blowes Causa cum causa ratio cum ratione pugnet Cardinall Bellarmine hath but one reason but that is indeed a very sound one like the Cat in the fable which hath but one shift against the hounds his reason p Bell. loc cit is the testimony of Saint q Breviarium collectum à sancto Liberato sic inscribitur apud Binium to 2. pa. 610. Liberatus who then lived who not onely testifieth Vigilius to have writ this but sets downe the very Epistle it selfe of Vigilius and whereas some pretended both that Liberatus was corrupted by heretikes and that his narration was contrary to their Pontificall the Card. tels us for a certainty that there r Vestigium nullum apparet corruptionis in libro Liberati Bell. is neither any footstep nor print of corruption in Liberatus neither doth he ſ Revera non pugnat narratio Liberati cum narratione Pontificalis Jbid. herein dissent from the Pontificall Cardinall Baronius boasteth t Plura sunt quae persuadent Bar. an 538. nu 15. et ex pluribus colligi potest An. eod nu 19. of his reason as the Fox did in the same fable that he had a number of sleights and shifts to deceive the dogs but the hounds comming suddenly upon them both the Cat skipt into a tree which was her onely pollicy and there shee saw the Fox with all his hundreth wiles torne in pieces even such are Cardinall Baronius his sleights in this cause hee hath many but never a one that is worth a Rush none that would save from tearing if the hounds should happen to come upon him His first is because the u Bar. an 538. nu 19. Acts of the sixt generall Councell doe shew that heretikes had counterfaited some Epistles in the name of Vigilius and particularly those bookes which are said to be writ from Vigilius to Iustinian and Theodora of blessed memory Thus say the Acts To which the Card. assumes sane quidem inscriptio recitatae Epistolae Truly the inscription of the Epist recited in the name of Vigilius ad Dominos to my Lords doth demonstrate that it was written to Iust and Theodora Alas that this must be one of the Cardinals shifts and that it must bee for the worth of it stiled x Inscriptio ad Dominos demōstrat hanc Epistolam scriptam esse ad Just et Theodoram Bar. ibid. a demonstration Why there needs here neither mastive nor hound any beagle or brache will rent this reason into 20. pieces First what meant the Cardinal to expresse the words of the sixt Councell where Theodora is called an Empresse of blessed memory had he forgot what in another place y Bar. an 548. nu 24. hee said that she died miserably being blasted by the Popes thunder-clap Againe what a demonstration is this some Epistles were forged in the name of Vigilius ergo this is forged A pari some bookes are forged the Cardinals Annals are some bookes ergo they are all forged or some man is as wise as Chorebus ergo so is the Cardinall Take heed I pray you the hounds sent not these consequences of the Cardinall grounded on that old maxime A particulari non est Syllogisari Further yet what a reason call you this some bookes sent in Vigilius name to Iustinian and Theodora were forged ergo this Epist is forged It is a demonstration à baculo ad Angulum for this Epistle was writ neither to Iustinian nor to Theodora but to Anthimus Theodosius and Severus The Cardinall may know this clearly by Victor who testifieth the same in expresse words he might have perceived it by Liberatus who saith that Vigilius writ this Epistle to heretikes whereas not Pope Leo himselfe was more orthodoxall in this point than Iustinian as besides infinite other proofes is evident both by his Epistle z Constitutio Iustiniani vocatur Extat autem post finem Conc. Constantinopolitani sub Menna to 2. pa. 469. to Mennas confirming the deposition of Anthimus and by that his Epistle a Epistola illa ad Epiphanium extat Leg. 7. Cod. de summa Trin. written to Epiphanius Bishop of Constantinople foure b Data est ea Epist Iust 3. Consul Is est an 533. years before Silverius was expelled wherein hee professeth to embrace all the foure Councels and hee anathematizeth all that are anathematized by any of them declaring that he will not permit within his Empire any that oppugned those Councels But for all this the Card. will prove by the Inscription c Sanc quidem Inscriptio demonstrat Bar. an 538. nu 19. of this Epistle that it written to Iustinian and Theodora What if it were can hee prove withall that no other Epistle or booke was writ to them in the name of Vigilius No hee never offers to prove that and till that bee proved his reason at the best is but à particulari some Epistle writ in the name of Vigilius to Iustinian and Theodora was forged ergo this some man deserves a whetstone ergo so doth the Cardinall Besides this inconsequence the Antecedent is so false that I am ashamed to take the renowned Cardinall so tripping in his demonstration The Inscription saith hee demonstrates that it was writ to Iustinian and Theodora Truly the Inscription demonstrates the Cardinall to be of no truth or credit at al. The Inscription in Liberatus and him the d Bar. an 538. nu 13. Cardinal followeth is Dominis Christis e Sic habetur in Lib. ca. 22. apud Bin. pa. 624. b. Vigilius Vigilius to my Lords and Christs An Inscription indeed with a witnesse and a lesson for the Cardinall Iustinian Christ Theodora Christ and yet the Cardinall rankes the one Christ among the Furies of hell the other Christ hee condemnes to the pit and torments of hell what a Cardinall to bee so malitious and spightfull against Christ and Christs 21 The Inscription saith the Cardinall points f Demonstrat at Iustinian and Theodora I rejoyce to see the Cardinall once so charitably affected as to thinke Iustinian to be Christ Theodora Christ let all applaud the Cardinall in this saying seldome shall you take him nor will hee long persist in so good a mood or minde The Inscription of the Epistle is to Christs the Inscription demonstrates and points at them as the Cardinall tels us Christs then they were Christs they are against the spite of all slandering tongues Christs let them bee and with Christ let them rest for ever But will you now see a fine sleight indeed of the Cardinall such as put downe the Fox and Cat and all Truely saith hee the Inscription ad Dominos demonstrates that this Epistle was writ to Iustinian and Theodora why what meanes this Inscription ad Dominos why doth the Cardinal clip away the one halfe of the Inscription The Inscription in Liberatus is Dominis Christis the Cardinall belike misdoubted by Christis could not bee demonstrated
that Theodorus ought to be anathematized adding that they have demonstrated this even out of the words of Cyrill and Proclus which they writ ad condemnationē ejus for the condemning of Theodorus Thus writ the Councell unto which the whole Catholike Church hath ever since subscribed Seeing then it is certaine that Proclus both taught that Theodorus ought to be condemned and did himselfe write to condemne him there can bee no doubt but that those Epistles to Iohn and Maximus which Vigilius citeth and wherein Proclus is made to avouch the quite contrary that neither himselfe did nor that any ought to condemne Theodorus are forged in the name of Proclus by such hands as had wrought the like feat in Cyrill And if either those Epistles were extant for in that of Proclus to Iohn recorded in the fift u Coll. 6. pa. 562. Councell there is no such thing at all or had this Constitution of Vigilius beene published and knowne to the Councell before they had fully examined and cleared this Chapter touching Theodorus it is not to bee doubted but the one of them if not both would have discovered this forgery also 27. Besides all which there are divers evident prints of a false and hereticall hand in those Epistles Is it injury as that forged Proclus affirmeth to condemne the dead Nay it is even hereticall and that by the judgement of the whole Catholike Church as before we have proved to say that the dead may not be condemned Had Proclus writ or said this he had condemned the Councels of Sardica of Constantinople of Ephesus as injurious unto the dead nor them onely but he had condemned himselfe who as we have now demonstrated both condemned the dead and taught that Theodorus though dead ought to bee condemned 28. Did Theodorus at his death goe as this forged Proclus affirmeth to the Lord a blasphemer an heretike equall by the judgement of Proclus himselfe to the Iewes and Pagans and of the same ranke with Arius Macedonius Eunomius and Nestorius such a blaspheming heretike goe unto the Lord why then did the Ephesine Councell why did Saint Cyrill why did Proclus himselfe adjudge him to bee anathematized that is separated from the Lord Heretikes and impious persons as living they goe not in the wayes of the Lord but in their owne wayes so dying they goe like Iudas to their owne place not to the Lord not to his habitation and place of rest the Saints and they onely goe that way To them onely he sairh This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise 29. Was Theodorus not so much as blamed no not so much as once in his life as the forged Proclus saith It seemes Leontius borrowed his most partiall speech before mentioned out of this Proclus and was too credulous unto it But the true Proclus living so x Theodorus obijt an 427. Proclus sit Episcopus an 434. Bar. in illis annis neare to the time of Theodorus could not bee ignorant nor would ever have uttered so foule an untruth for although the Church pronounced no publike censure by name against him yet was he reproved and blamed not onely by others complaining of his erroneous doctrine but even by Theophilus B. of Alexandria and Gregory Nissene This the fift Councell witnesseth saying y Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 545. a. Saint Theophilus and Saint Gregory Nissene susceptis querimonijs adversus Theodorum adhuc viventem Complaints being brought unto them against Theodorus of Mopsvestia as yet living and against his writings scripserunt adversus eum Epistolas they writ Epistles against him and in those Epistles some part whereof is recorded in the Councell they blame him as presuming to renew the heresie and madnesse of Paulus Samosatenus And it is further added porrecta sunt autem and the impious chapters collected out of the books of Theodorus were shewed and brought to Theophilus whence it is now evident that those Epistles alleaged by Vigilius under the name of Proclus are no lesse by the untrue and hereticall assertions contained in them then by the cleare testimonies of the fift generall Councell convicted of forgery 30. From Fathers hee commeth to Councells and concerning the first Ephesine Vigilius noteth two points The former that Theodorus was not condemned by it to which purpose hee thus saith z Vigil Const nu 173. Solicite recensentes having with diligence and sollicitude reviewed the Ephesine Synode We have found that in it nothing is related touching the persō of Theodorus What nothing how then did Pope Pelagius a Theodorum mortuum sancta Synodus Ephesina damnavit Pelag 2. Epist 7. §. In his after Cyrill and the fift Councell finde that in it Theodorus was condemned and if they condemned him then certainly somwhat was related debated about him upon knowledge whereof the Councell condemned him But say indeed is nothing found concerning Theodorus in that Councell What say you to the impious and diabolicall Creed which was both related b Act. Ephes conc to 2. ca. 29 30 31 33. in the Synode and condemned c Hec Symbolum una cum authore Ephesina prima Synodus anathematizavit conc 5. coll 4. pa. 537. a. together with the author of it Truely here Vigilius useth a shift worthy to be observed That Creed he found and hee found it to be condemned but to quite Theodorus hee d Sed Symbolum quod Charisius prodidit condemnatū magis quia ab Athanasio Photio c. Vigil const nu 173. ubi sententia manca per dictionem condemnatum aut aliam similē supplendae est would have it beleeved that Theodorus was not the author of it nor that it was condemned as being the Creed of Theodorus but because it was divulged by certaine Nestorians Athanasius Photius Antonius and Iacobus Nor doth Vigilius use this shift only about that impious Creed but in other hereticall writings of Theodorus Proclus adjoyned to his Tome certaine impious positions collected è Theodori codicibus as Cyrill e Cyrill Epistola ad Acatium quae citat in conc 5. coll 5. pa. 543. expresly witnesseth Vigilius likewise of them would have it thought that they were none of the positions of Theodorus and by the forged Epistles of Proclus hee would perswade f Mala quae damnaverat cujus essent Proclus professus est se ignorare Vigil conc nu 175. that Proclus himselfe did not know whose they were The Emperour Iustinian before the Synode began sent threescore severall hereticall passages or chapters truly gathered out of the bookes and writings of Theodorus hoping that the Pope seeing Theodorus bookes so full fraught with heresies and blasphemies would make little doubt to condemne the writer of them Vigilius turnes to his former shift hee will not thinke nor have others to thinke that Theodorus writ such heresies though they had his name prefixed unto them for concerning those 60. chapters expressed both in the Popes Constitution g
that curse of the generall Councel The second that both Facundus Baronius do quite mistake the matter in carping at the Emperour as if by his Edict or in condemning those Three Chapters he had taught or published some new doctrine of faith he did not He taught and commanded all others to embrace that true ancient and Apostolicall faith which was decreed and explaned at Chalcedon as both the whole fift Councell witnesseth which sheweth that all those Chapters were implicitè but yet truly and indeed condemned in the definition of faith made at Chalcedon and Pope Gregorie also testifieth the same saying of this fift Councell that it was in omnibus sequax in every point a follower of the Councell at Chalcedon This the religious Emperour wisely discerning did by his imperiall edict and authoritie as Constantine and Theodosius had done before him ratifie that old and Catholike faith which the Nestorians by defending those Chapters craftily undermined at that time The third speciall point which I observe is that which Baronius noteth as the cause why Pope Vigil was so eager against the Emperor and his edict And what thinke you was it Forsooth because Iustinian primus m An. 553. nu 237. legem sancivit was the first who made a law and published a Decree for condemning of those three Chapters Had the Pope first done this and Iustinian seconded his holinesse therein hee had beene another Constantine a second Theodosius the dearest child of the Church But for Princes to presume to teach the Pope or make any lawes concerning the faith before they consult with the Romane Apollo or make him acquainted therewith that 's n Vel si rectum fuisset recte non fieret quia nulli Regum hinc aliquid agere sed solis est sacerdotibus datum Facund Bar. an 547. nu 35. Imperator est fidem coram sacerdotibus profiteri non eandem praescribere sacerdotibus Bar. ibid. piaculum a capitall a◠irremissible sinne the Pope may not endure it So then is was neither zeale not pietie nor love to the truth but meere stomacke and pride in Vigilius to oppose himselfe to the Emperours edict and make an insurrection against him A sory reason God wot for any wise man in the world much more for the Pope to contradict the truth and oppugne the Catholike faith Now if Iustinian for doing this which was an act of prudence and pietie tending wholy to the good and peace of the Church if hee could not escape so undutifull usage at the Pope his orators in those better times religious Kings may not thinke it strange to finde the like or far worse entertainment at the Popes of these dayes and their instruments men so exact and eloquent in reviling that in all such base and uncivill usage they goe as farre beyond Facundus Tertullus and them of former ages as drosse or the most abject mettle is inferiour to refined gold This is the first Period and first judgement of Vigilius touching this cause of the three Chapters in defence of which and oppugning of the Emperours edict hee continued more then a yeare after the publishing of the Edict even all that time while hee remained at Rome and was absent from the Emperour 6. As soone almost as Vigilius was come to Constantinople and had saluted the Emperor and conferred with them who stood for the Edict he was quite another man he changed cum caelo animum the aire of the Emperors Court altered the Popes judgement and this was about a yeare after o Edictū editū fuit anno 546. Bar. eo anno nu 8. Constantinopolin ingressus est an 547. propediē Natalis Domini Bar. an illo nu 26. the publishing of the Edict Now that all things might be done with more solemnitie and advise there was a Synod p Bar. an eod nu 31. 32. held shortly after his comming at Constantinople wherein Vigilius with thirty Bishops condemned the Three Chapters and consented to the Emperors Edict This Facundus expresly witnesseth saying q Ibid. nu 37. How shall not this bee a prejudice to the cause if it bee demonstrated that Pope Vigilius with thirty Bishops or therabouts have condemned the Epistle of Ibas approved by the Councell of Chalcedon and anathematized that Bishop Theodorus of Mopsvestia with his doctrines the praises whereof are set downe in that Councell Thus Facundus Besides all this Vigilius was now so forward in this cause that as before he had written bookes against the Edict in defence of the three Chapters and excommunicated those who condemned those Chapters so now on the Emperors side he writ bookes and gave judgement for the condemning of those Chapters and excommunicated some by name Rusticus and Sebastianus two Romane Deacons because they would not condemne them None can deny saith Baronius d An. 547. nu 40. that Vigilius writ a booke against the three chapters and sent it unto Mennas Bishop of Constantinople Again there e Ibid. is certaine proofe latae ab eo sententiae of the sentence of excommunication pronounced by Vigilius against Rusticus Sebastianus and other defenders of those chapters and this is so cleare ut nulla dubitatio esse possit that there can be no doubt at all but that Vigilius approved by a Constitution the Emperors sentence and condemned the three Chapters So Baronius The Epistles of Vigilius doe testifie the same In that f Extat in Coll. 7. Conc. 5. pa. 578. to Rusticus and Sebastianus he very often makes mention Iudicati nostri Constituti nostri of our judgement of our constitution against the three chapters concerning which he addeth g Ibid. pa. 580. that it was ratified by his Apostolicall authority saying that no man may doe contra constitutum nostrum quod ex beati Petri authoritate proferimus against this our Constitution which we set forth by the authority of Saint Peter The like hee testifieth in his Epistle h Ibid. to Valentinianus We beleeve saith he that those things may suffice the children of the Church which we writ to Mennas concerning the blasphemies of Theodorus of Mopsvestia and his person concerning the Epistle of Ibas and the writings of Theodoret against the right faith Thus Vigilius consenting now with the Emperor defending his Imperiall Edict and condemning the three Chapters in all which his profession was Catholike and orthodoxall 7. When Vigilius was thus turned an Imperialist and in regard of his outward profession declared in his Constitution become orthodoxall though as it seemeth he remained in heart hereticall hee fell into so great dislike of those who defended the three Chapters that they i Bar. an 547. nu 49. did proclamare proclame him to be a colluder a prevaricator or betrayer of the faith one who to please the Emperour revolted from his former judgement yea the Africane k In Chron. an 10. post Coss Basilij Bishops proceeded so farre against him that as Victor
if not breed in themselves yet increase in al welwillers unto the truth a constant dislike nay detestation of their hereticall and Antichristian doctrines and for your selfe my earnest and continuall prayer to God shall bee that you may ever continue your religious and ardent desire to advance Gods truth and honour here which will procure your owne immortall fame in this world and through Gods mercy in Christ eternall felicity in that life which being unlike to this shall neither have end of dayes nor end of blessednesse Barton neare Bury S. Edmonds in Suffolke April 29. 1631. Your Lordships humbly devoted GEO CRAKANTHORP AN ADVERTISEMENT TO THE CHRISTIAN REAder touching the Scope Argument and manifold Vse of this ensuing Treatise IT is not ambition to live in other mens writings but desire if I could to breath some life into them which hath drawn me of late rather to preface other mens works than to perfit mine owne It grieved me much to see such evidences lie in the darke which being produced to publike view would give singular light to the truth And if Socrates the mirrour of modesty in a Philosopher held it no disparagement to professe that he performed the office of a Midwife to other mens wits by helping them in the deliverie of those conceptions wherein himselfe had no part why should I either feare or regard any detraction from the living for a charitable office in this kinde to the dead doubtlesse if the office of a Midwife be at any time needfull it is then most necessarie when the living Child is to be takeÌ„ out of the dead wombe of the parent Such was this Posthumus in whom I hope the observation of a Plin. Nat. Hist l. 7. c. 9. Auspicactùs enecta Parente nascuntur sicut Scipio Africanus primusque Caesarum à Caeso matris utero dictus simili modo natus et Manlius qui Carthaginem cum exercitu intravit Plinie concerning children thus borne will bee verified For the most part saith hee those Children prove most lively and fortunate of whom the Parents dye in travell never seeing them live who cost them their lives The instances are many very illustrious Fabius b Tert. lib. de resur carnis Possumus illos recogitare qui execto matris utero vivi aerem hauserunt Laberij aliquiet Scipiones et Fabius Caeso ter Consul Caeso thrice Consul Scipio surnamed the Africane Iulius Caesar the first most renowned of all the Romane Emperours and our peerlesse K. Edward 6. Howbeit I confesse it is an hard thing to calculate the nativity of a Book and certainly foretell what hazzard the impression of a Treatise of this subject may runne or guesse what argument will please the divers tasts of this distempered age yet this I am confident of that all who exactly view this worke in all parts and compare it with others drawne with the same Pencill will esteeme it like the c Cic. Orator Minerva of Phidias his Masterpeece It cost him neare as many yeares labour as Isocrates Panegyrique the Prime rose of his flowry Garden did him This Author perfected this worke in his life time and commanded it after a sort to the Presse in the last d Def. Eccles Angl. cap. 4. p. 19 De quo loto Concilio conscriptum scias à me librum integrum in quo innumerabiles Baronij fraudes mendacia etiam et haereses palam detectae c. booke hee published by command from supreme authority in defence of the Church of England against the calumnies of the revolted Archbishop of Spalata in these words The Church had beene undone if Vigilius his decree had taken place But the most holy Emperour Iustinian and the fift Councell then happily shewed themselves Pillars of the Catholike faith concerning which whole Councell I desire you to take notice of an intire booke written by mee wherein the innumerable frauds lies and heresies of Baronius are manifestly detected out of that booke if it see light and come to your hands you shall understand and plainly perceive how fraile and reedy your Romane Pillar is In which passage he insinuates that the argument of it is non de stillicidiis aut aquis pluviis not of Eves droppings or water passages but of the Roofe of the house and Arch it selfe the authority of Councels and the infallibilitie of the Papall Chaire The Title carried through the whole booke carrieth not the greatest part of it plus e Quintil. instit Orat. lib. 1. ca. 4. in recessu est quam à fronte promittit his warehouse within is fraught with more variety of rich stuffs thaÌ„ is set out on his shop An entire Treatise of the fift generall Councell hee professedly undertaketh but currente rota in the prosecution of this argument hee taketh tardy Baronius and Binius and other Romish falsaries hee runneth through all the later generall Councels he substantially handleth the maine Controversies concerning the power of calling and authority ratifying Ecclesiasticall Synods and so cleareth all Antiquity on the Reformed side in points of great moment that I perswade my selfe the wiser sort of our learned adversaries who will by stealth get a sight thereof will take good counsell and utterly derelinquish their most glorious but most vaine and false claime to generall Councels for if wee devide the Councels that beare the still of Oecumenicall and Generall according to the different times in which they were held into pure mixt and wholly corrupt the first of undoubted the second of doubtful the third undoubtedly of no authority at all the first are wholly ours the last are wholly theirs in the middle sort we part stakes w th them 4. of the first ranke have beene heretofore wrested perforce out of the Romanists hands by Bishop Iewell Bishop Bilson Dr Renols Dr Whitaker and others The fift this accomplisht Antiquary vindicates also from them and declareth how in the Councels of the second ranke we share with them and in fine hee leaveth them nothing intirely but the lees and dregs of all Councels the Laterane and Trent Habeant quod sunt let them have these lees to themselves who themselves Moab-like for these many ages are setled upon the lees of their owne corruption Had this judicious and industrious Writer bent all his forces against the Romanists false pretended right to generall Councels and forcibly beat them out of that Hold onely hee had deserved that EulogiuÌ„ which the f Panlus Fagius Epist ad Albertum est magna religio apud Judaeos non subiicere nomen eius qui boni aliquid dixit docuit aut scripsit Iewes give any Rabbin to whom they are indebted for aâ—y wise saying or apt note upon any Scripture text g Vid. comment Rabb passim ZICRONO LIBRACHA sit memoria ejus in benedictione blessed be is memorie How much more when he assaulteth the maine fort of the Romish faith and by impregnable authorities and infallible reasons overthroweth
est an 1442. yeares after the end of the Councill at Basil He earnestly maintained the decree of that Councill resolving f Lib. 2. de Concor Cathol ca. 17. that a generall Councill is omni respectu tam supra Papam quam supra sedem Apostolicam is in every respect superior both to the Pope and to the Apostolike see Which he proveth by the Councils of Nice of Chalcedon of the sixt and 8 generall Councils and he is so confident herein that he saith Quis dubitare potest sanae mentis what man being in his wits can doubt of this superioritie Witnesse Iohn de Turrecremata a Cardinall also who was famous at the same time g Claruit an 1460. Tritem de Scrip. eccl in Ioh. de Tur. He thought he was very unequall to the Councill at Basil in fauour be like of Eugenius the 4 who h Poss in Ioh. Tur. made him Cardinall yet that he thought the Popes judge ment in defining causes of faith to be fallible and his authority not supreme but subject to a Councill Andradius will tell you i Lib. de author gener Concil pa 88. in this manner Let us heare him Turrecremata affirming that the Definitions of a Council concerning doctrines of faith are to be preferred Iudicio Rom. Pontificis to the judgement of the Pope and then he citeth the words of Turrec that in case the Fathers of a generall Councill should make a definition of faith which the Pope should contradict This was the very case of the fift Councill and Pope Vigilius dicerem judicio meo quod Synodo standum esset et non personae Papae I would say according to my judgement that we must stand to the Synods and not to the Popes sentence who yet further touching k Turr. summ de eccl lib. 2. cap. 93. that the Pope hath no superior Iudge upon earth extra casum haeresis unlesse it be in case of heresie doth plainly acknowledge that in such a case a Councill is superior unto him Superior I say not onely as he minceth the matter by authoritie l Tunc Synodus major est Papa nō quidem potestate jurisd ctionis sed authoritate discretivi judicij Turrec of discretive judgement or amplitude of learning in which sort many meane Bishops and presbyters are far his superiors but even by power of Iurisdiction seeing in that case as he confesseth the Councill is a superior Iudge unto the Pope and if he be a Iudge of him he must have coactive m Bel. lib. 3. de ver Dei ca. 9. § Praeterea Et lib. 2. de cōcil ca. 18. authoritie and judiciall power over him Witnesse Panormitane an Archbishop and a Cardinall n Poss in Nich. Tudisc also a man of great note in the Church both at and after the Councill of Basil He o Cap. Significasti de Elect. extrav professeth that in those things which concerne the Faith or generall state of the Church Concilium est supra Papam the Councill in those things is superior to the Pope He also writ a booke in defence of the Councill at Basill so distastfull to the present Church of Rome that they have forbid p Poss loco citat it to be read and reckned it in the number of Prohibited bookes in their Romane Index At the same time lived q Obijt an 1467. Tritem in Ant. Ros Antonius Rosellus a man noble in birth but more for learning who thus writeth r Monarch part 2. ca. 15. I conclude that the Pope may be accused and deposed for no fault nisi pro heresi but for heresie strictly taken or for some notorious crime scadalizing the whole Church and againe s Li. cod par 3 c. 21 Though the Pope be not content or willing to be judged by a Councill yet in case of heresie the Councill may condemne and adnull sententiam papae the Iudgement or sentence of faith pronounced by the Pope and he gives this reason thereof because in this case the Councill is supra papam above the Pope and the superior Iudge may be sought unto to declare a nullitie in the sentence of the inferiour Iudge Thus he and much more to this purpose Now although by these the first of which was a Belgian the second a Spaniard the third a Sicilian and the last an Italian it may be perceived that the generall judgement of the Church at that time and the best learned therein was almost the same with that of the Councill at Basill that neither the Popes authoritie is supreme nor his judgement in causes of faith is infallible yet suffer me to adde two other witnesses of those who were after that Councill 32. The former is the Iudgement of Vniversities quae t Orthuin Gra. in fasc rer expet pa. 240. fere omnes which all in a manner approved and honored that Councill of Basil The other is the Councill at Biturice some r Ortel Synon take it for Burdeaux called by Charles the seventh the French King in which was made consensu omnium x Ioh. Marius lib. deschis conc ca. 23. ecclesiasticorum et principum regni by the consent of the whole clergy and all the Peres of France that Pragmaticall Sanction which Iohn Marius calls y Ibid. medullam the pith and marrow of the decrees of the Councill at Basil One decree of that Sanction is this z Gag annal Fran. Lib. 10. The authoritie of the Councill at Basil and the constancie of their decrees perpetua esto let it be perpetuall and let none no not the Pope himselfe presume to abrogate or infringe the same This Sanction was published with full authoritie not seventy yeares before the Councill at Lateran as Leo the tenth witnesseth a Ab ipsius Sanctionis editione vix annos 70 fluxisse Cōc Later Sess 11. pa. 639. b. Loquitur autem desecunda ejus edit nam antea promulgata erat an 1438. teste Gag Mario that is some foure yeares after the end of the Councill at Basill And although the Popes whose avarice and ambition was restrained by that sanction did detest it as Gagninus saith b Lib. 10. non secus ac perniciosam haeresin no otherwise then as a dangerous heresie yea and labored tooth naile to admit it yet as saith the universitie of Paris c In sua Appel à Lean. 10. ad Concil by Gods helpe hactenus prohibitum extitit they have beene ever hindred untill this time of Leo the tenth Indeed Pius secundus indevored and labored with Lewes the 11. to have it abrogated and he sent d Io. Mar. lib. citat ca. 24. a solemne embassador Card. Balveus a very subtill e Homo versutus planeque perversus ib. fellow to bring this to passe but after much toyling both himselfe and others re infecta redijt he returned without effecting the Popes desire And to goe no further Leo the
warriours and having discomfited them we shall with ease cleare all the coasts of this cause from all his theevish piraticall and disordered straglers 2. The first and chiefest exception of Baronius ariseth from the matter controversie it selfe touching these Three Chapters concerning which he pretendeth that no question of faith was handled therin so one dissenting from another in this cause might not be counted or called an heretike This was a question saith he a An. 547. nu 30 nu 215. de personis non de fide of persons and not of the faith Againe b Ibid. nu 46. Vigilius knew Non de fide esse quaestionem sed de personis that there was no question moved herein about the faith but about certaine persons And yet more clearly In these disputations saith he c Ibid. nu 231. about the Three Chapters as we have oftē said Nulla fuit quaestio de side ut alter ab altero aliter sentiens dici posset haereticus there was no question at all about the faith so that one dissenting from another herein might be called an heretike And this hee so confidently avoucheth that he saith of it Abomnibus absque ulla controversia consentitur all men agree herein without any controversie Thus Baronius whom Binius applauding saith d Not. in Conc. 5. §. Ne quis Sciendum est bee it knowne to all men that in these disputations and differences about the Three Chapters non fuisse quaestionem ullam de fide sed tantummodo de personis there was no quaestion at all concerning the faith but only concerning the persons So he Whereby they would insinuate that Pope Vigilius did erre onely in a personall cause or in a matter of fact which they not unwillingly confesse that the Pope may doe but he erred not in a cause of faith or in any doctrinall position of faith wherein onely they defend him to bee infallible 3. Truly the Card. was driven to an extreme exigent when this poore shift must be the first and best shelter to save the infallibility of the Apostolike Chaire For to say truth the maine controversie touching these Three Chapters which the Councell condēned and Vigilius defended was onely doctrinall and directly belonging to the faith nor did it concerne the persons any other way but with an implication of that hereticall doctrine which they and the defenders of these Chapters under that colour did cunningly maintaine A truth so evident that I doe even labour with abundance of proofes 4. Iustinian the religious Emperour who called this Councell about this matter committed it unto them as a question of faith We have saith he e Epist ad Synod Coll. 1. pa. 520. a. commanded Vigilius to come together with you all and debate these Three Chapters that a determination may be given rectae sidei conveniens consonant to the right faith Againe stirring f Ibid. ◠them up to give a speedy resolution in this cause hee addes this as a reason Quoniā qui de side recta interrogatur for when one is asked concerning the right faith and puts off his answer therein this is nothing else but a deniall of the true confession for in questions answers quae de fide sunt which are questions of faith hee that is more prompt and ready is acceptable with God Thus the Emperour 5. The Holy Councell esteemed it as did the Emperour to be no other than a cause or question of faith for thus they say Gum h Coll. 8. pag. 584. a. de fide ratio movetur when a doubt or question is moved touching the faith even he is to be condemned who may hinder impiety but is negligent so to doe and therefore Festinavimus bonum fidei semen conservare ab impietatis Zizanijs We have hastened to preserve the good seed of faith pure from the tares of impietie So cleerly doth the whole generall Councell even in their definitive sentence call the condemning of the Three Chapters which themselves did a preserving of the good seed of faith and the defending of them which Vigilius did a sowing of hereticall weeds which corrupt the faith Againe m Ibid. pa. 586. b. We being enlightned by the holy Scriptures and the doctrine of the holy Fathers have thought it needfull to set downe in certaine Chapters those are the particular points of their Synodall judgement Et praedicationem veritatis haereticorum eorumque impietatis condemnationem both the preaching of the truth or true faith and the condemning of Heretikes and their impietie And in the end having set downe those Chapters and among them a particular and expresse condemning of these Three w th an anathema denounced to the defenders of the they conclude thus n Ibid. pa. 588. a. We have confessed these things being delivered unto us both by the sacred Scriptures by the doctrine of the holy Fathers by those things which are defined de unâ eâdemque side concerning one and the same faith by the foure former Councels Then which nothing can be more cleare to witnesse their decree touching these Threee Chapters most nearely to concerne the faith unlesse some of Baronius his friends can make proofe that the condemning of heretikes and their impious heresies and the maintaining of that doctrine which the Scriptures and Fathers taught and the foure first Councels defined is not a point of faith 6. Neither onely did the Catholikes which were the condemners of these Three Chapters but the heretikes also which were the defenders of them they also consent in this truth that the question concerning them was a controversie or cause of faith Pope Vigilius in his Constitution o Apud Bar. an 553. nu 106. 197. 208. alibi still pretendeth his Defence of Those Chapters to be consonant to the Councell at Chalcedon and the Definition thereof and of the Epistle of Ibas hee expresly saith The Councel of Chalcedon pronounced it to be orthodoxall And none I suppose will doubt but that the question whether that or any other writing be orthodoxall and agreeable to the Definition of Chalcedon as Vigilius affirmed that Epistle to be or be heretical and repugnant to that Definition as the Holy Councell adjudged that Epistle to be is a plaine question and controversie of faith Victor B. of Tunen who suffered imprisonment and banishment for defence of these Three Chapters teacheth the like saying p Jn Chron. an 2. post Consul Basilij That Epistle of Ibas was approved and judged q Iudicio Synodi approbata oribodoxa judicata est ibid. orthodoxall by the sentence of the Councell at Chalcedon and the condemning of these Three Chapters is the condemning and banishing of that Councell Facundus B. of Hermian who writ seven bookes of these Three Chapters doth more than abundantly witnesse this of him Victor thus writeth r In suo Chron. an 10. post Consul Basilij Evidentissime declaravit Facundus hath
taken and that the heretikes abused their lenitie in forbearing him to strengthen their heresie saw that now it was time no longer to dispense or winke at Theodorus and therefore the time Å¿ Quoniam nec susceperunt dicta illorum et tempus quod dispensationis â—â—digeres praeterijs jam scripserunt patres quae superius dicta sunt post mortem ejus adversus cum et ejus scripta Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 551. b. of that dispensation being expired they began now in plaine termes and by name to condemne both his person and his writings as before they had in a generalitie performed them both in the Councell of Ephesus and this was done by severall Bishops in severall Countries and by many severall wayes 10. The first sentence wherein Theodorus was particularly and by name condemned was in a Councell at Armenia where the credit of Theodorus had done most hurt The chiefe Bishops in that Synod were Acatius Bishop of MelitiuÌ„ in Armenia a very learned holy maÌ„ who had bin one t Vt liquet ex subscriptionibus in quibus saepe Acatius To. 2. Act. Conc. Ephes ca. 3. of the chiefe also in the holy Ephesine Councel and u Rambulas vocatur in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 549. a. et apud Gratian. Caus 24. a. 2. ca. 6. ex â—meÌ„d Greg. 13. Rambulas or Rabulas Bishop of Edessa whose name it seemes the Nestorians for very spite against him turned into x Sic à Liberato homine Nestoriano vocatur ca. 10. et Ibas narrat Theodorum injuste à Rabulae damnatum Bar. an 448. nu 72. Rabula that so they might with more facility revile his person a man of such piety and high esteeme in the Church that Cyrill y Cyrilli Epist ad Rabulam in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 543 b. cals him columnam fundamentum veritatis the very piller and foundation of the truth and z Rambulas sanctae memoriae Episcopus qui in Sacerdotibus expleâ—dun â—enig in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 549. a. Benignus testifieth that he was a faire and resplendent lampe in the Church These a Liber ca. 10. two stirred up the Bishops of Armenia to reject the writings of Theodorus tanquam haeretici as one who was an heretike yea the author of the Nestorian heresie and themselves were present in that noble Councell of b Fuit nobile Concilium in Armenia celebratum câ—i Acatius cum Rabula interfuit Bat. an 435 nu 4. Armenia wherein they not onely condemned Theodorus as an impious person an oppugner of Christ and the childe of the Devill as by the contents of the acts of that Synod c Libellus transmissus ab Episcopis Armenia Proclo extat in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 542. doth appeare but further also they writ their Synodal letters both to Proclus Bishop of Constantinople to Cyrill Bishop of Alexandria quatenus fiat unitas vestra contra Theodorum sacrilega dogmata ejus that they also would joyne with them and their Synod in coÌ„demning by name both the person and sacrilegious writings of Theodorus giving this as a reason thereof because they exhort them but to doe in plaine and expresse manner the same thing which was done by them before but in a generality We write unto you per vos etiam antea condemnatum sine nomine Theodorum nominatim condemnari that Theodorus may now by name bee condemned by you who hath already though without expressing his name beene condemned by you And what they exhorted Proclus and Cyrill to doe that Rambulas performed not onely in the Armenian Councell but in his owne Church at Edessa for as Ibas in his impious Epistle d Quae extat in Conc. Chal. Act. 10. saith Ausus est Theodorum clarè anathematizare hee was bold by name and expresly to anathematize Theodorus in his owne Church and both Benignus and Liberatus witnesse the same e Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 549. a. 11. f Liber ca. 10. What Proclus did upon receipt of those letters sent from the Armenian Councell unto him is not to be learned out of Liberatus report of this matter for he in the narration of this passage is not onely untrue and partiall but very hereticall also justly herein taxed by Baronius g Liberatus cautè legendus ut pote qui ab aliquo Nestoriano eam videtur mutuatus historiam Bar. an 435. nu 9. and Binius h Historiam ca. 10. incautè nimis ab al quo Nestoriano magna ex parte mutuatus videtur Bin. de Liberato Notis ad Liber as borrowing his narration from some Nestorians which the Reader will easily observe but the truth herein must be taken out of Cyrill and the fift Councell Proclus saith Cyrill i Cyrilli verba citantur in Conc 5. coll 5. pa. 543. b. sent a tome or writing to them of Armenia full of sound doctrine and hee adjoyned thereunto certaine chapters collecta è Theodori codicibus gathered out of the bookes of Theodorus consonant to the doctrine of Nestorius exhorting them etiam illa anathematizare to accurse even those doctrines of Theodorus also The fift Councel explaines this more fully Proclus say they k Coll. 5 pa. 551. a. writeth thus against Theodorus and his impious doctrine And then they cite first those words of Proclus before mentioned wherein he sets Theodorus in the same ranke with Arius Eunomius Macedonius l In Epist Procli quae extat in Bibl. S. pa. to 3. corrupte legitur Manichei and other like heretikes calling them all puddles of errours and deceit And after this those other words of Proclus written to Iohn Bishop of Antioch wherein he calleth the doctrines of Theodorus or those chapters which were collected out of his bookes vaniloquie monstriloquie Iudaicall impietie ad destructionem legentium evomita doctrines vomited out by him to the destruction of the readers and hearers exhorting others to reject to abhorre to tread under foot and to accurse all those chapters of Theodorus utpote diabolicae insaniae constituta inventiones as being the positions and inventions of devillish madnesse From which words of Proclus uttered both against the person and doctrine of Theodorus the Councell concludeth very justly that Proclus not onely in particular condemned Theodorus as the Armenian Councell exhorted him but condemned him as a Iew Pagan and Heretike And this was done by Proclus in the yeare when Valentinian was the 4 and Theodosius the m Corruptè legitur in editione illa epist quae extat to 3. B.S. pat Theodosio 5. pro 15. ut ex fastis liquet 15. time Consull as the date of his letter or Tome to the Armenians doth declare which declares also that the Armenian Councell was held the same yeare n Conc. Armeniae habitum an 435. Bar. anno illo nu 4. is est Coss Theodosij 15 et Valent. 4. for it followed the spreading abroad of the bookes of
Conc. Vig. a nu 60. ad nu 173. and in the Synodall h Conc. 5. coll 4. acts he thus saith i Vigil in const nu 173. Wee decree that by those foresaid chapters nulla injuriandi praecedentes patres praebeatur occasio no occasion be given to injure the former Fathers and Doctors of the Church And again k nu 184. We provide by this our Constitution that by these or the like doctrines condemned in Nestorius and Eutyches no contumely nor occasion of injury bee brought to those Bishops who have died in the peace of the Catholike Church and that Vigilius thought Theodorus so to have dyed we have before l Sup. ca. 7. declared yea that Vigilius knew it Baronius assured us Thus Vigilius to free Theodorus from condemnation pretends those hereticall writings to be none of his 31. What is it that Vigilius will not say for defence of this blasphemous and condemned heretike This cavill was used as Baronius m Defensores Theodori ea ipsius scripta esse negarunt Bar. an 435. nu 14. tells us by the old Nestorians and defenders of Theodorus denying those to bee the writings of Theodorus quae diffamata which were famously knowne through the whole East and which being afterwards detected and discovered to bee truly his writings both they and their author with them were condemned Now this old hereticall and rejected cavill Vigilius here reneweth those writings famously knowne to be the workes of Theodorus condemned as his writings and he with them and for theÌ„ Vigilius will now have thought to be none of his nor he by them nor for them may bee now condemned And that you may see how Vigilius herein doth strive against the maine streame of the truth Saint Cyrill n Cyrill Epistolae ad Proclum citata in Conc. 5. coll 5 pa. 550. b. who then lived testifieth Theodorus to be author of those hereticall and blasphemous writinâ—â— That wee have found certaine things in the writings of Theodorus nimiae plena blasphemiae nulli dubium est full of blasphemie none that thinks aright can make any doubt And againe o Ibid. pa. 550 a. I examining the bookes of Theodorus and Diodorus have contradicted them as much as I could declaring that sect to be every where full of abomination Yea hee writ divers bookes p Qui Cyrilli libri citantur saepe in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 538. seq against Theodorus expressing the words of Theodorus and his owne confutation of the same So cleare and undoubted was this truth in Cyrills dayes who lived at the same time with Theodorus that hee thought them unwise who made any doubt of that which Vigilius now calls in question And particularly touching that impious Creed Cyrill saith q Prolata apud sanctâ—m Synodum expositione ab en composita sicut dicebant qui protulerunt c. Verba Cyrill in Epist ad Proclum citat in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 550. b. that they who brought it to the Synode of Ephesus said that it was composed by Theodorus which they said not as by way of uncertaine report but as testifying it to be so in so much that the whole Synode giving credit thereunto thereupon condemned Theodorus r His condemnatis qui sic sapiunt nullam viri Theodori memoriam fecerunt Ibid. though by a dispensation they expressed not his name 32 The same is testified by Rambulas Acatius and the whole Armenian Councell who after examination Å¿ Fiat unitas vestra contra Theodorum sacrilega capitula dogmata ejus Libell Episc Armen ad Proclum in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 542. b. of this cause found the true and indubitate writings of Theodorus to be sacrilegious and therefore by name condemned him exhorting both Cyrill and Proclus to doe the like The Imperiall Edicts of Theodosius t De quibus legibus supra hoc cap. Exta â—t vero in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 544. and Valentinian leave no scruple in this matter who would never have so severely forbidden the memory of Theodorus and the reading or having of his bookes had it not by evidences undeniable beene knowne that those were indeed his workes and hereticall writings If all these suffice not when this cause about Theodorus was now againe brought into question the Emperour Iustinian and the fift Councell so narrowly and so exactly examined the truth hereof that after them to make a doubt is to seeke a knot in a rush They testifie those very hereticall assertions whereof Vigilius doubteth to be the doctrines and words u Habemus quae ex Theodori codicibus collegistu Conc. 5. coll 4. pa. 527. b. idem docet Iustin in suo Edict § Si quis defendit Theodorum of Theodorus that impious creed also whereof Vigilius is doubtfull to be composed by Theodorus they are so certaine x Jmpius Theodorus aliud Symbolum exposuit Iust in Edicto §. Tali Et impium ejus Theodori Symbolum coll 4. pa. 537. a. hereof that even in their Synodall sentence y Licet volentibus codices impij Theodori prae manibus accipere vel quae ex impijs codicibus ejus à nobis inserta his gestis sunt Conc. 5. coll 8. pa. 585. a. they referre the triall of what they decree herein to the true and undoubted bookes of Theodorus And in their sentence is included the judgement of the whole catholike Church ever since they decreed this which hath with one consent approved their decree 33 After all these Pope Pelagius in one of his decretall Epistles wherein at large he handleth this cause not onely testifieth that impious Creed z Ab ejus Theodori discâ—pulis dictatum ab eo symbolum in eâ â—em Synodo Ephesina prolatum Pelagius Epist 7. §. In his and those hereticall a Ejusdem Theodori ex libris illius dicta replicemus ibid. writings to bee the workes of Theodorus alleaging many places of them but wheras some obstinately addicted to the defence of the three Chapters moved againe b Haec Theodori dicta utrum ejus sint fortasse dubitatur ibid. §. Haec this same doubt which Vigilius doth and as is likely by occasion of his decree Pelagius of purpose declareth those c Ibidem seq to have beene the true writings of Theodorus and consonant to his doctrine and that hee proveth by the testimonies of the Armenian Bishops of Proclus of Iohn of Antioch of Cyrill of Rambulas of Honoratus a Bishop of Cilicia and so a neighbor of Mopsvestia which is in the same d Secunda Cilicia sub qua Mopsvestia constituta est Conc 5. coll 5. pa. 547. b. Province of Hesychius of Theodosius and Valentinian the Emperours and of Theodoret then whom not any except perhaps Nestorius was more devoted to Theodorus insomuch that he is thought to have taken from Theodorus the name of Theodoret. After which cloud of witnesses produced Pelagius thus concludeth
ready both himselfe and the Church must be to condemne his former hereticall writings When heresie commeth in his owne deformed habit it doth but little or no hurt at all who will not detest it when he reades it in the writings of Arius Nestorius Eutiches or such like condemned heretikes the odiousnesse of their names breeds a dislike almost of a truth in their mouthes but certainly of an errour But when Satan assumes the forme of an Angell of light when heresie comes palliated yea countenanced with the name of a Catholike a learned an holy a renowned and approved Bishop then and then specially is there danger of infection The reverence the love the honour wee beare to such a person causeth us unawares to swallow the poyson which hee reacheth unto us before we take leasure to examine or once make doubt of his doctrine 28. It was truely said by a Vinc. de Hâ—res ca. 23. Vincentius Lirinensis The errour of the Master is the tryall of the Scholler tanto major tentatio quanto ipse doctior qui erraret and the more learned the teacher is the greater still is the temptation which beside other he shewes by the example of Origen he was in his age a mirrour b Vincent Liâ— loc citato of gravity integrity continency zeale c Zelo dei se truncavit Hier. Epist ad PaÌ„mac Ocean to 2. pa. 194. piety of learning of all sorts both divine and humane of so d Scripturas memoriter tenebat ibid. happy a memory that he had the Bible without booke of such admirable eloquence that not words but hony e Vinc. doc cit seemed to drop from his lips of so indefatigable industry that he was called Adamantius and was said by some f Hier. lib. 2. ado Ruffin to have written six thousand bookes by g Hier. epist ad Pam. Hierome one thousand besides innumerable commentaries of such high esteeme and authority that Christians h Vinc. loc cit honoured him as a Prophet Philosophers as a Master they flocked from the utmost parts of the world to heare his wisedome as if a second Salomon had beene sent from heaven yea most would say malle se cum Origene errare quam cum alijs vera sentire that they had rather erre with Origen then thinke aright with others When such a man lapseth into heresie if his writings may scape without censure if it shall be judged a contumelie an injurie or slander to condemne his bookes for the honour which was given to his person one such man as Origen were able to draw almost the third part of the starres of heaven after him 29. And if any beleeve the Epistles going under his name Theodoret was in divers respects not much inferiour to Origen His birth noble i Nobilibus parentibus nascitur Possen in Theodor. his parents being without hope of Children vowed k Epist Theod. 81. ad Nonium extat apud Bar. an 448. nu 12. him before his conception like another Samuel unto God And accordingly even from his Cradle consecrated him to Gods service Violently l Javitus episcopus sum ordinatus ibid. drawne to the dignity of a Bishop the Citie of Cyrus in Syria where was his episcopall See he nobilitated being before but obscure though worthy m Erat in Syria oppidulum vehemeÌ„ter neglectum Cyrus nomine a Iudaeis extructum ut qualemcunque gratiam benefactori Cyro refarreÌ„t Proc. de aedific Iustin Orat. 2. in fine of eternall memorie as being one monument of the deliverance of Gods people by the hand of Cyrus out of the Babylonish captivitie So upright blamelesse and voide of covetousnesse that having beene five and twenty yeares Bishop of that place in all that time ne n Theod. Epist ad Nonium obolum mihi in tribunali ablatum aliquis conquestus est none could say that hee had exacted or received for causes of judgement so much as one halfe pennie I tooke no mans goods no mans garments nay which is a memorable token of integritie none of mine house saith he hath taken the worth of an egge or a morsell of bread So plentifull in workes of charitie That he distributed o Quae nobis a parentibus obvenerlit post eorum mortem â—atim distribui Theod. Epist ad Leonem extat inter Epistolas Leonis post Ep. 62. his inheritance among the poore repaired Churches p Theod. Epist 81. builded bridges drained Rivers to townes where was want of water and such like in so much saith he that in all this time I have q Epist Theod. ad Leonem ad Nonium provided nothing for my selfe not any land not any house no not so much as any sepulcher nothing praeter laceras has vestes I have left nothing to my selfe but onely this ragged attire wherewith I am apparelled For learning and knowledge both in divine and humane matters he was much honoured compared to Nilus r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epig. apud Poss in Theodor. as watering the whole countrie where hee abode with the streames of his knowledge he converted eight townes Å¿ Theod. Epist ad Nonium quae est 81. infected with the heresie of the Marcionites to the faith two other of the Arians and Eunomians wherein he tooke such paines and that also with some expence of his blood and hazard of his life that in eight hundreth parishes within the Diocesse of Cyrus Ne t Jbid. unum quidem haereticorum zizanium remansit there remained not so much as one hereticall weed 30. So learned so laborious so worthy a Bishop was Theodoret and so desirous am I not to impaire any part of his honour much lesse to injure disgrace or slander him Whom almost would not the writings of a man so noble for birth and parentage so famous for learning so eminent in vertue move and perswade to assent unto him if they might goe currant without taxing without note or censure of the Church and that much more than the bookes of Origen both because Origen was but a Presbyter but Theodoret a Bishop and specially because Origen u Originem fontem Arij Niceni patres percussere damnantes enim eos qui filium negant esse de substantia patris illum OrigineÌ„ Ariumque damnaverunt Hier. Epist ad Pon. mac de error Orig. Omnis tam orientis quam occidentis Catholicorum Synodus illum haereticum denunciat Hier. Apol. 2. adver Ruff. himselfe was by the Church condemned and so the author being disgraced the authority of his writings must needs be very small but the person of Theodoret was approved by the whole Councell of Chalcedon they all proclamed x Con. Chal. Act. 8. him to bee a Catholike and orthodoxall Bishop Here was a farre greater temptation and greater danger when his writings are hereticall whose person so famous and holy a Councell commendeth for Catholike Now or never was the Church to
Sâ—rab li. 14. Val. Max. tit de Cupidit gloriae lib. 8. ca. 14. did himselfe by burning the temple of Diana at Ephesus But when both the name and bookes of Nestorius was now so detested by reason of the imperiall Edict tunc caeperunt Theodori volumina circumferre saith Liberatus then m Liber ca. 10. they began but to disperse the writings of Theodorus which Baronius n Bar. an 435. nu 3. also confesseth when the rivers that is Nestorius was stopt by the Emperors law then the Nestorians ipsum fontem aperuore opened the very fountaine divulging the bookes of Theodorus and Diodorus The Epistle then mentioning the expresse condemning of Theodorus doth of a certaintie follow that imperiall Edict against Nestorius That Edict was published as by the date o Leg. ult de haereticis eod Theod. appeares in August when Theodosius was the fifteenth time p Is est annus Ch. 435 ut docet Marc in Chron. Bar. in illum annum Consull The union betwixt Iohn and Cyrill was made the next yeare after the Ephesine Councell for Iohn writing to Xistus Bishop of Rome and testifying his unitie q Placuit nobis quoque in sacrae synodi sententia acquiescere Epist Iohannis ad Xistum Act Conc. Eph. to 5. ca. 17. and consent to Cyrill saith in that Epistle that the Ephesine Councell was held anno proximè lapso the yeare next before The Councell at Ephesus both began and ended in the yeare when Antiochus r Act. Conc. Ephes to 2. ca. 1. ubi habita dicitur Synodus post Coss 13. Theodosij anno autem post istum Consulatum Antiochus Bassus erant Consules ut ex Marcell in Chron. fastis certum est Et to 3. Act. Eph. ca. 17. literae Im per. ad Synodum datae sunt Antiocho Consule Caepit autem Concilium 23. die Maij eo anno to 2. Act. ca 1. finitum est post quatuor ut Liber ca. 7. vel post 3. menses ut Socrates ait lib. 7. ca. 33. 37. and Bassus were Consuls Å¿ Is est an Ch. 431. Marc. in Ch. Bar. in cum annum Betwixt Valerius and Aetius who were next Consuls after Antiochus and Bassus and in whose Consulship the union was fully concluded and the fifteenth Consulship of Theodosius wherein the Edict against Nestorius was published are two intire Consulships t An. 433. Theodosius 14. et Maximus Coss an 434. Ariobinda Aspar Coss an 435. Theodosius 15. et Valent. 4. Coss Fasti et Mercell et Bar. as by the Fasti and others is certaine So that it is certaine that the Epistle which mentioneth the condemning by name of Theodorus was not written till more then two compleat yeares after the union ended but how long after these two yeares it was before Ibas writ it is wholy uncertaine in likelihood it was two or three more for some time after the Edict must bee allowed for the Nestorians to translate first and then disperse the bookes of Theodorus some more after that for the condemning of him by Rambulas some againe after that before Rambulas dyed to whom Ibas succeeded in the Bishopricke of Edessa and who writ this Epistle when hee was in possession of that See as both the title u Fragmentum Epistola Ibae Episâ—opi Edesseni Conc. Chalc. Act. 10. and contents x Ex quibus unus qui Theodorum condemnat extitit falso alicubi scribitur existit nostrae civitatis tyrannus Ibas in sua Epist loc citat tyranni autem nomine significari Rambulam testatur Liber ca. 10. ubi sic ait De quo Rabula successor ejus Jbas in epistola sua diâ—iâ— â—unâ— Theodorum praesumpsit qui omnia praesumit apertè in ecclesiastia anathematizare etc. of the Epistle declare By all which and if there were none else by the last onely that Ibas writ this being Bishop of Edessa it is cleere that some good while in likelihood three or foure yeares were past after the union before Ibas writ this Epistle of which Baronius tells us so precisely that it was writ eo momento at the very moment and instant when the peace was concluded 13. The other point to be observed is what manner of a Catholike Pope Vigilius and Cardinall Baronius have here set forth unto us Ibas when he writ this Epistle is with them a Catholike a Catholike Writer a Catholike Bishop in him you shall see the lively portrature of one of their Catholikes Hee even in this Epistle written after the Vnion when he was as they teach y Vig. Const nu 194. Ibam tunc temporis cum hanc Epistolam momento ipso unionis scripsit Catholicum fuisse Bar. an 448. nu 75. a Catholike denyeth God to be incarnate and Marie to be the Mother of God he condemnes the holy Ephesine Councell and the twelve Chapters of Cyrill hee commends Theodorus of Mopsvestia for a Preacher of the truth while he lived for a Saint being dead These are the doctrines of Ibas all of them taught positively and avouched not as the Cardinall fancieth historically related in his Epistle as the words z Vide Epistolam ipsam hoc clarum erit theÌ„selves do shew the whole fift Councell a Conc. 5. coll 6. pa. 575. 576. witnesseth all taught by him after the Vnion when he was one of the Popes and Cardinalls Catholikes yea taught consonantly to the Vnion which Ibas then embraced yet Ibas teaching writing and maintaining all these blasphemies and heresies that is oppugning with all his art and ability the whole Catholike faith is crowned and canonized by Vigilius and Baronius for a good Catholike Of such Catholikes their Romane Church hath great store nay seeing none is now of their Church who approves not all the Cathedrall decrees of their Popes and therefore this of Vigilius among the rest it hence ensueth that none is now a Romane Catholike that is a member of their present Romane Church who approves not Ibas such as he was when he writ this Epistle for a Catholike that is who approves not the most blasphemous heretikes and oppugners of the whole faith to be Catholikes and who condemnes not the Cyrillians that is all that maintaine the Catholike faith for heretikes 14. But still as yet the doubt concerning the Vnion remaineth Ibas say they when he writ this Epistle embraced the union with Cyrill and none can embrace that union but hee shewes himselfe thereby to bee a Catholike True none can truly and sincerely embrace that union which Cyrill made with Iohn the condition whereof was the subscribing to the holy Ephesine Synode and condemning of Nestorius with his doctrines but hee is and must be acknowledged to be a good Catholike Had Ibas approved that union or consented unto it Ibas had not beene Ibas he had never written that impious Epistle which in every part most of all in the end
that whē Ibas said that Cyrill expounded or explained his Chapters that explanation which hee meant was in truth a purging of those Chapters And what was there or is in any one of those twelve Chapters to be purged out They are all wholly d Quod nulla ex parte ab Euangelica Apostolica doctrina aberraverim id postquam Epistolas quas ad Nestorium conscripseram earum una habet illa 12. Capitula ea extat to 1. act Con. Ephes ca. 14. legissent communì omnium sententia confessi sunt omnes Cyril Ep. ad Imper. to 5. Act. Eph. ca. 2. pa. 829. a. orthodoxall approved in ever part both by the holy Ephesine Councell and after that by the Councell at Chalcedon e Conc. Chal. in defin fidei Act. 5. Seeing in them and every part of them there is not one dramme of any drosse seeing all of them are the pure and refined Catholike faith if ought at all bee purged out of them it must needs be a Catholike doctrine a position of the Catholike faith the purging and wiping away of any part purgeth out the whole Catholike faith every part of it being so connexed with golden linkes together that no man can deny one unlesse hee renounce al nor purge out any of that vitall blood but in stead thereof will succeed all the blasphemous humors of the Nestorians Since the explanation which Ibas meant was joyned with a purging of those Chapters it was not nor could it be any other but a plaine deniall condemning and anathematizing of those Chapters and of the whole Catholike faith 45. This will bee more cleare if we consider the occasion of this phrase and why the Nestorians called that an Explanation which as they meant was a condemnation of his Chapters S. Cyrill as he was most orthodoxall in this point for his sense so for his words he was not so strict and precise but sometimes tooke the word Nature in an ample and catachresticall signification for Person but commonly in the proper and usuall signification for Essence whensoever he tooke it in the later sense hee never then said that there was one onely nature in Christ which was the heresie of Apollinarius and Eutiches but hee still professed and maintained two natures that is two essences against Apollinarius to be truly in Christ But when he said that one Nature was in Christ he then ever meant one Person not one Essence And in this use of the word Nature hee followed Athanasius whose words he alledgeth and approveth we f Athanasii verba apud Cyrillū lib. de rect fide ad Imper. to 1. Act. Eph. Conc. ca. 5. §. Porro pa. 672. a. confesse Christ to be the Sonne of God according to the spirit and to be the Sonne of Man according to the flesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not two natures to be one Sonne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but one nature of the Word incarnate Did Athanasius deny two essences either the divinitie or humanitie in Christ Nothing lesse in that very sentēce he professeth him to be truly God and truly Man but taking the word Nature for Person hee in that sense truly denies two and professeth but one Nature that is one naturall subsistence or Person to be in him In like sort Cyrill himselfe in his Epistle g Ea Epistola Cyril citatura ae Iustiniano in Edict §. Credimus to Successus affirmeth that there is una natura Dei verbi incarnati one Nature of the Sonne of God incarnate that is the Sonne of God being now incarnate is one Nature or naturall subsistence or one and not two persons and yet one consisting of two natures that is two essences the divine nature assuming flesh and the humane nature being personally united unto the Godhead which to bee his true meaning besides Iustinians h Ipse pater Cyril quoties unam naturam dixit verbi incarnatam Naturae nomine prosubsistētia usus est Iustin in Edict §. Credimus pa. 493. a. testimonie infinite places doe make evident those especially in his booke de i Extat to 1. Act. Conc. Ephes ca. 5. fide recta ad Theodosium where he saith k Ibid. §. Quin. pa. 666. a. the scripture sometimes ascribes all that is spoken of Christ to the man sometimes all unto God and speaketh right in both propter utriusque naturae in unam eandemque personam coitionem by reason that both the natures doe meete in one and the selfe same person Nor may we thinke this diverse use of the same word to be strange or unlawful but as the name of Father is given even in Scripture unto the Son l Tota Trinitas est Pater noster per creationem et guhernationem ut Esa 63. Et nunc Domine Pater nosteres licet persona Patris dicatur Pater Christi per naturam Aquin. in ca. 1. Epist 2. ad Cor. v. 1. Et Paternitas in divinis prius importat respectum personae ad personam quam respectum Dei ad creaturam Aquin. p. 1. q. 33. art 3. when it is taken essentially or put in opposition to the creatures but never when it is taken personally or put in opposition to the Sonne Even so when the name of Nature is taken as in Athanasius Cyrill and others sometimes it is without an opposition to Person it may there signifie the same with Person and note any naturall subsistence but when in any speech there is expressed or implied an opposition of Nature unto Person there it ought onely to signifie the substances or essences concurrant in in that person and not the Person it selfe Nor was it so great a fault in the Nestorians to take the word Nature for Person but partly in drawing that which was the unproper and abusive into the ordinarie and usuall signification they seldome by Nature noting ought but Person and specially for that they tooke Nature for Person even in those very speeches wherein was noted and expressed an opposition of Nature unto Person as in that profession which they made acknowledging in Christ two natures and one person where taking Nature for Person they were enforced to take one Person for one by affection or cohabitation neither of which truly making one person they called that one person which in truth was not one but divers distinct persons 46. This profession of one Nature that is of one naturall subsistence or of one person the Nestorions disliked in Cyrill and in his Chapters and thought it but very falsly to be the same which Apollinarius taught as appeareth by the Epistle of Ibas where he m Ibas in Epist apud Conc. Chal. Act. 10. thus writeth Cyrill confuting the Bookes of Nestorius hath written as Apollinaris did that God himselfe or the Word is made man so that there is no difference betwixt the Temple and him who dwelleth in the Temple for he hath written twelve Chapters to shew quia una est natura divinitatis
holding this one fundamentall position they are pertinacious in all their errours and that in the highest degree of pertinacy which the wit of man can devise yea and pertinacious before all conviction and that also though the truth should never by any meanes be manifested unto them For by setting this downe they are so far from being prepared to embrace the truth though it should be manifested unto them that hereby they have made a fundamentall law for themselves that they never will be convicted nor ever have the truth manifested unto them The onely meanes in likelihood to perswade them that the doctrines which they maintaine are heresies were first to perswade the Pope who hath decreed them to bee orthodoxall to make a contrary decree that they are hereticall Now although this may be morally judged to be a matter of impossibilitie yet if his Holinesse could be induced hereunto and would so farre stoope to Gods truth as to make such a decree even this also could not perswade them so long as they hold that foundation They would say either the Pope were not the true Pope or that he defined it not as Pope and ex Cathedra or that by consenting to such an hereticall decree hee ceased ipso facto to be Pope or the like some one or other evasion they would have still but grant the Popes sentence to be fallible or hereticall whose infallibility they hold as a doctrine of faith yea as the foundation of their faith they would not Such and so unconquerable pertinacy is annexed and that essentially to that one Position that so long as one holds it and whensoever he ceaseth to hold it hee ceaseth to be a member of their Church there is no possible meanes in the world to convict him or convert him to the truth 21. You doe now clearely see how feeble and inconsequent that Collection is which Baronius here useth in excuse of Pope Vigilius for that he often professeth to defend the Councell of Chalcedon and the faith therein explaned Hee did but herein that which is the usuall custome of all other heretikes both ancient and moderne Quit him for this cause and quit them all condemne them and then this preteÌ„ce can no way excuse Vigilius froÌ„ heresie They all with him professe with great ostentation to hold the doctrines of the Scriptures of Fathers of generall Councels but because their profession is not onely lying and contradictorie to it selfe but alwayes such as that they retaine a wilfull and pertinacious resolution not to forsake that heresie which themselves embrace as Vigilius had not to forsake his defence of the Three Chapters Hence it is that their verbal profession of Scriptures Fathers and Councels cannot make any of them nor Vigilius among them to be esteemed orthodoxall or Catholike but the reall and cordiall profession of any one doctrine which they with such pertinacy hold against the Scriptures or holy generall Councels as Vigilius did this of the Three Chapters doth truly demonstrate them all and Vigilius among them to be heretikes And this may suffice for answer to the second exception or evasion of Baronius CAP. 15. The third exception of Baronius in excuse of Vigilius taken from his confirming of the fift Councell answered and how Pope Vigilius three or foure times changed his judgement in this cause of faith 1. IN the third place Baronius comes to excuse Vigilius by his act of confirming and approving the fift Councell and the decree thereof for condemning the Three Chapters It appeareth saith hee a An. 554. nu 7. that Vigilius to the end he might take away the schisme and unite the Easterne Churches to the Catholike communion quintam Synodum authoritate Apostolica comprobavit did approve the fift Synod by his Apostolicall authoritie Againe b An. 553. nu 235. when Vigilius saw that the Easterne Church would be rent from the West unlesse he consented to the fift Synod eam probavit he approved it Again c Ibid. nu 236. Pelagius thought it sit as Vigilius had thought before that the fift Synod wherein the three Chapters were condemned should bee approved and again d An. 556. nu 1. Cognitum fuit it was publikely known that Vigilius had approved the fift Synod and condemned the three Chapters The like is affirmed by Bellarmine e Lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 5. § Coacta Vigilius confirmed the fift Synod per libellum by a booke or writing Binius is so resolute herein that hee saith f Not in Conc. 5. § Praestitit A Vigilio quintam Synodum confirmatam et approbatam esse nemo dubitat none doubteth but that Vigilius confirmed and approved the fift Councell Now if Vigilius approved the fift Councell and condemned the Three Chapters it seemes that all which wee have said of his contradicting the fift Synod and of his defending those Three Chapters is of no force and that by his assent to the Synod he is a good Catholike This is the Exception the validity whereof we are now to examine 2. For the clearing of which whole matter it must bee remembred that all which hitherto wee have spoken of Vigilius hath reference to his Apostolicall decree published in defence of those Three Chapters that is to Vigilius being such as that decree doth shew and demonstrate him to have beene even a pertinacious oppugner of the faith and a condemned heretike by the judiciall sentence of the fift Councell but now Baronius drawes us to a further examination of the cariage of Vigilius in this whole businesse and how hee behaved himselfe from the first publishing of the Emperours Edict which was in the twentieth g Bar. an 546. nu 8. yeare of Iustinian unto the death of Vigilius which was as Baronius accounteth h An. 555. nu 1. in the 29 of Iustinian and second yeare after the fift Councell was ended but as Victor who then lived accounteth i In Chron. an 17. post Coss Basil in the 31 of Iustinian and fourth yeare after the Synod And for the more cleare view of his cariage wee must observe foure severall periods of time wherein Vigilius during those nine or tenne yeares gave divers severall judgements and made three or foure eminent changes in this cause of faith The first from the promulgation of the Emperours Edict while he remained at Rome and was absent from the Emperor The second after he came to Constantinople and to the Emperours presence but before the fift Synod was begun The third in the time of the fift Synod and about a yeare after the end and dissolution thereof The fourth from thence that is from the yeare after the Synod unto his death 3. At the first k Ipso exordio asserâ—ae ab Imperatore sententiae Bar. an 546 nu 38. et 39. publishing of the Edict many of the Westerne Churches impugnabant Edictum did oppose themselves to it and as Baronius saith insurrexere made an insurrection against it and
can except against our Negative Argument which will not more forcibly refute many of the Cardinals disputes unlesse perhaps as Gretzer m Gretz Apol. pro Bar. ca. 1. § Respondet answers in defence of Baronius in another cause that the old Logick rule Ex puris negativis nihil sequi holds only in Syllogismes but not in Enthymems for which subtilty I doubt not but the very Sophisters in our Vniversities will soundly deride him so in this they will say which with as good warrant and reason they may that an agument à testimonio negativè holds onely in the Cardinals Annals or when somewhat is to be proved for the Pope or his cause but it never holds when ought makes against the Pope and the Cardinall or makes for the Protestants and their cause 23. But if Anastasius in this narration be fabulous what shall wee say of Aimonius and al those other Writers who mention this banishment of Vigilius as well as doth Anastasius What else can bee said then that which Ierome n Hier. Apol. â— adver Ruff. pa. 223. saith of divers of the ancient Writers Before that Southerne Devill Arius arose at Alexandria innocenter quaedam minus cautè loquuti sunt the ancients spake certaine things in simplicitie and not so warily which cannot abide the touch nor avoide the reprehension of perverse men Or that which Saint Austen o Aug. lib. 3. de doct Christ ca. 33. observes in himselfe and Tyconius Non erat expertus hanc haeresin Tyconius had not to deale with this heresie of the Pelagians as I have said It hath made us multò vigilantiores diligentioresque much more diligent and vigilant in scanning of this point than Tyconius was who had no enemy to stir up his diligence Right so it fals out betwixt those Writers and us of this age Aimonius Otho Platina and the rest found the banishment of Vigilius and much like stuffe as it is historied in Anastasius they in simplicitie and harmelesse innocency tooke it upon his credit The question about the Popes Cathedrall Infallibility about Vigilius hereticall Constitution and such like controversies were not moved in their dayes and therefore they spake of these things innocenter minùs cautè as Ierome saith of the Fathers and because they were not distrustfull of Anastasius they writ not so warily of these matters as others whose industry by the manifold frauds of Baronius as of another Arius hath beene whetted and they compelled to fift the truth more narrowly than they wanting opposites and oppugners did It fell out to them as it did to Ierome himselfe Ruffinus had set p Vnus sub nomine Pamphili à te editus est et eadem quae sub Pamphili nomine à te ficta sunt Hier. Apol. 2. Cont. Ruff. pa. 226. out a book in defence of Origen under the name of Pamphilus the Martyr p Vnus sub nomine Pamphili à te editus est et eadem quae sub Pamphili nomine à te ficta sunt Hier. Apol. 2. Cont. Ruff. pa. 226. Ierome at the first and for divers yeares beleeved q Inter caeâ—eros translatores posui et hunc librum à Pamphilo editum ita putans esse ut à te et tuis discipulis fuerat divulgatum Ibid. the booke to have beene indeed written by Pamphilus as Ruffinus said it was Credidi r Hier. Apol. 3. contra Ruff. pa. 238. Christiano Credidi Monacho I never dreamed that such an horrible wickednesse as to forge writings and cal them by the name of Martyrs could come from a Christian from a Monke from Ruffinus but when the question about Origen was once set on foote Ierome then sought Å¿ Hier. locis citat out every corner every Copie every Library that hee could come to and so discovered the whole forgery The very like hapned to Otho Platina and the rest they found this fabulous narration of the banishment of Vigilius and the consequents upon it in the booke of Anastasius the Writer of the Popes lives of the Pontificall the keeper of the Popes Library a man of great name and note for learning one in high favour with the Popes of his time they never suspected or dreamed that such a man a Christian a Monke that Anastasius would deale so perfidiously and record such horrible untruths But now the question about Anastasius credit and the cause of Vigilius which was not moved in their dayes being sifted and come to the skanning the whole forgery and falshood of Anastasius is made evident to the world both in this and in a number the like narrations Anastasius is not the man the world tooke him for his writings are full of lyes and fictions Not the Legendaur more fabulous than Anastasius hee for a long time was the Master of the Popes Mint by his meanes the royall stampe of many golden Fathers yea of some Councels also and infinite historicall narrations was set upon Brasse Lead and most base metals and then being brought like so many Gibeonites in old Coates and mouldy coverings Anastasius gave them an high place and honourable entertainment in the Popes Librarie and with them ever since hath the Church of God beene pestered they past for currant among men delighted in darknesse and errours such as had no need to bring them to the touch but the light hath now manifested them and made both them and their author to be detested 24. You see now the weaknesse nay the nullity of the Cardinalls reason even of his Achilles drawne from the Emperours fact in restoring or freeing him from exile which he would never have done unlesse he had consented to the Synod For seeing we have proved that Vigilius was not at all banished it clearly thence ensueth that neither Narses entreated to have him freed from exile neither did the Emperour upon that entreaty free him from exile neither did Vigilius consent to the Synod after his exile and all the other consequents which upon this foundation of Vigilius his exile the Cardinall builds like so many Castles in the ayre they all of themselves doe now fall to the ground and which I specially observe it hence followeth that Vigilius did never after the end of the fift Councell consent unto it or to the condemning of the Three Chapters either by his Pontificall decree or by his personall profession for the Cardinall assures us and delivers it as a truth which of necessity t Necesse est affirmare Bar. an 554. nu 4. must bee granted that his consent whether personall or pontificall was at no other time but when he was loosed out of banishment 25. Now at that time it neither was nor could be for there was never any such time nor was hee at all banished and therefore upon the Cardinals owne words we are assured that Vigilius after the end of the Synod never revoked his Constitution published in defence of the Three Chapters never after that time
ibid Synodus celebretur Ibid. from the Councel and hold another Councell by themselves The glorious Iudges proposed a most equall and fitting meanes to have the matter peaceably debated and the whole Synod brought to unity But when out-cryes i Suggerentur Imperatori clamores isti c. Act. eadem 5. pa. 94. a. and tumult prevailed above reason the Iudges complained of those discords to the Emperour and Imperator k Ibid. praecepit the Emperour commanded them to follow the direction of the Iudges which they did and so with one accord consented on the Definition of faith The Emperour at the earnest entreaty of Bassianus commanded l Festinet vestra reverentia causam discutere c. Literae Imper Act. 11. Cōc Chal. pa 116. b. the Synod to examine the whole cause betwixt him and Stephanus to which of them in right the See of Ephesus belonged The Synod would have given sentence for Bassianus Iustitia m Act. eadem pa. 118. b. Bassianum vocat Equity and right doth call for Bassianus to bee the Bishop of that place The glorious Iudges weighing the cause more circumspectly thought that neither of them both could in right be Bishop The whole Synod being directed by them altered their opinion and said n Ibid. This is a just sentence this is the very judgment of God When there was a difference in the Synod about the dignity of Constantinople the greater part o Haec omnes dicimus Act. 16. pa. 137. a. holding one way and the Popes Legates the contrary p Contradictio nostra his gestis inhaereat Ibid. the glorious Iudges judicially q Quod interloquuti sumus tota Synodus approbavit dixerunt Iudices Jb. sentenced which was to stand for the Iudgement of the Synod and the whole Councell in their synodall letter consented r Confirma vimus regulam 150. patrum c. Relatio Synodi ad Leonem post Conc. Chal. pa. 140. a. therunto So many so manifest evidences there are of the Imperiall Presidency in that holy Councell not any of all those Catholikes once repining at or contradicting the same 15. For the fift that it was ordered by the Imperiall authoritie may appeare in that both the Emperor was sometimes by ſ Cū Iustinianus Synodo interesset Zonar Ann. to 3. in Justin himselfe sometimes by his glorious t Coll. 1. Conc. 5. et Coll. 7. Iudges present in the Synod and specially in that hee tooke order that liberty u Maximè cum pijssimus Imperator et nos ipsi licentiam dedimus unicuique suam voluntatem facere manifestā sic dixit Synodus Coll. 2. pa. 524. b. and synodall freedome should be observed therein yea as the whole Synod testifieth hee did x Coll. 7. p. 581. omnia all things which preserve the peace of the Church and unity in the Catholike faith The sixt Councell is abundant with proofes of this presidency Macarius said O our most holy Lord iubeto y Conc. 6. Act. 1 pa. 8. b. libro proferri command that the bookes bee produced and the Emperour answered Iubemus we command them to be brought wee command them to be read and it was done The Popes Legates say Petimus z Act. 3. Conc. 6. pa. 11. a. serenitatem vestram we entreate your highnesse that this booke may be examined the Emperour answered Quod postulatum est proveniat let that be done which you request Againe O most holy Lord we intreat a Ibid. pa. 11. b. that the letters of Pope Agatho may be read the Emperours answer was what you have desired let it be done and they were read Macarius having collected certaine testimonies out of the Fathers for his opinion intreated the Emperour Iubeto b Act. 5. pa. 25. b relegi that he would command them to be read his answere was let them bee read in order and so they were The Popes Legates said petimus wee intreate c Act. 6. pa. 27. a your highnesse that the authentike Copies may bee produced out of the Registrie his answer was fiat let it de done The whole Synod intreated If it d Act. 8. pa. 30. a please your piety let Theodorus and the rest stand in the midst and there make answer for themselves his answer was What the Synod hath moved fiat let it be done George Bish of Constantinople said O our Lord crowned by God command * Ibid. that the name of Poper Vitalianus may bee set in the Dipticks his answer was quod postulatum est fiat let that be done which he hath requested The Emperour commanded e Act. eadem 8. pa. 30. b. the books of Macarius to be read the whole Synod answered Quod jussum est what your highnesse hath commanded shall be performed After the authenticall letters of Sergius Pope Honorius had been read in the Synod the glorious Iudges called f Act. 13. pa 67. a.b. for the like authenticall writings of Pirrhus Paulus Peter and Cyrus to bee produced and read the whole Councell answered g Sanctum Concilium dixit Hoc fieri superstuum judicavimus c. Ibid. pa. 67. b. that it was superfluous seeing their heresie was manifest to all the Iudges replied omnino h Ibid. necessarium existit this is necessary that they be convicted out of their owne writings and then their writings were produced I omit the rest whereof every Action of that Synod is ful and by those Acts the Presidency in Councels doth so clearly belōg to Emperors and that also by the acknowledgment i Praesidente eodem pijssimo Imperatore Constantino Act. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11. of that whole generall Councell that Albertus Pighius being unwilling to yeeld to this truth hath purposely writ k Act. Pigh lib. de Actis 6. et 7. Synodiquae circumferuntur quod parengrapha sint et minimè germana a most railing and reviling Treatise against this holy generall Synod condemning both this Councell and these Acts as unlawfull for this among other reasons because the Emperour with his Iudges plena l Lib. eodem § At Concilio illi authoritate Praesidet is President with full authority in the same hee doth all he proposeth hee questioneth he commandeth hee examineth he judgeth he decreeth And yet in all these hee doth nothing but what belongs essentially to his Imperiall authority nothing but what Constantine Theodosius Martian and Iustinian had done before him and done it with the approbation and applause of the whole Church and of all the Catholike Bishops in those holy generall Councels and hee performed this with such uprightnesse and equality that hee professed necessitatem m Sacra Imp. Constantini Pogon ante 6. Conc. pa. 6. b. nullatenus inferre volumus wee will inforce no man but leave him at his owne freedome in sentencing the causes proposed and aequalitatam n Ibid. utriusque partis
conservabimus we will bee equall and indifferent Iudges betwixt both parties 16. In the second Nicene though by the fraud of Anastasius there be not many yet are there some prints remaining of this Imperiall Presidencie We have received say the Emperours o Conc. Nic. 2. a Act. 1. pa. 300. letters from Hadrian Bish of Rome sent by his Legates qui et nobiscum in Concilio sedent who also sit with us in the Synod Those letters jubemus publicè legi we command to be publikely read according to the use in Councels and we command all you to marke them with decent silence After that you shall reade two quaternions also sent from the Bishops in the East and the whole Synod obeyed the Imperiall commands Pope Hadrian himselfe was not ignorant of this right in the Emperours when sending his Pontificall and Cathedrall judgement concerning the cause of Images hee said thus unto them We p Epist Hadr. Papae ad Imp. lecta in Con. Nic. 2. Act. 2. in sine Epist offer these things to your highnesse with all humility that they may bee diligently examined for we have but perfunctoriè that is for fashioÌ„ and not exactly gathered these testimonies and we have delivered them to your Imperiall Highnesse to be read intreating and beseeching your mansuetude yea and as if I were lying q Et veluti praesentes genibus ad voluti et corâ vestigia pedum volutando Ibid. at your feete I pray and adjure you that you will command holy Images to bee restored Thus hee When the Pope cals the Emperours his r Dominis pijssimis Constantino et Irene Hadrianus servus servorum Dei Inscript Ep. Haar Lords and submits both his owne person to their feet and his judiciall sentence to such tryall as they shall thinke fit doth not this import an higher Presidency in the Emperour than either himselfe or his Legates had in the Synod Nay it is further to be remembred which will remaine as an eternal blot of that Synod that Irene the Empresse not contenting her selfe with the Imperiall which was her owne rightfull authority intruded her selfe into the Episcopall also she forsooth would be a Å¿ Synodus illa Nicena mulierem InstitutriceÌ„ sive Doctricem habuisse perhibetur quod non solum divina legis documentis sed ipsius naturae lege inhibetur Car. magni l ber dict Capitulare de non adorand Jmag. lib. 3. ca. 13. Aliud est matremfamilias domesticos erudire aliud Antistitibus sine omni Ecclesiastico ordine vel publicae Synodo docentem interesse Jbid. Doctrix in the Councell she present among the Bishops to teach the whole Councell what they should define in causes of faith Perversas Constitutiones tradere shee tooke upon her to give Constitutions and those impious also unto them Those Constitutions backed with her sword and authority the Bishops of the Councell had not the hearts and courage to withstand All which is testified in the Libri Carolini which in part were written t Quod oâ—us aggressi sumus cum coÌ„hibeÌ„tia Sacerdotum non arrogantiae supercilio sed zelo Dei et veritatis studio Carol mag praesatio et Cap. ultimum illius libri fuisse Caroli agnoscit Had. in sua Epist 3. ca. 25. pa. 281. a. and wholly set forth by Charles the great being for the most part composed by the Councell at Frankfourd u Libri Carolini scripti videntur in Concilio FraÌ„cofordiensi Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 8. § Primo quia and approved by them all in that great synod A truth so cleare that Pope Adrian in his reply to those Caroline bookes denyeth not Irene to have done this which had easily and evidently refuted that objectioÌ„ and discredited those Caroline Bookes for ever but hee x Hadr. Epist 3.3 ca 53. defends her fact by the examples of Helena and Pulcheria to which this of Irene is so unlike that for this very cause she is by the whole Councell of Frankford y Lib. Carol. lib. 3. ca. 13. consisting of three hundred Bishops or thereabouts resembled to the tyrannizing and usurping Athalia Lastly when that whole Synod came to the Kingly City for the Imperiall confirmation of their Acts seeing it is expresly testified by Zonaras z Commentaria in regia Praesidentibus Imperatoribus recitarunt quae statim obsignata sunt Zonar to 3. in vita Iren et Const and Paulus Diaconus a Ingressi sunt omnes Episcopi in regiam et praesidentibus Imperatoribus una cum Episcopis lectus est tomus et subscripsit tam Imperator quam mater ejus Paul Diac. histor misc lib. 23. in an 8. Const that the Emperour was President in that assembly of the Bishops why should it not by like reason be thought that both himselfe when hee was present and in his absence the secular Iudges his Deputies held the same Imperial Presidency in the Nicene Synod 17. For that which they call the eighth generall Councell both the Emperours Deputies are called Presidents i Magnificentissimi praesides dixerunt Act. 9. § Lecta and in the sixt seventh eighth and tenth actions it is expresly said Presidentibus Imperatoribus the Emperours being Presidents yea and both of them by their very actions declared their Presidencie The Popes Legate k Repugnantibus Apost sedis legatis utpote quod sententia Rom. Pontisicum condemnati audiri iterum non deberent Bar. an 869. nu 27. would not have permitted Photius and his Bishops to bee heard the Emperours Deputies over-ruled l Advocentur cum Photio Episcopi quoque Photiani quod nisi fiat literam in hac Synodo scribemus nullam Verba Iudic saec in CoÌ„c 8 Act. 4. pa. 883. b. them as was fit in that matter yea they said to the Photian Bishops Imperator m Verba Bahanis in Conc. 8. citata à Nich. Cusan lib. 3. Concor ca. 20. jubet et vult the Emperours will pleasure and command is that you should speake in your owne cause Of the Emperour they intreat liberty to defend themselves Rogamus domine n Conc. 8. Act. 6. verba sunt Metropolitae Caesariensis pa. 886. b. Imperator we beseech you our Lord and Emperour that without interruption we may defend our cause When the bookes of Photius were brought into the Synod and burned in the midst thereof this was done 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 o Act. 8. p. 893. a the Emperour commanding it and many the like 18. Now these eight are all which are accounted by them in the number of generall and approved Councels for the space of more than a thousand years after Christ Of al which seeing it is now cleare that they were both called by Imperiall authoritie and governed by Imperiall Presidencie it hence appeareth that as by the warrant of the Scriptures and example of the ancient Church before Christ so also by the continued practice of the whole Catholike
ipsis liceat adversus Idolum Romanum that they might not so much as whisper against him 38. Verily none of those Iron chaines which were used by Dioscorus in the Ephesine Latrocinie are comparable to these No subscription unto blankes like the swearing to maintaine whatsoever their Romane Dioscorus shall define They who were not chained might have no place in the Synod they who were chained with such bands and specially with such an oath could have no freedome in the Synod they must speake thinke and teach nothing but what the Pope breathes into them Had there beene such wise and worthy Iudges for Presidents of that Councell as there was at Chalcedon could they possibly have endured to see all synodall freedome thus oppressed and banished Nay they would in their zeale to God and his truth have broken and burst in sunder every linke of that chaine And as x Conc. Chalc. act 8. 10. Ibas and Theodoret were not admitted to the Councel of Chalcedon as members thereof till they had openly renounced and anathematized the heresies which they had before embraced So would not those glorious Iudges have permitted any of those Tridentine Bishops to have sit in the Councell till they had openly renounced anathematized and abjured that oath and with it their vassallage to the Pope and all those hereticall doctrines which by their adhering to the Pope and following his faction they had embraced and those are Image-worship Transubstantiation proper Sacrifice Adoration of the Host their Purgatorian fire and the rest of those heresies which since the Romane faction began to prevaile and that was about seven hundred yeares after Christ in the dayes of Gregory the second who as I suppose first of all by synodall judgement decreed the worship of Images they have maintained For seeing since that time not truth not equity but faction prevailed in their Synods and swayed matters in their Church there could be no equall triall of the truth by any of their Synods held since that time But when all the Bishops were freed from those chaines of their oath and slavish bondage to the Pope since the faction whereof he hath beene the leader got the upper hand those glorious Iudges would have permitted nothing to passe for a free synodall sentence but that onely which could have had warrant from the Scriptures those holy Councells and consenting judgement of those Fathers who lived within the six hundred yeares or somewhat more after Christ at what time partiality and faction had not corrupted and blinded their judgement as in the second Nicene and ever since it hath 39. But because such glorious Iudges and their most equall Presidency was wanting nay was banished from their Assembly at Trent scarce any tokens or shadow of freedome could take place therein Not towards Protestants Brentius y Gent. Exam. Conc. Trid. sess 15. nu 3. and divers other learned Divines came to Trent offered z Obsecrant in disputationis arenam descēdere se certamine offerebant ibid. themselves and their faith to triall of disputations Nulla ratione a Ibidem impetrari potuit this could not be obtained by any meanes that they should come to dispute b Neque admissi fuerint ad suae fidei professionē proponendam discutiendam et haud unquam admitti potuerunt ut suam fidei confessionem in synodi publico conventu exhiberent ac multo minus ut dogmata quae in ea continebantur disputatione assererent ibid. Gen. in Exam. lib. 5. nu 4. pa. 317. for the faith c Jbid. pa. 320. Nullus unquam liber aditus Protestantibus the Protestants at no time had any freedone to come to the Councell at Trent Not towards their owne Bishops if they spake or did ought tending to the defence of the truth Cornelius Bishop of Bitons said d Melc Can. lib. 12. loc Theol. ca. 13. §. Extat that Christ offered not in his last supper his owne body and blood this crossed their proper sacrifice of the masse therfore Cornelius for that free true speech à Patribus universis explosus est was hissed out of their Trent Councell by all the Fathers and Divines there present Iacobus Nachiantes e Cypr. Valer. in Marc. 2. Bishop of Clodia Fossa sayd he could not approve that traditions should be held in equal reverence as the Scripture he was for this truth expulsed the Councell Gulielmus f Ibid. Venetus a Dominican Fryer sayd in the Councell that the Councell was above the Pope he was commanded to depart out of the Councell Another of the Bishops g Car. Molin li. de Conc. Trid. nu 22. hapning to touch and that but lightly the pride of the Pope in his titles wished that seeing God is no where in the Scripture called sanctissimus but sanctus the Pope also would be content with the same title of sanctus and not take a more ample name of honour than is given in Scripture unto God The Pope being certified hereof sent for him to come from Trent to Rome and gave him to his Officers to use him hardly h Satalitibus suis de gradu deijciendum duriter tractandum propinavit Ibid. and to bee degraded Petrus Vergerius i Ioh. Sleid. Com. lib. 21. pa. 304. seq Bishop of Iustinianople he who endeavoring k Dum confutādi causa libros adversariorum diligenter excutit attente argumenta considerat captum se victumque sensit Ibid. to refute the Protestant writings and began that booke which hee intituled Against the Apostates of Germany was himselfe overcome by the evidence of that truth specially in the doctrine of Iustification which he oppugned came to the Councell at Trent The Pope having intelligence that he was inclined to Lutheranisme writ to his Legats at Trent Ne locum ei tribuant in consessu That they should not admit him into their Councell but command him to depart Ad hunc l Ibid. plura de eo lege apud Cypr. Valer. in Marcel 2. modum eliminatus by this meanes was the Bishop excluded from their free Synod and if Iohannes Casus the Popes Legate to the Venetians and Archbishop of Beneventum who writ a m Nec puduit eum scelus omnium longe turpissimum celebrare laudibus Ioh. Sleid. loc citat booke in the praise of one of the most detestable and damnable sinnes could have prevailed to have entised n him to goe to Rome he had not thence escaped so easily as he did from Trent Could any of these or the like enormous disorders which utterly subvert all synodall freedome have been endured had there beene equall and prudent Presidents for Kings and Emperours in that Councell But the Imperiall presidency being abandoned together with it was all freedome and synodall orders excluded So that I may truly say both of these Tridentine and their other nine Synods m Eum uti Romam peteret modis omnibus
honour of that most religious Emperour The first concernes His knowledge and learning Iustinian not able to reade not know so much as his Alphabet Is there any in the world thinke you so very stupid as to beleeve the Cardinall in this so shamelesse so incredible an untruth Tanti ingenii tantaeque doctrinae fuisse constat saith Platina x In vita Bonifac 2. it is manifest that Iustinian was of so great a wit and so great learning that it is not to bee marveiled if hee reduced the lawes being confused before into order Tritemius y Lib. de script Eccles saith of him He was a man of an excellent wit and hee is deservedly z Lecum inter Ecclesiasticos scriptores merito acquisivit Jbid. reckoned among Ecclesiasticall Writers and hee expresly mentioneth three bookes which hee writ against Eutyches one against the Africane Bishops adding that none may doubt but that besides these hee writ many and very excellent Epist Possevine a Appar Sac. in verbo Iustinianus the Iesuite acknowledgeth him with Tritemius for an Ecclesiasticall Writer besides the reciting of those same books which Tritemius mentioned hee alleageth these words of their Pontificall most worthy to be observed for this purpose Iustinian the Emperour a religious man sent unto the Apostolike See his profession of faith Scriptam chirographo proprio written with his own hand testifying his great love to the Christiā Religion In regard of which his excellēt writings both Pope Agatho * Conc. 6. Act. 4. in Epist Agath and the whole sixt generall Councell with him who lived in the next age to Iustinian reckoneth him in the same ranke not onely of Ecclesiasticall Writers but of venerable Fathers with Saint Cyrill Saint Chrysostome and others whose writings doe give testimony to the truth Liberatus who lived in the dayes of Iustinian and who was no well-willer of the Emperour yet could not but record That he b In Brevia ca. 24. writ a Booke against the Acephali or Eutichean heretikes in defence of the Councell of Chalcedon and that Theodorus seeing him so toyled in writing against heretikes told him Scribendi laborem non eum debere pati That he should not trouble himselfe with writing books but maintaine the faith by publishing Edicts Procopius c Lib. 3. de bell Goth. who was familiarly conversant with Iustinian recites that traiterous perswasion of Arsaces to Artabanus when he excited him to murther the Emperour This said hee you may doe easily and without danger for the Emperour is not mistrustfull and he passeth the time till very late of the night in talking without any watch or guard having none but some old and feeble Bishops about him Christianorum scriptis miro studio revolvendis intentus being marvellously addicted to reade and peruse the writings of Christians Are these thinke you the actions of an illiterate of an Abcedary Emperour And what speake I of these The Pandects the Code the Authentikes the Institutions the whole body of the law proclame the incredible wisedome and rare knowledge of Iustinian All people saith he d Instit Proem are governed by the lawes Tam à nobis promulgatìs quam compositis as well published as composed by us and though he used the learning helpe and industry of other worthy men whose names he hath commended to all posterity and never-dying fame yet when they offred the bookes unto him Et legimus recognovimus saith he * Ibid. wee both read them and examined them which the glosse explaineth saying Nos ipsi legimus We our selves have reade and perused them So that I cannot sufficiently admire this most shamelesse untruth of Baronius in reviling him for an illiterate and not so much as an Abcedarie scholler whose wit learning and prudence hath beene and will for ever bee a mirrour to all ages 4. But Suidas saith the Cardinall e Bar. an 528. nu 2. doth affirme f Jn verbo Iust the same calling Iustinian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and void of all learning For answer whereunto first I would gladly know of the Cardinal how hee can assure us that this is indeed the saying of Suidas specially seeing their owne Iesuite Possevine tels g In appar verbo Suidas us for a certainty that Plaeraque very many things are falsly inserted into Suidas and that à Sciolis Schismaticis by some smatterers or Schismaticks and further that those Plaeraque are such as are repugnant to the Euangelicall truth and Historicall sinceritie How may we bee assured that this concerning Iustinian is not one of those Plaeraque seeing this to be contrary to Historicall sincerity doth by those many and evident proofes which wee before produced fully appeare Againe admitting Suidas for the Author thereof is Suidas thinke you of more or equall authority and credit to their Pontificall which witnesseth expresly that Iustinian writ the holy confession of his faith Chirorgrapho proprio with his owne hand Equall to Tritemius and Possevine or to winke at them to Pope Agatho and the sixt generall Councell who all account Iustinian among the Writers of the Church Who I pray you was this Suidas truly an earnest defender of those impieties which in their second Nicene Synod began to prevaile who in reviling manner doth call h Suid. in verbo Constantimus Constantine Iconomachus a Serpent an Antichrist and the disciple of the Devill and all for his not consenting to the adoration of Images and reliques and to the Invocation of Saints Now how this sort of men were given to lyes and fables the Acts of that Synod doe fully demonstrate Or if you rather desire to have their Iesuites judgement of Suidas hee will tell you first that he was hereticall in teaching i Poss in verbo Suidas the Essence in the Godhead to be generative which their Laterane Councell hath condemned for an heresie Hee will tell you further that this booke is full of errours fables and lyes of which sort are these among many That the world was made of the Poëticall Chaos that it shal continue 1200. thousand yeares that the Sun and Starres are fierie substances fed and perpetuated by terrestriall humours as their nutriment that Paradise is Hortus pensilis a garden hanging in the ayre farre above the earth that Caine was begotten of the Devill which is a lye that the Iewes adored an asses head and every seventh yeare sacrificed a stranger His narration in verbo Nero touching Annas and Caiphas Pilate Peter and Simon Magus wherin multa comminiscitur he forgeth many things His narration in verbo Iulianus which hee calleth in expresse words mendacium flagiciosissimum a most lewd lie His slandering Constantine the great as base of birth and his sonne Crispus as incestuous His commending of Acatius and Acesius two heretikes adding that hee writeth many things contra Historiae venitatem against the Historicall truth His relation in verbo Apolonius where
reason of the Cardinall may take effect themselves and their Romane Church will be farre the greatest loosers how easie will it be to reject and contemne an whole Volume of their Pontificall Edicts why this was made or written by Iohn 12. that by Hildebrand or Boniface 8. the other by Iohn 23. an heretike an Atheist a Devill incarnate as a generall Councell c Johannes 23. inter Christi fideles â—itas ac mores ejus cognoscentes vulgariter dicitur Diabolus incarnatus Conc. Constant sess 11. pa. 1579. testifieth another by Formosus Steven or by one of those whom themselves professe to have beene theeves robbers Wolves Tygers and most savage beasts and Apostaticall Popes as Genebrard d Per annos ferè 150. Pontifices ferè 50. à virtute majorum prorsus defecerunt Apotactici Apostaticivè potius quam Apostolici c. Gen. lib. 4. Chronol ad an 904. calleth threescore of them all worse than the Author of this Imperiall Edict though wee should admit him to have beene such or as bad every way as Baronius describeth him 6. But the truth is the Author of the Edict was no such man as the Cardinall fancieth as it beares the name so it was indeed the worke of Iustinian no childe can have more honour by his father than it by such an Emperour and though Baronius having so often slandered Iustinian to bee utterly rude unlearned one that could not so much as reade nor knew his Alphabet or first elements could not but in good congruity confidently deny Iustinian to bee the Writer or Author of so learned and divine an Edict or as himselfe cals it of so exact a Catechisme yet considering what before was declared both out of Procopius of the Emperours often tossing of bookes among the Bishops out of Liberatus of his great paines taken in writing against heretikes and for defence of the Councell of Chalcedon and out of Platina calling Iustinian a very learned Emperour I cannot thinke but that although Iustinian might use the advise helpe and industry of Mennas Theodorus or some other Bishops in this as in other Edicts concerning Ecclesiasticall affaires yet still the ultima manus the last correction and perfecting of all was the Emperours owne doing the rather because both in his other Edicts that against Anthimus against Origen as also in his letters to this Synod and the rest there is so uniforme a stile so Imperiall and so divine a kinde of writing that the same Genius of Iustinian seemes to breathe in them all 7. But Baronius e An. 546. nu 8 9. tels us that both Liberatus Facundus and Vigilius doe testifie Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea to bee the Author of this Edict Baronius is ever like himselfe that is untrue and fraudulent Not one of these say it first not Liberatus hee indeed affirmes f Jn suo Brevi ar ca. 24. Theodorus and some others to have suggested this unto the Emperour that hee would condemne those Three Chapters by a publike Edict or booke but hee addes withall Rogaverunt eum ut dictaret Libellum they prayed the Emperour that he would dictate or indite the booke against the Three Chapters and the Emperour consented saith Liberatus g Annuit eis Princeps Jbid. unto them hoc se laetus implere promisit and he gladly promised to doe so that is to indite or dictate such an Edict So farre is Liberatus from affirming as Baronius alleageth him Theodorus to bee the Author of this booke or Edict that hee teacheth the quite contrary As for Facundus he h Ea quae scribi fecerunt titulo nominis tui prae notarunt verum nos illa scripta nolumus tua dici Fac. apud Bar. an 546. nu 9. saith indeed the Edict was not written by Iustinian but by the adversaries of the truth but that Theodorus writ it that is the Cardinals addition Facundus saith it not and even in that which hee saith that the Edict is contrary to the Emperours faith Facundus doth so manifestly slander both the Emperour as if hee thought the Three Chapters were not to be condemned and the Edict also as if the condemning of these Three Chapters were contrary to the Catholike faith that there is no credit at all to bee given to him in his report touching the Author who is so untrue in his reports both touching the matter of the Edict and touching the knowne profession and faith of the Emperour 8. The Cardinals Vigilius now remaineth whose words i Inter Epist Vigilij Epist 17. tom 2. Conc. pa. 503. b. are these spoken to Theodorus The booke condemning the Three Chapters by their meanes was read in the Kings Pallace before certaine Greeke Bishops à quibus assentationum favorem tuis vocibus exigebas What if one should here oppose the Cardinall and say tuis vocibus were the Ablative case and that Theodorus had by his words sollicited the other Bishops favorably to consent to the Emperors Edict How will Baronius assure us that they must bee taken in the Dative case as if Theodorus had sollicited them to consent to his words that is as the Cardinall supposeth to the Edict which was penned and written by him or whereof he was the Author Sure against this Baronian construction the words of Liberatus are very pregnant seeing Theodorus as hee sheweth was one who entreated the Emperour to indite or dictate the booke and the Emperour promised so to doe If then Theodorus sollicited the Bishops to consent to the words of the Edict hee certainly urged them by this testimonie of Liberatus to consent not to his owne but to the Emperours words of whose inditing and dictating the Edict was Admit them to bee the Dative how knowes the Cardinall that by tuis vocibus are ment the words of the Edict might not Theodorus signifie to the Bishops his owne great liking of the Emperours Edict and perswade them to the like to say as he said to consent to his words in approving the Imperiall Edict The Card. was too secure negligeÌ„t in relying on these words tuis vocibus which being so ambiguous receive divers those also just exceptions But yet there is a farre worse fault in this proofe that the Epistle whence the Cardinall citeth these words though it beare the name of Vigilius yet is intruth not the Epistle of Vigilius but a very counterfeit and base forgery under his name full of untruths unworthy of any credit at all which besides other proofes hereafter to be alleaged faineth Mennas to be Bishop of Constantinople and to be excommunicated together with Theodorus by Vigilius foure or five yeares after hee was dead which censure was to stand in force till Mennas repented of his contumacie against the Popes Decree and should be reconciled to him This lying and base forgery doth Baronius bring to prove Theodorus and not Iustinian to bee the author of this Imperiall Edict Might not one say here as was said of the Asse
decree of silence either oppugned or such as might bee oppugned it was a non ens a chymera floating in the Cardinals idle fancy Was there no Helleborus at Rome or in Italy to purge the Cardinals braine of this extreme distemper 12. The whole hope consists now in the Cardinals Triarij the three heresies objected to Theodorus that of Origen of Eutyches and of the Aphthardokites And for the two last I must say the same almost as to the former calumnies they are meere fictions of Baronius Theodorus was saith hee p Iustinianus obligatus fuit in eo errore Apthardochitarum ab eis qui ei assistebant haeresis ejus defensoribus At quinam illi Horum Antesignanus fuit Theodorus ille nequis simus c. erat is Euâ—ycheanae blasphemiae propugnator Bar. an 564. nu 6. 7. an Aphthardokite and an Eutychean heretike what Author what witnesse or testimony doth the Cardinall produce to prove so hainous a crime against him truly not one himselfe accusator simul testis is both the accuser and the witnesse But yet hee proves it by some good consequence or reason no nor that neither his proofe is no lesse foolish than his position is false Iustinian saith q Ibid. he was misled into the heresie of the Aphthardokites by some Origenists as Eustathius declareth whereupon we may easily and without calumny affirme that the ring-leader of those who misled the Emperour was Theodorus Bish of Caesarea an Origenist The ground of which to omit that this Eustathius is of no credit being the heresie of Iustinian seeing that to bee a calumnie and slander wee have before r Sup. ca. 20. confirmed this whole collection must needs be like the foundation on which it relyeth slanderous and false to say nothing how alogicall and incoherent a consequent this is from particulars Some Origenists misled Iustinian therefore Theodorus how much rather on the contrary may wee certainly conclude that seeing Iustinian who was directed in causes of faith by Theodorus continued orthodoxall and a most worthy defender of the true faith as before we proved therefore doubtlesse Theodorus himselfe the director of the Emperor was and remained orthodoxall and that of a certaine hee was no Eutychean nor Aphthardokite is evident by his subscribing Å¿ Coll. 8. to the decree of the fift Councell wherein not onely the Councell and decree of Chalcedon condemning Eutyches and in it the heresie of the Aphthardokites is strongly confirmed but Eutyches also by name and all that hold his heresies are anathematized by all the Bishops of that fift Councell and particularly by this Theodorus whom the Cardinall without any testimony or proofe at all slanders to have beene an Eutychean and Apthardokite unto both which heresies he was most opposite All which will be more manifest by considering the first of those three heresies wherein Baronius hath the greatest colour for his saying That Theodorus was an Origenist and a most earnest maintainer of that heresie the Cardinall often and most confidently affirmeth wherein hee hath Liberatus t An. 538. nu 29 the Deacon and Bishop Facundus u An. 546. 8 9. 49. for his Authors 13. First for Facundus he doth not expresly mention Theodorus as an Origenist but yet because Baronius citeth him to say that Theodorus writ the Edict and Facundus calleth the writers of that Edict Origenists let him be admitted for one of the Cardinals witnesses Who I pray you or of what credit thinke you is this Bishop Facundus Truly an enemy to Iustinian an enemy to Theodorus of Caesarea and to all that condemned the Three Chapters a very heretike and enemy to the Catholike truth Witnesse hereof that testimony which their owne Possevine x Poss Appar in verbo Facundus et verbo Secundus giveth of him out of Isidorus He writ twelve bookes in defence of the three Chapters whereby he proveth the condemning of those three Chapters to bee the condemning or banishing of the Apostolike faith and the Councell of Chalcedon Now the defenders of the three Chapters and writers in defence of them to bee condemned anathematized and accursed for heretikes by the fift Councell and after it the 6. 7. and in a word by all both generall Councels and Popes that follow Gregory we have often before declared So that by the consenting judgement of all those generall approved Councels and Popes Facundus being an earnest defender of them and writer in their defence is anathematized and condemned for an heretike And that he continued pertinaciously in this heresie after the sentence and judgement of the generall Councell Baronius doth witnesse who y An. 553. nu 221. tels us and that with a Constat It is certaine and manifest that Facundus was sought for to be punished because hee had written most eloquently in defence of the three Chapters but by lurking in some secret place he escaped Possevine a In Facundo further addeth that Facundus writ a booke against Mutianus in defence of Theodorus of Mopsvestia and that Theodorus of Mopsvestia damnatus fuit ab Ecclesia Catholica ob errores contra fidem was condemned by the Catholike Church for his heresie or errors against the faith Must not he needs bee an heretike that defends a condemned heretike yea defends those very writings and errors of him and Ibas which are condemned for hereticall I confesse saith Facundus b Fac. apud Bar. an 547. nu 38. to your Holinesse that I withdraw my selfe from the communion of the opposites those were the condemners of the three Chapters that is to say in truth Catholikes not because they condemne Theodorus of Mopsvestia but for that in the person of this Theodorus they condemne the Epistle of Ibas as hereticall and by that Epistle condemne the Councell of Chalcedon à qua suscepta est by which that Epistle is approved Thus Facundus so very heretically that Nestorius Eutyches Dioscorus nor any coÌ„demned heretike could wish or say more than Facundus hath done both for their heresies against the Councell of Chalcedon For the impious Epistle of Ibas is wholly hereticall the approving of it is the overthrow of the whole Catholike faith and yet Facundus not onely himselfe defendeth that impious Epistle as orthodoxall and by it defendeth the person and writing of Theodorus of Mopsvestia a condemned heretike but avoucheth the Councell of Chalcedon to approve the same which condemnes it and every part of it even to the lowest pit of hell 14. Here by the way I must in a word put the reader in minde of one or two points which concern Possevine and Baronius in this passage If Facundus be a condemned heretike for writing in defence of the three Chapters what else can Possevine be who praysed those bookes of a condemned heretike for thus he writeth c Loco citato Facundus writ opus grande atque elegans a great and elegant worke containing twelve books fortified by the authorities
supra wee have proved 17. This were enough to oppose to all that Facundus and Liberatus say two defenders of the three Chapters and so professed enemies both to the Catholike truth defined in the fift Councell and to Theodorus of Cesarea who first of all suggested the condemning of them to the Emperour Iustinian But now besides this just exception against the Cardinals witnesses I will adde two cleare and authentike proofes to demonstrate both Liberatus and after him Baronius unjustly and falsly to slander Theodorus of Cesarea for an Origenist The former is his owne subscription to the fift Councell In that Councel among other heretikes Origen is not only expresly by name condēned that in their definitive sentence but an Anathema also denounced against all who doe not condemne and anathematize him these are the words of the Councell m Coll. 8. pa. 587 a. b. If any doe not anathematize Arius Emonius Macedonius Apollinarius Nestorius Eutyches Origen with their impious writings talis anathema sit such an one let him bee accursed To this Synodall decree did all the 165. Bishops in the Councell consent and subscribe the eighth man was this Theodorus of Cesarea who subscribed n Coll. eadem pa. 588. b. in this manner I Theodorus decrevi quae proposita sunt have decreed these things which are proposed and I confesse that the truth is as all those Chapters and doctrines above named of which this against Origen is the eleaventh doe containe when Theodorus himselfe confesseth Origen and his writings to bee condemned accurseth them yea and all who doe not accurse them is it not a vile and unexcusable calumny in Liberatus and in Baronius to revile him as a patron of Origen 18. Perhaps you will say hee was in former time an Origenist but at the time of the fift Councell hee was become a new man Though this were admitted yet cannot Baronius bee excused for calling him after that fift Councell an heretike an Origenist But hee was still the same man both now and before orthodoxall as by the other evidence taken from the Emperours Edict in condemning Origen will appeare when the defenders of Origen both for their number and insolency grew very troublesome in the East specially about Ierusalem Pelagius and Mennas as Liberatus o Loco citato saith at the instigation of some religious Monks intreated the Emperour that Origen and his heresies might be condemned the Emperour thereupon published a very large and religious Edict against Origen which he directed to Mennas and the copy therof he sent also to Vigilius and to other Patriarks after many other things the Emp. thus writeth p Edictum Iustin contra Origenem extat to 2. Con. pa. 482. We desiring to put away all offence from the holy Church to leave it without blemish following the divine Scriptures holy fathers who have cast out and justly anathematized Origen and his impious doctrine have sent this our Epistle unto you wherein we exhorte you that you call an assembly or Synod of all the holy Bishops and Abbots who are now in Constantinople and that you see that all of them doe in writing anathematize Origen and his wicked doctrines and all the Chapters out of him under-written and further that you send the Copy of what you have done in this cause to all other Bishops and Abbots within your Patriarkship that they also may all doe the like Besides this the Emperour yet commands that none be ordained Bishop or chosen into any Monastery unlesse forthwith in a booke they accurse and anathematize as Arius Sabellus Nestorius Eutyches and the rest so also Origen and his impious doctrines Thus writ the Emperour and what in this manner hee commanded Mennas to doe in his Patriarkship the like was Vigilius to doe in the Romane Zoilus in the Alexandrian Euphrenius in the Antiochian That according as the Emperour commanded this was done Liberatus q Dictata est in Originem damnatio quam subscribentes c. Liber ca. 23. is witnesse so that by all the Bishops in the world that then were and by such as were after this to bee ordained Origen with his impious doctrines was to bee condemned and accursed Particularly of the Synod or Bishops at Constantinople Baronius r An. 538. nu 83 confesseth The Emperour admonished Mennas to assemble a Synod by which all these things which he had written against Origen might bee confirmed quod factum fuit which was accordingly done and as Cedrenus ſ Ced in compend Annal. saith their sentence was this We condemne all these errours of Origen omnes qui ita sentiunt sentient and all who do either now or her after shall think as he doth condemning themselves with an anathema if either then they did thinke so or ever hereafter should think the like That Theodorus though he had remained at Cesarea subscribed to this sentence I thinke none can doubt the Emperours command being so strict to all Patriarks But indeed it seemeth that Theodorus was not onely at Constantinople at this time and there subscribed but that hee was one of the chiefe agents with the Emperour to publish this Edict for of him Evagrius t Lib. 4. ca. 37. witnesseth that cum Iustiniano assiduè versabatur he was continually conversant with the Emperour hee was faithfull and especially necessary unto him of him Liberatus u Ca. 24. saith that hee was dilectus familiaris Principum deare and familiar both with the Emperour and Empresse of him x An. 451. nu ◠Baronius testifieth that he was praepotens armiger Iustiniani the Champion of Iustinian for so saith he I may well call him that was used to sit at the Emperours Elbow yea of whom y An. 564. nu 7. the Emperour had conceived so great an opinion that hee thought it the chiefe point of his duty or piety ejus semper inhaerere Vestigijs alwayes to tread in the footsteps of Theodorus Thus Baronius Seeing Theodorus was so neare unto so potent with the Emperour so highly esteemed by him that hee alwayes trode in his steps how could Theodorus bee a patron of Origen when the Emperor himselfe accursed and commanded all others to accurse him Did not Theodorus treade out this path of an anathema unto the Emperour or had he been an Origenist how could the Emperour following him step by step be an enemy to Origen Or to omit many other like consequences seeing the Synod of Constantinople as besides Baronius Liberatus witnesseth that is all the Bishops there present among whom Theodorus being neare and deare unto the Emperour and so continually conversant with him was doubtlesse one and one of the chiefe condemned Origen it is not to bee doubted but that he was one of the first and chiefe Bishops that subscribed in that Synod to the condemnation of him Now this was done in the 12. z Hoc tempore 12. is annus Justin Constantinopoli
yeare after it was published was confirmed by Pope Iohn who thus writeth f Epist 1. Ioh. 2. ad Justin to 2. Conc. pa. 404. et Bar. an 534. nu 15. et seq to the Emperour You for the love of the faith and to remove heresie have published an Edict which because it agreeth with the Apostolike doctrine wee confirme by our authority and againe You have writ and published those things which both the Apostolike doctrine and the venerable authority of the holy Fathers hath decreed nos in omnibus confirmamus and we confirme it in all points This your faith is the true and certaine religion this all the Fathers Bishops of Rome and the Apostolike See hath hitherto inviolably kept this confession whosoever doth contradict hee is an alien from the holy Communion and from the Catholike Church Thus Pope Iohn What can any man in the world now thinke else of Baronius but condemne him for an accursed heretike Hee denyes the Councell of Chalcedon to embrace that profession unum de Trinitate which as the Emperour and Pope witnesse it earnestly embraceth he not onely suspecteth in this place but in plaine termes else-where g Planè comperitur eosdem ipsos Scythiae Monachos Eutycheanos fuisse haereticos Bar. an 519. nu 99. he calleth the Scythian Monks Eutycheans heretikes and oppugners of the Councell of Chalcedon and that for this cause for that both themselves professed and required others to professe Christ to bee unum de sancta Trinitate nor content herewith hee addeth these words the heresie whereof with no niter can bee washt away hee faineth saith Baronius h An. eod nu 102. that these words unus de Trinitate est crucifixus are to bee added for the strengthning and explaning of the Councell of Chalcedon which sentence unus de Trinitate est crucifixus the Legates of the Apostolike Sea prorsus reijciendam esse putarunt thought to bee such as ought utterly to be rejected as being never used by the Fathers in their Synodall sentences latere enim sciebant sub melle venenum for they knew that poison did lye under this hony Now seeing by Iustinians Edict and the Popes confirmation thereof all who either refuse or who will not professe Christ to be unum de sancta Trinitate are accursed and excluded from the Catholike Church and communion Baronius cannot possibly escape that just censure who condemneth that profession as hereticall and as repugnant to the faith of Chalcedon Thus while the Cardinall labours to prove by this the Acts of the fift Councell to bee corrupt hee demonstrates himselfe to bee both untrue hereticall rejected out of the Church and a slanderer of the holy Councell of Chalcedon as favouring the heresie of Nestorius 4. Thirdly whereas hee saith that the Scythian Monkes would inferre verba ista in Synodum Chalcedonensem bring or thrust in those words into the Councell of Chalcedon it is a slander without all colour or ground of truth they saw divers Nestorians obstinate in denying this truth that Christ was unus de sancta Trinitate who pretended for them that these words were not expressed in the Councell of Chalcedon the Monkes and Catholikes most justly replyed that though the expresse words were not there yet the sense of them was decreed in that Councell that this confession was but an expression or explication of that which was truly implicitely and more obscurely decreed at Chalcedon To falsifie the Acts of that Councell or adde one syllable unto it otherwise than by way of explanation or declaration that the Monks and Catholikes whom Baronius calleth Eutycheans never sought to doe as at large appeares by that most learned and orthodoxall booke written by Iohannes Maxentius about this very cause against which booke and the Author thereof the more earnestly Baronius doth oppose himselfe and call them hereticall hee doth not therby one whit disgrace them his tongue and pen is no slander at least not to weighed but the more he still intangles himselfe in the heresie of the Nestorians out of which in that cause none can extricate him as in another Treatise I purpose God willing to demonstrate 5. Fourthly whereas Baronius saith that the Scythian Monkes prevailed not in the dayes of Hormisda quod absque additamento Synodus rectè consisteret because the Synod of Chalcedon was well enough without that addition hee shewes a notable sleight of his hereticall fraud That the Synod is well enough without adding those words as an expresse part of the Synodall decree or as written totidem verbis by the Councell of Chalcedon is most true but nothing to the purpose for neither the Scythian Monks nor any Catholikes did affirme them so to bee or wish them so to bee added for that had beene to say in expresse words wee will have the decree falsified or written in other words than it was by the Councell But that the Synod was well enough without this additament as an explication of it and declaration of the sense of that Councell is most untrue for both Iustinian by his Edict commanded and Pope Iohn by his Apostolike authoritie confirmed that to bee the true meaning both of that Councell and of all the holy Fathers And when a controversie is once moved and on foote whether Christ ought to bee called unus de sancta Trinitate for a man then to deny this or deny it to bee decreed in the Councell of Chalcedon or to deny that it ought to be added as a true explanation of that Councell is to deny the whole Catholike faith and the decrees of the foure first Councels and though one shall say and professe in words as did Hormisda and his Legates that they hold the whole Councell of Chalcedon yet in that they expresly deny this truth which was certainly decreed at Chalcedon their generall profession shall not excuse them but their expresse deniall of this one particular shall demonstrate them both to bee heretikes and expresly to beleeve and hold an heresie repugnant to that Councell which in a generality they professe to hold but indeed and truth doe not Even as the expresse denying of the manhood or Godhead of Christ or resurrection of the dead shall convince one to bee an heretike though hee professe himselfe in a generality to beleeve and hold all that the holy Scriptures doe teach or the Nicene fathers decree If Baronius his words that the Councell is right without that additament bee taken in the former sense they are idle vaine and spoken to no purpose which of the Cardinals deepe wisedome is not to bee imagined If they bee taken as I suppose they are in the later sense they undeniably demonstrate him to bee a Cardinall Nestorian 6. But leaving all the rest of the Cardinals frauds in this passage let us come to that last clause which concernes the corrupting of the Councell of Chalcedon This saith he which in Hormisdaes dayes they could not now in this
3. ad tom 6. Act. Conc. Eph. p. 907 which Theodoret made to the Nestorians at Chalcedon during the time of that Ephesine Councell of which Peltanus sayth Theodoret is caryed insano impitu with a furious rage against Cyrill and the other Orthodoxall Bishops of the holy Councell comparing them to Serpents Basiliskes murderers and the like Neither doth he onely vomit out his choler against them but he plainly girded at the Emperour also Did he accuse none when he uttered all this Nay he d Theod. loc cit affirmes Catholikes which hold Christ God and man to be one person and so to be passible to be worse than Heathens The Heathens sayth he taught the Heaven the Sun and the Starres to be impassible and shall wee beleeve the onely begotten Son of God to be passible and such as may dye Absit Salvator ne sic simus Apostatae farre be this from us O Saviour let us not be such Apostates as to teach this let us not suspect that our Saviour could suffer Let any man now judge whether it be not a shamelesse untruth which those Epistles avouch that Theodoret was not reproved for this doctrine no not lightly reproved in all those 26. yeares whereas both then and ever since the whole Catholike Church hath accursed his impiety and heresie which he so insolently then preached And omitting infinite like proofes of the falshood of that Epistle the next yeare after the Ephesine Councell there was a Synod e Tom. 5. Act. Eph. Conc. ca. 5. pa. 831. pa. 927. held at Antioch where Iohn and divers other Bishops concluded the full union with Cyrill wherein they all condemne anathematize the heresies of Nestorius which their profession of faith and this condemning of the Nestorian heresie Iohn sent both to Cyrill to Pope Sixtus and to Maximianus Bishop of Constantinople Now seeing Theodoret not onely in former time had beene so violent and furious in defence of that doctrine but then and long after continued in the same minde was not his doctrine reproved nay was it not accursed and anathematized by Iohn Patriarch of Antioch and many other Bishops subject to his Patriarchship What a most vile and shameless untruth then is it which the Impostor makes Theodoret to utter that in the whole space of 25. or 26. yeares he neither accused any nor was accused nor reproved no not lightly reproved either by Iohn or any other but that all and every one of his writings contained the true doctrine of the Church But enough of those Epistles which to be forged and false this which is already sayd may for this time suffice 11. Having now declared how untrue that is which Baronius affirmeth that Theodoret after the union did never embrace the heresies of Nestorius and withall seene how weake and unsound his proofe is in this point I will yet adde one consideration which will further manifest and even demonstrate the same That is taken from the history of Theodoret. Certaine it is that when Theodoret writ that history he was earnestly addicted to Nestorianisme whereof in the very last Chapter f Lib. 5. ca. 40. he gives an eminent proofe commending Theodorus Bishop of Mopsvestia for a worthy teacher of the whole Church and for an oppugner of all heresies adding that whereas he was a Bishop thirty six yeares he never ceased optimam herbam sanctis Christi ovibus suppeditare to feed the flocke of Christ with the best herbes None can doubt but hee who so much extolleth so detestable an heretike and approveth those most damnable heresies which from him Nestorius suckt for the best herbes or doctrines but he must needs be confessed to bee as deepe in Nestorianisme as Nestorius himselfe If now it may appeare that this history was writ by him after the union there can no doubt remaine but that after the union Theodoret favoured Nestorius and all his heresies 12. Baronius knowing this inevitably to follow to decline the whole force of this tels g an 427. nu 28 us that Theodoret writ his history not onely before the union but before the jarre also yea before the time of the holy Councell at Ephesus whereof having given some sleight conjectures in the end he concludes Dicendum est It must be sayd that Theodoret writ this history in the space of those three yeares which were next precedent to the holy Ephesine Councell So he Shall I say the Cardinall was deceived and overseene herein No I will not suspect that such an evident error could creepe into the minde of so exact an Annalist I rather thinke his intent was wilfully and wittingly to deceive others and that therefore hee sayd this to smother that truth touching Theodorets continuance in Nestorianisme which he elsewhere so often denieth Theodoret h Lib. 5. hist Eccl. ca. 36. mentioneth in that his history the translation of the body or reliques of Chrysostome and bringing them to Constantinople The Cardinall was so far from being ignorant hereof that himselfe citeth i Bar. an 438. nu 6. Theodoret with a memorandum He ante omnes above them all mentioneth this translation but in few words That translation as Socrates k Lib. 7. ca. 44. and Marcellinus l In suo Chron. witnesse was when Theodosius was the sixteenth time Consull that is as the Cardinall also accounteth in the yeare 438. Now seeing the union betweene Iohn and Cyrill was made in the yeare 432. it unavoydably followeth that either Theodoret writ not his History till seven yeares at least after the union and how much more I know not whether 8. 10. or 16. after it for it is uncertaine or if hee writ it as the Cardinall divineth before the Ephesine Synod that he writ it prophetically writing those Acts which happened not till eight or nine yeares after his history was written The truth is an orderly and historicall continuation of things done he doth not write but onely to the death of Theodorus Bishop of Mopsvestia where his history for any such continuation of succeeding matters doth end but to shew and testifie that he writ his history after the yeare 438. hee purposely mentioneth some of those acts which fell out in that yeare and hereof further there may be a presumption because Theodoret as Baronius tels m Ecquid mirum si quod dixerat Sozomenus à Theodoreto repetitum inveniatur Bar. in Martyr Rom. Decemb. 23. us followed Sozomen in his commending of Theodorus of Mopsvestia now Sozomens history was continued unto the 17. Consulship of Theodosius as himselfe witnesseth So that if Theodoret as the Cardinall tels us tooke it out of Sózomen and his booke was not published till the yeare 439. sure the Cardinall of all men had reason to think that Theodoret could not before that time otherwise than prophetically in this point write his history It remaineth now seeing Theodoret was an earnest defender of Nestorius at the time when he writ this
in the title Baronius and Binius u Scripta fuit Synodalis Epistola à Dâ—maso ex Conâ—ilio Romano ad Paulinum Antiochenum Bar. an 378. nu 41. itidem Binius loco citat hold it both to be the true undoubted and Synodall Epistle of Pope Damasus and truely sent from him but sent to Paulinus Bishop of Antioch not to any Paulinus Bishop of Thessalonica Applie now this to the Epistle of Theodoret may not it likewise be true and truly written by Theodoret though the title be either false or unpossible If any demand how that errour in Theodoret touching the title of the Epistle might happen Baronius and Binius impute x Locis citatis it to the malice and wilful fraud of Theodoret but I much rather ascribe it to the writer who finding in Theodoret the name of Paulinus without any addition either ignorantly or wickedly inserted the false addition of Thessalonica Would the Cardinall have dealt favourably with the other inscription of Iohn and in stead of it have put Domnus who was then Bishop of Antioch he might have spared his labour in this point 12. In the sixteenth Novell of Iustinian the inscription is to Anthimus Bishop of Constantinople now the date of that Edict is on the thirteenth day of August in the yeare after the Consulship of Bellisarius at which time it is certaine that not Anthimus but Mennas was Bishop for Mennas sate in the generall Councell held that yeare at Constantinople which began on the second of May yea the Emperour himselfe on the sixt of August in the same yeare and Consulship dates another Edict unto Mennas So that undoubtedly there is an errour in the inscription and yet notwithstanding this errour the Edict it selfe is without all doubt Iustinians nor will the Cardinals demonstration hold in this 13. The Epistle of Foelix the fourth y Extat tom 2. Conc. pa. 390. to Sabina was written and dated on the twefth of the Kalends of November at which time a Hac Chronologia mendosa est nam hoc mense Bonifacius jam Pontifex creatus erat ut patet supra Bin. not in eam Epist et Bar. an 530. nu 1. Foelix was dead What may it by the Cardinals demonstration be rejected for a counterfeit No the Cardinall b Facile accidisse potuit ut loco Bonifacij Foeliâ—is nomen fuerit appositum Bar. loco citat will tell you it was indeed the Popes Epistle but of Boniface the successor of Foelix and not as the inscription tels of Pope Foelix facile accidisse potuit it might easily happen that the name of Foelix might bee put in stead of Boniface his next successor Might not the very same and as easily happen in this Epistle of Theodoret that the name of Iohn might be put in the inscription in stead of Domnus his next successor 14. There is an Epistle of Pope Silverius c Epist 1. Sylv. extat tom 2. Conc. pa. 476. wherein he writ an excommunication against Vigilius usurping his See it is dated in some Copies in the yeare of Basilius in others of Bellisarius being Consuls Now in all the time d Temporibus Sylverii nullus convenit Bellis rii consulatus neque Basilii Bar. an 539. 3. idem ait Bin. Not. margin ad eam epistolaÌ„ Silverius was Pope neither was Basilius nor Bellisarius Consuls What then shall the Popes Epistle be rejected as a a forgery a counterfeit No by no meanes The Cardinall e An. 539. nu 1. 4. often mentioneth it honours it for a rare monument and to helpe that errour he tels us the date is added more than should be Might not the like happen to the inscription of Theodorets letter in the Synodall acts Might it not happen that the inscription was onely to the Archbishop of Antioch that the name of Iohn was added more than should be Epiphanius in his Book of heresies sayth f Epiph. haer 46. that Iustine Martyr dyed when Adrian was Emperour a manifest untruth for Iustine Martyr writ an Apology for the Christian faith unto Antoninus g Just Mart. ad Antoninum piuâ—â— defensio the successor of Adrian and he was put to death under Mar. Aurelius and Verus 24. yeares h Nam Hadrianus obiit an 140. Bar. illo an nu 1. Iustinus vero an 165. Bar. illo an nu 1 after the death of Adrian Will the Cardinall have his demonstration to hold here in Epiphanius so that his booke against heresies must be condemned for a counterfeit and none of Epiphanius writing No error irrepsit there slipt an error into Epiphanius for Adrian is written in stead of Antoninus as the Cardinall i â—â—cc citat Notis in Martyr Rom. Apr. 13 tels you but it rather seemes in stead of Aurelius under whom Iustine dyed Had the Cardinall beene any way as indifferent to Theodorets letters hee would likewise have said error irrepsit an error is slipt into the inscription by writing Iohn in stead of his successor Domnus rather than have condemned the writing for a forgery 14. In the twenty third Cause Question 4. Cap. 30. in the ancient title it was cited as a text of Sylvester a manifest errour of Sylvester instead of Sylverius Did the Gregorian Correctors for this false title or name of Sylvester inserted condemne that Canon or Epistle as a counterfeit no but approving the text as true they amended the title and restored it to Sylverius In the very same Chapter it is said that Guillisarius caused Sylverius to bee deposed there was no Guillisarius that ever did that but it was Bellisarius yet for that error of the name which yet remaines * Guillisarius quia est initium capitis non est mutatum Not. Greg. in illud cap. uncorrected is not the Canon or Epistle rejected 15. In that fragment of this Synod which Binius i Post 5. Concil pa. 606. a. out of Tyrius commendeth it is sayd that the fift Synod which decreed the Patriarchall dignity to the Bishop of Ierusalem was held in the time of Vigilius of Rome Eutychius of Constantinople and Paule of Antioch Now that by the Cardinals demonstration was never for it is certaine that there was no Paul Bishop of Antioch in Pope Vigilius his dayes Before this Synod was Ephreem k Ephreem sedere capit an 526. Bar. eo an nu 55 sedet aute â— an 18. Niceph. in Chron. who sate eighteene yeares in whose fourteenth or fifteenth yeare began Vigilius l Vigilius caepit an 440. Bar. eo an nu 9 is est Ephaimi an 15. to be Pope to him succeeded Domnus m Niceph. in Chron. Bar. an 446. nu 68. hee sate 18. yeares in whose n Nam 8. Domni est an 553. quo habitum est concilium hoc 5. seventh or eighth yeare this fift Councell was held and himselfe personally subscribed unto o Collat. 8. pa. 588. a. it and