in the presence of Charlemaine by occasion of certaine matters obiected against Pope Leo the 3. all the Bishops cried out with one voice that it was vnlawfull for any man to iudge the Pope The generall Councell of Lateran vnder Alexander the 3. being to make a decree touching the forme to be obserued in the election of the Popes saith we are to proceede in this election with singular diligence for if any error be committed in it there is no Superiour to whom we may haue recourse there is none vpon earth superiour to the Pope Let him reade the chapter Licet extra de electione Finally in the Lateran Councell vnder Leo tenth in the Sess 11. it is expressely determined that the Pope is superior to any Councell whatsoeuer and therefore it appertained onely to him to summon the Councells to transfer and to dissolue them Now if these Councells themselues do acknowledge that they are subiect to the Pope who will be so hardie to say that the Councell is superiour to the Pope or that it is lawfull to appeale from the Pope to the Councell â—rier Paolo The first proofe which our authour bringeth is that when the Pope S. Marcelinus did for feare of death offer sacrifice to Idolles there was a great councell assembled in Sinuessa to treat of this matter and all the Councell did confesse that they had no power to iudge the Pope and that Pope Nicholas the first did make mention of this Councell which is true and which is more the Acts of it are extant to this day to this they of Paris do answere that this Councell was not generall and that vnder these wordes Prima sedes a nemine iudicatur a generall Councell is not comprehended it seemeth strange vnto them that the Councell being assembled onely vpon this occasion it should conceiue that it had no authority to determine it and it is more strange that Marcelinus denying the fact that the Councell had not eftsoone departed for so the matter had been at an end and not proceeded to conuict him as indeed they did producing first 7. witnesses which affirmed they saw him offer sacrifice after this they examined as many witnesses more as made vp the number fourteene The second day they produced 14 more who being interrogated by the Bishoppes affirmed the same The third day he examined 44. more so that the number of witnesses amounted to 72 called Labra occidua it is certaine that to examine witnesses is a iudiciall act of a superiour and it is as certaine that Marcelinus after the examination of these 72. prostrated himself vp on the ground and acknowledged his offence and the Teste saith that the Bishops Subscripserunt in eius damnationem damnauerunt eum and one of them said Iuste ore suo condemnatus est ore suo Anathema suscepit Maranatha quoniam ore suo condemnatus est nemo enim vnquam iudicauit Pontificem nec praeâ—ul
authority in Ecclesiasticall affaires equall to old Rome and to haue the next place after her The Canon being read together with the subscription one of the Legates said you see with what subtilty holy Bishops are dealt with all in that they haue bin enforced to subscribe without producing the copie of the Canon whereof they haue made mention The Bishops cryed out no man is enforced and the contention being prosecuted the Iudges did order that both the parties should propound the Canons the sixt Canon of the Nicene councel was read in the behalfe of the Romanes and in the behalfe of the Constantinopolitās the reading was different for in that which the Romans read these words were in the beginning of it Quod Ecclesia Romana sēper habuit primatum which are not in the other copies after this a Canon being read of the councel of Cōstantinople the Bishops reasoned sufficiently finally the Iudges demanded of thē what was their opinion whereunto they answered that that which was determined was iust one of the Romane Legates did protest that either the decree might be annihilated or that his protestation might be recorded against it let the reader therefore Iudge what opinion the councell of Calcedon held of the Popes superiority As to the Romane councell vnder Simachus the Parisians doe not deny that the Popes of Rome haue held that they ought not to be iudged of any also that the prouincial councels they haue assembled in Rome haue not confirmed the same but they say with all that neuer any Roman councel neither this fift nor any other came to specification that the Pope may not bee iudged of a general councel and when they say that the Pope can bee iudged of none they vnderstand that hee can bee iudged of none that hath not generall authority in the Church For the Pope hauing generall authority it stands not with reason that he should bee iudged by him that hath but particular authority wherewith they answere also to the history which he alledgeth of Leo the third But here I am inforced to set downe a little thing of mine own Paulus Emilius in the third of his history reporteth this fact Where yet it shal not be found that he saith there being assembled a great councell of Bishoppes as the author maketh him speake He saith simply first that Charles sent Leo to Rome with many Bishoppes and secular noblemen and enterteined himselfe elswhere about publique businesse Afterwarde hee went to Rome and there heard the accusations against the Pope and hauing diligently examined them hee required their opinion and the Bishops made answere that it were well that the Pope should iudge himselfe and it was acceptable to Charles to bee deliuered from proceeding to that iudgment Let the author read the place and hee shall see no mention there of a councell and that it was rather a conuocation of the imperiall councell where were both seculars and Bishops and that the Bishops did fauour the cause of the Pope And let the author also remember himselfe that hee opposed before against the decree of Constance because there was no debaiting of the matter before hand and let him not here plant such a maine foundation of a thing which was spoken by some Bishops in a particular fact thus assembled and hauing their opinion vnpremeditately demaunded For peraduenture the Popes innocency being known vnto them they spake by way of exaggeration not therefore will Gerson say to the preiudice of generall councels which represent the Church vniuersall and haue vniuersall authoritie But see Reader the cunning of our author Who saith that the first councell of Rome vnder Pope Simachus approued as their owne decree that sentence of Ennodius aliorum hominum causas c. It shall neuer bee found in that councell that that sentence was particularly approued no nor yet so much as mentioned It will bee found indeede that the councell saide let a little booke bee brought hether which hath beene written by Ennodius against them which haue murmured against our fourth Sinod and it beeing read the councell saide let the booke bee held of all men for most sound and for Sinodical and let it be entred amongst the actions of our fourth and fift Sinods Integerrime Synodaliter and let it be held as the other decrees of the Sinodal actions because it is written and confirmed with Sinodall authority And Pope Simachus answered bee it done according to your will and bee it placed among the decrees Apostolicall and held for such Here say the Parisians that it is to be vnderstood that by decrees Synodall or actions Synodal or decrees Apostolicall is not ment a Canon which can determine an article as de fide that is to bee held for matter of Faith But all the Epistles of a Pope entred in the Register are called the decrees of such a Pope and hee that shall peruse the book of Councells shall see this inscription vpon euery Pope The decrees of Pope N. and then his election his life and afterward his Epistles if there be any And likewise in the Councels he shall see that their actions containe many communications of interchanged speaches yea not fore-thought on somtimes the epistles of sundry persōs al which things are not de fide neither doth any man receiue them for such No man can possibly say that the Popes epistles especially before Siricius nor all that which at this day is found contained in so many narrations of the Actes of the councell of Ephesus of Calcedon and other ensuing is de fide The determinations of Councels are receiued which in the auncient for the most part will not passe one or two sheetes whereas their actions will containe fortie or fifty And concerning the Papall decrees their greater part conteineth no other matter saue such as doth not concerne the Faith Sometimes in a long epistle there shall be one onely Article as in that most famous and most holy epistle of Saint Leo to Flauian Wherefore there is great ods to say such a proposition of Ennodius was approued which would intend that it were approued as an Article of faith or Ennodius booke was approued which intends no more saue that it is a good book made to good purpose but not that whatsoeuer is in it should be de fide to establish well this answere it might bee said to the author This booke is of many sheets printed in folio it conteineth aboue 200. Propositiones among which that is one which the author produceth It is demaunded whether they will that they be all de fide and it shall be shewed him that there is some there that is not such If he will not accept them all as being de fide what reason why hee would haue this to be de fide and not the rest Hee hath thought to escape this obiection by telling vs that one onely sentence of Ennodius was approued Let vs speake frankly the
and diuision because that in these latter times many countries and kingdomes haue fallen from the Church of Rome vpon no other occasion but because the Pope would euer be enterprizing vpon their temporall estates Wee may firmely beleeue that Paulus Quintus had a good intention to reforme the abuses which haue bin brought in till this present But so great is their violence that it is no meruaile if men of neuer so good mindes bee transported and caryed away contrary to their own inclinations to that very point which they minded to auoyde AN Answere to Gersons second booke intituled An examination of this assertion Bellarmine Sententia Pastoris etiam iniusta est timenda IN the second booke the same Iohn Gerson makes relation that a certaine Commissary of the Popes in some publique proceeding of his makes this assertion followlowing Our sentences though they bee vniust must both be feared and obeyed Gerson Vpon which assertion hee passeth a censure diuided into many Propositions which are these that follow First this assertion is false Secondly this assertion is impossible Thirdly this assertion is erronious in point of manners Fourthly this assertion is suspected of heresie Fiftly this assertion bringes the author of it in suspicion for his faith and must therfore be called in question till he either explane his sentence or reuoke it and if hee persist in his opinion then is he to bee turned ouer to the secular power Bellarmine This in briefe is the iudgement of Gerson which how it is too strict and seuere will appeare in the discourse that followes This Commissary whether he were true or fained not content onely to say according to the saying of Saint Gregory that his sentences though they were vniust were to be feared ads further that they were likewise to bee obeyed And though hee might haue forborne the adding of these words yet do they not deserue so hard a censure as this of Gersons who hath taken that in ill sense which might haue beene well enough taken Gerson doth reprehend two thinges in this Commissary of both which we will briefly discourse First hee reprehends him for speaking positiuely without distinction that his sentences though they were vniust were to bee feared for it seemes by this he would say that all vniust sentences are to be feared though we are to vnderstand that not all vniust sentences are to be feared but such onely as though they bee vniust are yet of validity as it is gathered out of Gratianus 11. Quest 3. per totum To this it may be answered that the Commissary spake in like sense as S. Gregory and the holy Canons for as S. Gregory sayth that a sentence of the pastor how iust or vniust soeuer it be is to be feared though he speake without distinction yet can it not be gathered thereby that euery sentence of the pastour is to bee feared but that onely which though it be vniust is not yet to be accounted a nullity So likewise can it not be collected out of the Commissaries words that all sentences are to be feared but those onely as though they be vniust are not yet manifestly of no validity To cōclude the same scandale that is laide to the words of the Commissary may in like manner be laide to those of S. Gregory Frier Paolo In the answere to the second booke of Gerson wherein are many thinges which do plainely demonstrate the iustice of the cause of the state of Venice and the nullity of the censures pronounced against it the Author taking no note of any of them falles a disputing with Gerson and shewing that the assertion pronounced by a Commissary of the Popes in these words Our sentences though they be vniust must be both feared and obayed hath some good sense in which it may be vnderstood and that therefore Gerson is somewhat too seuere a Censor in making an ill construction of that which may be well taken not remembring how in his answer to the first worke he hath not onely takē the words of Gerson continually in the worse sense but farther when Gerson himselfe wold declare his owne meaning omitting the declaration opposeth him selfe to the wrong part of the sense which hee before had distinguisht and secluded and where he is forced to confesse that the doctrine of Gerson is absolutely true he hath either found it to be som way iniurious as appeares in the ninth consideration or by a voluntary mistaking of times will seeme to belieue that Gersons worke was written before the Councell of Constance which surely was written since as this second booke was likewise written since that time because that herein he doth name the foresaid Councell and more doth giue the title of Regent to the sonne of Charles the sixth who tooke it not to him till the yeare 1418. which I thought fitte to touch by the way to shew that both these bookes were made in the Popedome of Martinus Quintus who was a single and vndouted Pope By which means the common refuge of the Author who will needes haue it that Gersons doctrine was written in a time of schisme helps nothing for all he saith to auoide the force of his arguments Gerson doth not deny but that the assertion of the Commissary may haue some good sense in it because he saith the Commissary must be inforced either to expresse himselfe or reuoke his sentence But Gerson denies that the assertion in the formall sense it hath can be true and true it is that he which examineth an assertion when it is in Thesis that is vniuersall without applying it to the particular occasion doth examine it in the formal sense of the wordes But cōming to the Hypothesis he takes it in that sense which the particular occasion doth minister Our Author therefore doth well in examining it both wayes and first taking it in Thesis sayth that it followes not of this that all vniust sentences are to be feared as Gerson affirmes but this should be gathered onely of those as though they be vniust are not yet to be accounted nullities since you may conclude as much out of S. Gregories saying that the sentence of the pastor be it iust or vniust is to be feared seeing that this is spoken without distinction yet neuertheles is to be vnderstood by all men of that which is vniust and yet of validity and concludes in briefe that the scandale which is giuen to the words of the Commissary may as well be giuen to the words of Saint Gregory It had been enough to haue said interpretation because this word scandall and S. Gregory agree not in my opinion so well together But whē the Author sayth that the saying of S. Gregory is subiect to the same interpretation this is to be vnderstoode either as it is set downe in S. Gregory himselfe or as it is in Gratianus or else as it is absolutely separate by it selfe and in any mans mouth that will abuse it
this worke of Gersons was written after the yeare 1418. and before 1422. when Charles the sixt dyed If then Martinus Quintus was elected in 1417. it is plaine the booke was written in his Popedome beside that Gerson himselfe in the fourth proposition doth nominate the councell of Constance as then past Then must it needs bee that the Commissary commaunded the execution of some Papall prouision contrary to the orders set downe by the foresaid conuocation which according to Gerson was to commaund an vniust thing and did therfore conteine intollerable errors against publicke iustice and in his opinion did tend directly to an vndue vsurpation All which if it had beene obserued by our author hee had surely forborne to say that the Commissary spake of vniust sentences but such as were of validity seeing plainely in the fourth proposition that this Commissaries sentence is a protestation made against the foresaid actes and decrees and for this reason Gerson held it of no validity This Commissary if he had beene a man of conscience could not haue held his own seÌ„tences vniust but like one that how euer the world went would be obeyed to ease himselfe of trouble in iustifying his mandats writ in a common processe that his sentences whether they were iust or vniust were to bee obeyed If vniust sentences might suffer a distinction of such as were of validitie and such as were not of validitie hee had not freed himselfe of all difficulties because hee might yet bee encountered with the question of validitie and therefore the Commissary endeauoured in one ambiguous word to include the generall that necessary it was to obey all his sentences and by this meanes thought to purchase obedience to that which hee particularly intended not much vnlike to this present occasion wherein many distrusting their own abilities in shewing the iustice of the Popes mandats to the common wealth of Venice say that the Pope is to bee obeyed though hee commaund vniust things Surely I cannot but much wonder how the author treating of a question which is grounded vpon a thing in fact should conclude coÌ„trary to the truth of the story See then I pray you how all Gersons discourse is built in the ayre And now as if in the eight propositions following Gerson had swerued from his purpose and treated of another matter the author saith Bellarmine To this discourse Gerson doth add certain propositions to shew that which the most Christian king was both able and ought to do in defence of the liberty of the French church of which propositions it is not very necessary to discourse in this place First because they are all grounded vpon this principle that the authority of a councell is aboue the Popes authority for vpon no other reason will Gerson haue it that the Pope cannot change the auncient Cannons vpon which the French Church did then ground their liberty but because hee did belieue that those Canons which were made by the councel could not be subiect to the Popes will and authority Now that this principall is declared to be false let vs not belieue that the Venetians can hould it for true Secondly because that since Gersons time In the councell of Lateran vnder Leo the tenth that pragmaticall act was abrogated which the French churches defended agrement was made betwixt Pope Leo and the most Christian king so as now there is no more talke of the liberty of the French church in preiudice of the Pope But the most Christian king and all the Bishops of France are at peace and vnitie with their mother which is the church of Rome and likewise with their Father which is the Pope Christs vicar Saint Peters successor Thirdly because this liberty of the French church which Gerson writes of hath no sympathie with that liberty which is now pretended by the state of Venice because that was founded vpon auncient Canons and this is contrary as well to the ancient Canons as the moderne â—rier Paâ—â—o Gerson hauing intention to demonstrate in eight propositions that which the most Christian King was to doe in defence of the liberty of the french Church defending it from Buls of reseruations and Papal prouisions and other abuses of the court of Rome vsed in those times sets downe eight propositions which the Author doth wisely obserue to bee better dissembled and past ouer then handled seeing plainly that to endeuour to confute them were to confirme them and to establish that which before he contradicted That Princes both ought and might oppose themselues to such commandements of Prelates as were exorbitant and vnlawfull and therefore excuseth himselfe from treating of these eight propositions for three causes First because they are grounded vpon this principle that the authority of a Councell is aboue the Popes authority and this he saith he hath declared before to bee false But he might haue added that notwithstanding his declaration it is both held and maintained by the Vniuersities of France of which Nauarra and others giue sufficient testimony Secondly because that in the Councell of Lateran vnder Pope Leo that pragmaticall Act was abrogated so as at this day there is no more talke of the liberty of the French Church The Author takes vs here to be very simple and ignorant in matter of history as if we knew not that the liberty of the french Church of which Gerson speakes was one thing and the pragmaticall decree another The one being before Gersons time but the decree was made by Charles the 7. about the yeare 1440. long after this booke was written in which his father Charles the 6. was mentioned as then liuing But why saith he not here as wel that vpon the annulling of this pragmatical decree by Leo the Vniuersity of Paris made an appeale to the next councell Hee presupposeth furâ—her that wee doe not so much as know what is a pragmaticall decree and what a particular order and whether this latter doth abrogate the former in the whole or in certain parts onely But the most bold and wilfull part of all is to belieue that we are lockt vp in a prison and know not so much as the present occurrences of the world and are ignorant whether in France there be dayly appeales from ecclesiasticall sentences to the Court of Parliament tanquam ab abusu and whether that Court doth take knowledge of them Surely the Author would be well content we were meÌ„ of this sort and that we knew no more of the world then what stood with the benefit of Church-men onely and blinded in extreame ignorance wee should hold them in admiration iust like Gods and Oracles The third cause which he alleadgeth for not touching the eight propositions of Gerson is because the liberty of the French Church which Gerson writes of was grounded vpoÌ„ antient Canons and this of the Venetians is contrary both to the antient Canons and those of latter time What truth there is in this last saying of his