Memorial was given in against Caecilian but sufficient Evidence could not be produc'd The Judgment of the Seventy Bishops of Numidia was alledg'd for which the Judges had no great respect The Third Day the whole Cause was determined Donatus was condemn'd as being convicted of having re-baptiz'd and laid his Hands upon Bishops who were already Ordain'd And Caecilian was absolv'd by the Sentence of all the Bishops and even by the suffrage of Miltiades who concluded the Decision The Council having thus judg'd the Cause of Caecilian and Donatus endeavour'd to restore Peace among the other Bishops by ordering that in those places where there had been a Bishop of each Party he who had been Ordain'd first should continue Bishop and Care should be taken to give another Bishoprick to the other Letters of Communion were also offer'd to be sent to the Bishops of Majorinus's Party provided they would be reconcil'd At last the Bishops wrote to Constantine inform'd him of their Decision and assur'd him that they had given their Judgment according to Justice and Equity The Acts of this Council were extant in St. Austin's time and they were also produced in the Conference of Carthage but now they are lost We have taken what we have said out of Optatus in Book First and out of St. Austin in his Abridgment of the Conference on the Third Day in Ch. 11. of his Letter 162 now the 43d and of Letter 50. now the 185. Of the COUNCIL of Arles THE Bishops of Majorinus's Party having lost their Cause in the Council of Rome address'd Of Arles 314. themselves to the Emperour and complain'd of the Judgment which was given at Rome alledging that their Judges did not hear all that they had to say The Emperour desiring they might be solemnly Judg'd that so they should have nothing to reply call'd a Call'd 'T is certain that the Emperour call'd this Synod We have in Euseb. B. X. of his Hist. Ch. 5. the Letter which he wrote to Chrestus Bishop of Syracuse wherein he commands him to be present at this Council of Arles he wrote of it likewise to all the other Bishops Some have said that the Donatists appeal'd to a Council after the Decision of Rome but St. Austin who had studied this History exactly says in an infinite number of places that they complained only of the Judgment given at Rome but did not Appeal till after the Decision of the Council of Arles a Council in the Year 314 in the City of Arles This Council was composed of 33 Western Bishops b Compos'd of 33 Western Bishops Baronius thought that this Council consisted of 200 Bishops which he grounded upon a Passage of St. Austin in his Book against the Epistle of Parmenianus Ch. 5. but he misunderstood that Passage for there he does not speak of the Council of Arles but of the Council of Rome which consisted only of 19 Bishops and not of 200 as they are reckon'd in the Text of St. Austin according to the common Editions but this place has been restored in the last Edition by a Manuscript of the Vatican Library and instead of reading as it was Ut ducentos Judices apud quos victi sunt victis litigatoribus credant esse postponendos it is now thus restored ut contra Judices apud quos victi sunt victis litigatoribus credant c. There are but 33 Names at the head of the Council's Letter but of these 33 there are 4 Priests and one Deacon and six Exorcists They endeavour to prove that there was a greater number of Bishops at this Council because Constantine in his Letter to Chrestus and the second Council of Arles testify That there were Bishops in it from all Parts of the World But these 19 Bishops are found to be from all Parts of the West and so it is not necessary to admit a greater number of them to verify what is said by Constantine and the Fathers of the second Council of Arles Ado says that 600 Bishops were present at this Council but this is no-wise probable with some Priests and some Deacons Marinus Bishop of Arles presided there the Legates of Pope Sylvester were present c Marinus Bishop of Arles presided there c. His Name is at the head of the Bishops named at the beginning of the Epistle to St. Sylvester before those of the Pope's Legates but that the Emperour was not there d That the Emperour was not there Some Authors have said that he was but they are mistaken for it appears by the Letter of Constantine written after the Synod that he was not and the Donatists would not have appeal'd to his Judgment if he had been present at the Sentence given by the Synod and approved it The Council heard the Accusations which were form'd against Caecilian but when his Accusers could not prove him guilty of the Crimes whereof they accused him they were rejected or condemned by the Council After this cause was judged the Bishops thought it their Duty since they were assembled to make some Rules concerning the Discipline of the Church and they made 22 Canons In the 1st they ordain That the Feast of Easter should be celebrated on the same Sunday in all the Churches of the World and that the Bishop of Rome should give Notice of the Day to the Churches according to Custom In the 2d they enjoyn Ministers to continue in the Churches where they were ordain'd In the 3d. they excommunicate those who make use of Arms in a time of Peace In the 4th they Ordain That those who run Races in the Cirque shall be separated from the Communion while they follow that employment In the 5th they make the same Regulation for those who act upon the Theatre In the 6th they ordain That Imposition of Hands shall be given to those who having fallen Sick declare That they desire to believe in Jesus Christ. In the 7th they permit the Faithful to enter upon Offices without being deprived of the Communion of the Church but upon Condition that the Bishop of the place where they shall take an Office shall superintend their Conduct and that if they do any thing contrary to the Discipline of the Church they shall be separated from his Communion The 8th determines the famous Question about the re-baptization of Hereticks and ordains concerning the Africans who had always re-baptized them That if any one leave a Heresy and return to the Church he shall be ask'd concerning the Creed and if it be known that he was baptized in the Name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Imposition of Hands only shall be given him that he may receive the Holy Spirit but if he does not acknowledge the Trinity he shall be re-baptized The 9th declares That in Order to their being received into Communion in a Foreign Church they should not any longer carry Letters of Recommendation from the Confessors but Letters of Communion from
which is the 15th of his Learned Dissertations upon St. Leo. and it contains nothing remarkable The last Letter written to Anysius of Thessâ—lonica and other Bishops of Illyricum was for a long time attributed to St. Ambrose tho he speaks there of this Father in the Third Person and was restor'd to Siricius by Holstenius The Bishops to whom he writes had consulted him about the Cause of Bonosus who was accus'd of saying rashly That the Virgin Mary had Children Siricius answers Anysius and those Bishops that the Synod of Capua having ordain'd that the neighbouring Bishops to Bonosus and chiefly those of Macedonia should take cognizance of the Charge that was drawn up against him it did no longer belong to him to judge of this Cause that it belong'd to them to whom this Judgment was committed to give their Sentence and that neither the Accused nor the Accusers could avoid it That the Synod of Capua having chosen them to Judge it the Judgment which they should give was to be lookt upon as the Judgment of the Council That Bonosus having consulted St. Ambrose whether he could be readmitted to his Church he had answer'd him that he must attempt nothing unseasonably but must wait for the Judgment of those to whom the Synod of Capua had given Authority to determine this Affair Yet in the following part of this Letter he does not omit to acquaint them with his thoughts of this Question and to refute the Opinion of Bonosus but he does it as a private Doctor and not as a Judge declaring at the end of this Letter that he waited for their Judgment upon this Affair that he might follow it as his Rule This is a very authentick Testimony of the Reverence which the Ancient Popes had for the Decisions of Councils SABINUS SABINUS Bishop of the Macedonians at Heraclea in Thracia liv'd about the end of the Reign of Theodosius the Great He collected together the Acts of several Councils of the Fourth Century Sabinus which Socrates quotes several times a Quotes several times Socrat. lib. 1. c. 8. and 9. lib. 2. c. 15 17 39. lib. 3. c. 10. 24. tho' he wrote very spitefully against the Church yet his Memoirs had been very useful for clearing up the History of the Councils of that time if they had come to our hands AMBROSE of Alexandria ST Jorom speaks of this Author in his Catalogue of Ecclesiastical Writers after this manner Ambrose of Alexandria the Scholar of Didymus wrote a great Dogmatical Treatise against Ambrose of Alexandria Apollinarius and Commentaries upon Job of which some spoke to me not long ago This Author is still alive which shews that he died not till after the Year 392. And this is all that we have to say of this Author THEOTIMUS THEOTIMUS Bishop of Tomi in Scythia has written according to the Testimony of the same St. Jerom short and sententious Tracts by way of Dialogue according to the ancient manner Theotimus of Writing This Bishop was one of the Defenders of St. Chrysostom He was present at Constantinople when St. Epiphanius came thither and spoke to him briefly in Defence of Origen's Books Socrates produces his Words Ch. 12. of the VIth B. of his History Sozomen commends in Ch. 26. of the VIth B. of his History and mentions some Miracles which he wrought EVAGRIUS of Antioch ST Jerom assures us that Evagrius who was ordain'd in 386 Bishop of Paulinus's Party at Antioch was a Man of a brisk and fervent Spirit that when he was Priest he wrote many Evagrius of Antioch Treatises upon different Subjects which he had read to himself but that they had not yet seen the light and that he had Translated into Latin the Life of St. Anthony written by St. Athanasius This shows that they are to blame who attribute the Translation of this Life to St. Jerom. This Author died in the Year 393. St. AMBROSE Bishop of Milan THe Father of St. Ambrose was Praetorian Praefect of Gaul when this Saint was born which was about the Year 340 a About the Year 340. The date of St. Ambrose's Birth depends upon the date of that Letter which was formerly the 32d and is now the 60th address'd to Severus for there he says That he was 53 Years old and that he wrote in a time of War Tot objecti barbaricis moribus bellorum procellis in medio versamur omnium molestiarum freto This may relate either to the War of Maximus in 387 or to that of Eugenius in 393 if it referrs to the first he was born in 334 if to the second in 340. 'T is hard to say whether it referrs to the one or to the other and was Nurs'd in his Father's Palace b Was Nurs'd in his Father's Palace Paulinus the Author of St. Ambrose's Life says plainly That he was born in his Father's Palace who was then the Praetorian Praefect of Gaul Posito in administratione praefecturae Galliarum Patre ejus Ambrosio natus est Ambrosius qui infans in Area Praetoris in Cunabulis positus c. This plainly enough discovers the place of his Birth and Education for the Dwelling-House and Palace of the Prafect of the Gauls was certainly in Gaul 'T is true that the same Paulinus speaking afterwards of St. Ambrose's Journey to Rome says That he went to his own Country proprium solum and that St. Basil writing to St. Ambrose says He was of the Imperial City But on these Occasions the Place of his Parents abode the Origin of the Family and the common Residence of St. Ambrose was consider'd as the Place of his Country And indeed so it was according to the Roman Laws and the Children born in a Place where their Parents were by chance about their Affairs were esteem'd to be of that Place which was the ordinary Residence of their Fathers and Mothers See L. reâ—â—o ff de captiv L. filios C. de municip L. cives C. de incolis 'T is more difficult to Assign precisely that City of the Gauls where the Praetorian Praefect then resided which is not certainly known Some are of Opinion that it was at Triers which St. Athanasius and Theodoret call the Metropolis of Gaul as Milan was the Metropolis of Italy For the Residence of the Praetorian Praefect of Italy was at Milan Ammian Marcellinus calls the City of Triers the Dwelling-Place of Princes to which we may add the Praises which many Authors have given of this City but this proves nothing In the time of the Tyrant Maximus Evodius the Praetorian Praefect of the Gauls Resided at Triers as appears by the History of the Priscillianists related by Sulpitius Severus But it does not follow from hence that this City was the Ordinary Residence of others because that Maximus a Tyrant who was newly raised to the Empire dwelt at Triers Some have thought that the ordinary Residence of the Praetorian Praefect of the Gauls was at Arles
make profession of playing he shall be depriv'd of Communion but if he forsakes this Custom he may be reconciled at the end of One Year The 80th Ordains That Freed-men whose Patrons are Secular Men shall not be suffer'd to enter into the Clergy The last Canon forbids Women to write to Lay-men in their own Names This Canon is difficult enough Albaspinaeus understands it of Ecclesiastical Letters I should more willingly understand it of Familiar Letters I know very well that there are many Difficulties about the true Sense of many of these Canons I have endeavour'd to explain them in the Extract which I made out of them wherein I follow'd that Sence which appear'd to me most natural and most agreeable to the Genius of the Ancients Those that would inform themselves more fully in this Matter may read the Notes of Albaspinaeus and the great Commentary of Mendoza which contains many things that are no-wise useful for understanding these Canons which are not so difficult when they are read without prejudice to one that understands something of the Ancient Discipline Of the Pretended COUNCIL of Carthage against Caecilian AFter the death of Mensurius Bishop of Carthage several Persons who had a mind to the Bishop-rick Of Carthage 311. of this City assembled the neighbouring Bishops to Ordain a Bishop of Carthage without citing thither the Bishops of Numidia The design of those Persons did not succeed according to their desires for not one of them was chosen Bishop and there was plac'd in the room of Mensurius Caecilian Archdeacon of Carthage who was Ordain'd by Felix Bishop of Aptungis The Bishops of Numidia being offended because they were not call'd to the Ordination of Caecilian and being sollicited by some of his Enemies came to Carthage in the Year 311 to the number of 70. They durst not enter into the Church where Caecilian was but being receiv'd by those who call'd them they cited him to come before them and defend himself This Bishop without being daunted answer'd them boldly If there be any Proofs against me let my Accuser appear and produce them But his Enemies having nothing Personal to object against him accus'd Felix of Aptungis who had Ordain'd him and said that this Bishop having been a Traditor could not give a valid Ordination and consequently Caecilian was not then a Bishop Caecilian either because he mistrusted the innocence of Felix or because he would not enter upon this Controversy made answer to his Enemies That if Felix had not conferr'd upon him Episcopal Orders they might Ordain him a-new as if he had been still a Deacon Purpurius Bishop of Limata a cunning and dextrous Man advis'd those of his Party to make a show of accepting this Proposition and when Caecilian should come to receive Ordination then to put him under Penance instead of laying hands on him to Ordain him Bishop This Advice had been put in execution if Caecilian had not been detain'd by his Friends who would not suffer him to trust himself to the fury of his Enemies Then the Bishops of Numidia condemn'd him tho' absent and Ordain'd Majorinus in his room They alledg'd Three Reasons for the Deposition of Caecilian The First was because he would not appear before the Council The Second because he had been Ordain'd by Traditors The Third because being Archdeacon he had hindred say they the carrying of Victuals to the Confessors of Jesus Christ who were in prison We have only one Article pronounc'd by the 70 Bishops produc'd by St. Austin in his Book against Fulgentius the Donatist It is express'd in these Words by the Bishop who pronounc'd it call'd Marcianus Our Lord has said in the Gospel I am the true Vine and my Father is the Husbandman he will cut off and cast forth every Branch that is in me and beareth not fruit And therefore since it is said That the Branch which beareth not Fruit should be cast forth we may truly say That neither Traditors nor Idolaters nor those who are Schismatically Ordain'd by Traditors can continue in the Church of God unless they be reconciled by Penance after they have acknowledged and bewailed their Sin Wherefore Caecilian being Schismatically Ordain'd by Traditors ought to be Excommunicated After the Bishops had thus pronounc'd severally their Sentences against Caecilian and Ordain'd Majorinus they sent a Circular Letter to all the Bishops of Africa exhorting them to separate themselves from the Communion of Caecilian But notwithstanding this Letter Caecilian continued in Communion with a great part of the Bishops of Africa and with all the other Bishops of the World who declar'd themselves in his favour against the Numidians who made the Schism and were call'd Donatists Thus Caecilian continued in his See notwithstanding the Judgment of this Synod and did not so much as assemble a Council to absolve himself from this Sentence believing himself sufficiently secur'd against the Conspiracy of his Enemies says St. Austin by the Communion of the Roman Church and of all the other Churches beyond the Sea from whom â—e received and to whom he wrote Letters of Communion What we have said of this Council is taken out of Optatus and St. Austin Of the COUNCIL of Rome COnstantine becoming Master of Africk after he had conquered the Tyrant Maxentius wrote Of Rome 313. to Anulinus Proconsul of Africk to maintain the Party of Caecilian and to endeavour to re-establish Peace in the Church of Africk This Wise Magistrate sent for Caecilian and his Adversaries read to them the Emperour's Letter and exhorted them to be reconcil'd to one another But some Days after those of Majorinus's Party presented to him two Memorials one was entitled A Manifesto of Caecilian ' s Crimes presented by Majorinus ' s Party And the other was a Petition wherein they prayed that some Bishops of Gaul might be given them for Judges Those who presented these two Papers to Anulinus earnestly prayed him to send them to the Emperour He did so and the Emperour having regard to their Petition gave them for Judges Miltiades Bishop of Rome together with Rheticius Bishop of Autun Marinus Bishop of Arles and Maternus Bishop of Cologne Miltiades joyn'd to these Four Fifteen Bishops of Italy and these Nineteen Bishops assembled in the City of Rome in the Year 313 and undertook to judge the Cause of Caecilian The first Day that they assembled Majorinus's Party presented to the Council a Memorial of the Crimes whereof they accus'd Caecilian But the Judges having desir'd them to produce their Accusers and Witnesses they introduc'd some who were oblig'd to withdraw immediately because they declar'd that they had nothing to say against Caecilian He for his part accus'd Donatus of having made a Schism at Carthage and urged him to present before the Council the Witnesses and Accusers which he had brought Donatus promised that he would present them and in the mean time was convicted of having re-baptiz'd and re-ordain'd The Second Day a New
They testifie also by a Fourth Letter which precedes these how much they could have wished that the Council which they desired had been held and how necessary it would have been These Letters do not properly belong to the Council of Aquileia but were written some time after in the name of those Bishops which were there assembled and for executing what they had Order'd For which Reason it was thought necessary to mention them here Of the COUNCIL of Saragosa WHile the Bishops of Italy were thus labouring to procure the Peace of the Church of Rome Of Saragosa 381. those of Spain were no less busied in allaying the Commotions which were rais'd upon occasion of Priscillian and his Disciples The Council of Saragosa was assembled upon this account about the Year 381 where having condemned Priscillian and his followers they made some Canons against their Practices The 1st forbids Women to meddle with Teaching and Expounding Articles of Faith The 2d pronounces an Anathema against those who fasted on Sundays from a superstitious or false Principle and against those who entred not into the Churches during Lent but hid themselves in their Houses or in the Fields The 3d. anathematizes those who having receiv'd the Eucharist did not eat it in the Church The 4th forbids any to be absent from the Church from the 15th of December until the Epiphany The 5th forbids Bishops under pain of Excommunication to receive those who are excommunicated by their own Bishops The 6th declares That those of the Clergy must be cast out of the Church who abandon the Ministry out of vanity to turn Monks The 7th declares That it is not lawful for any to take to himself the Title and Name of Doctor but only those to whom it is granted The 8th forbids Virgins to be veiled that are devoted to Jesus Christ except they be Forty Years old 'T is easy to perceive that all these Canons are made against the Priscillianists who affected a singular Way of living Of the COUNCIL of Sida in Pamphylia ST Amphilochius assembled in 383 a Council of 25 Bishops at Sida a City of Pamphylia against Of Sida in Pamphylia 383. the Heresy of the Massalians or the Euchaitae This Council condemned the Errors of these Hereticks and wrote a Synodical Letter to Flavianus Bishop of Antioch It is not now extant Photius had read it and he tells us of it in Volume 52 of his Bibliotheca The same Photius speaks in this place of a Synod held against these Hereticks at Antioch by Flavianus There were present in it Three Bishops and 30 Priests and Deacons of the Church of Antioch There Adelphius a Ring-leader of the Heresy of the Massalians was condemned and they would not receive him tho' he should have abjur'd his Heresy because they were persuaded that he would not do it sincerely these Hereticks making no scruple of renouncing their Doctrine with their mouth Flavianus sent an account to the Osroënians of what pass'd in this Synod Of the COUNCIL of Bourdeaux THIS Council was assembled by the Order of the Emperour Maximus and condemned Instancius a follower of Priscillian and had condemned Priscillian himself if he had not appeal'd to Of Bourdeaux 383. the Emperour See what we have said upon this Subject p. 191. 'T is said That afterwards there was a Council held at Triers where St. Martin was present But this Assembly of Bishops who came to Court to desire the Condemation of the Priscillianists deserves not the Name of a Council See Sulpitius Severus's Account of it in his Dialogues of the Life of St. Martin The same Sulpitius Severus at the end of his Second Dialogue mentions a Council held at Nismes in St. Martin's time but he acquaints us with nothing that pass'd in it Of the COUNCIL of Capua THE Council of Capua was assembled by the Emperour Valentinian in the Year 390 to determine Of Capud 390. the Difference which was between Flavianus and Evagrius the Successor of Paulinus in the See of Antioch In it Theophilus of Alexandria and the Bishops of Egypt were named for Judges of this Cause But Flavianus would not acknowledge them for Judges and told the Emperour boldly who had order'd him to come to Constantinople that he might send him to Alexandria Sir if they accuse my Manners or my Faith I am ready to submit my self to the Judgment of my Accusers themselves but if they would have my Primacy and See I will have no dispute with any body about it neither will I resist those who aspire to this Dignity And therefore give the See of Antioch to whom you please This resolute Answer made the Emperour wonder who sent him back to Antioch to govern his Church But tho' the Synod of Capua had not been assembled but for this Affair yet in it they treated of other things Bonosus a Bishop was informed against there because he had the boldness to affirm that the Virgin Mary had Children by Joseph after the Birth of Jesus Christ. The Council referr'd this Cause to Anysius Bishop of Thessalonica and the other Bishops of Macedonia They forbid him to enter into his Church This Bishop being disgraced by this Judgment consulted St. Ambrose whether it were lawful for him to enter into it This Saint answered him That he ought to do nothing contrary to the Judgment given by the Bishops of Macedonia And they desiring to ratify their Judgment by the Opinion of the Bishop of Rome wrote an account of it to Siricius who answered them That the Council of Capua having referred this Cause it did not belong to him to judge of it but to them to determine it We learn all this from the Letter of Siricius which was formerly attributed to St. Ambóse This Synod treated also of Re-baptization of Re-ordinations and Translations of Bishops as it is observ'd in the 48th Canon of the Code of the Canons of the Church of Africa which is conceiv'd in these Words We have declared what was Ordained in the Council of Capua That it was not lawful to use Re-baptization Re-ordination and the Translation of Bishops This is all we know of this Council Of the COUNCILS of Rome and of Milan against Jovinian SIricius condemned Jovinian and his followers in a Synod of his Clergy and his Condemnation was Of Rome and of Milan against Jovinian 390. confirmed by a Synod of Milan We have the Letters of these Two Synods In the First it is determined That tho' we ought not to despise nor condemn Marriage yet Virgins are more to be honoured The Second contains the Proofs of this truth and in it is shown That the Blessed Virgin lost not her Virginity by bringing forth Jesus Christ into the World Of the COUNCIL of the Novatians held at Sangarus SOcrates mentions in the 21st Ch. of the 5th B. of his History a Council of the Novatians held at Of Sangarus 390. Sangarus about the end of this Century wherein it
the Deacon should look upon himself as the Minister of the Priest as well as of the Bishop The 38th That he may give the Eucharist to the People in the presence of the Priest if necessity enforce it and the Priest be willing The 39th That he shall not sit down but with the Priest's leave The 40th That in a Meeting of Priests he must not speak but when he is ask'd The 41st That he shall not make use of a Surplice but at the time of Oblation The 42d That a Minister who discharges faithfully his Ministry ought to be preferr'd to a higher Dignity The 43d That Christians who suffer for Religion ought to be honoured and their necessities provided for The 44th forbids Clergy-men to suffer the Hair of their Heads or Beards to grow The 45th exhorts them to make known their Vocation by their Modesty in their Apparel and Countenance and forbids them to distinguish themselves by their Habit or their Shooes The 46th forbids them to co-habit with Strange Women The 47th and 48th forbids them to walk in publick Places and appear at Fairs The 49th deprives them of their Rewards who are not present at Vigils The 50th declares That those Ministers should be depriv'd of their Ministery who do not do their Duty or do it negligently The 51st 52d and 53d require all Ministers how able soever they be to earn their living by an honest Trade yet without failing in their Duty The 54th forbids the Advancement of those Ministers higher who envy the Prerogative of others The 55th commands Bishops to excommunicate those who accuse their Brethren unjustly and forbids the admitting of them into the Clergy even tho they should amend The 56th ordains those Ministers to be degraded who are Traytors or Flatterers The 57th obliges Slandering Ministers to make Satisfaction The 58th declares That his Testimony is not to be received without Examination who often goes to Law The 59th That the Bishop ought to reconcile those Ministers that are at difference and that he who will not obey him shall be punished by the Synod The 60th declares That a Minister ought to be remov'd from his Ministry who speaks lascivious words The 61st That those Ministers ought to be reprimanded who Swear by the Creatures and if they continue to do it they must be excommunicated The 62d That the same severity must be us'd to a Minister who sings at Meals The 63d is against those Ecclesiasticks who break a Fast without inevitable necessity The 64th declares That he ought not to be accounted a Catholick who fasts on Sundays The 65th That the Feast of Easter ought to be celebrated on the same day The 66th That an Ecclesiastick who believes that his Bishop has condemned him unjustly may have recourse to the Judgment of the Synod The 67th That seditious Persons Usurers and revengeful Persons ought not to be Ordain'd The 68th That those must not be ordain'd who are in the Rank of Penitents and that if a Bishop has ordain'd any of them through mistake they ought to be deposed but if he knew their condition he shall be deprived of the Power of Ordination The 69th makes a Bishop liable to the same Penalty who shall ordain a Widow or a Woman divorced The 70th enjoins Ecclesiasticks to shun the Society and Feasts of Hereticks and Schismaticks The 71st Ordains That the Name of a Church shall not be given to the Assemblies of Hereticks The 72d That none shall Pray or sing with them The 73d That those shall be Excommunicated who shall Communicate or Pray with them The 74th That the Bishop shall impose Penance upon him that desires it without respect to the Quality of the Person The 75th That negligent Penitents shall be later received The 76th declares That if a Person having desired Penance perceive himself to be seiz'd with a Disease and lose his Understanding before the Priest can come to him Penance shall be granted him upon the Testimony of those who affirm that he desired it and if it be thought that he will quickly die he shall be immediately reconciled and the Eucharist shall be put into his Mouth but yet if he recover his health he shall be put under Penance The 77th That Penitents who fall sick shall receive the Viaticum that 's to say the Eucharist The 78th That those who are thus receiv'd ought not to think themselves absolv'd if they recover their health without Imposition of Hands The 79th That if Penitents die in a Journey or at Sea before the Communion can be given them yet they shall still be commemorated in the Prayers and Oblations The 80th That Imposition of Hands shall be given to Penitents during all the times of Fasting The 81st That Christian Burial shall be given to Penitents The 82d That Penitents ought to use Kneeling even at those times when the Faithful are exempt from it The 83d That the Poor and Aged must be honoured The 84th That the Bishop ought not to hinder any Person to enter into the Church whether he be a Heretick Jew or Pagan until the Mass of the Catechumens begins The 85th That the Catechumens who would be baptized ought to give in their Names and after that be prepar'd for Baptism by abstaining from Wine and Meat and by Imposition of Hands The 86th That Novices or those who are newly baptiz'd ought for some time to abstain from Feasts and Shows and to live in Continence The 87th contains the Sentence of Excommunication against a Catholick who carries his Cause just or unjust before a Judge of another Religion The 88th excommunicates him who forsakes the Assembly of the Church to be present at Shows The 89th casts those out of the Church who practise Sooth-saying or Enchantments and who are addicted to Jewish Superstitions The 90th declares That the Exorcists ought every day to lay Hands on the Possess'd The 91st charges the Possess'd to take care that the Churches be swept The 92d declares That the Exorcists shall feed the Possess'd who continue in the Churches The 93d That Oblations shall not be received from the Brethren that are separated from the Church The 94th That their Presents shall be rejected who oppress the Poor The 95th blames those who refuse to give in Memory of the dead wherewithall to feed the Poor The 96th says That in judging a Cause the Faith and Conduct of the Accuser and Accused must be inquired into The 97th That the Superiour of Nuns ought to be approved by the Bishop The 98th That a Lay-man ought not to teach in the presence of Priests unless they command him The 99th That a Woman how Skilful and Holy soever she be ought not to take upon her to teach in an Assembly The 100th That she ought not to take upon her to baptize The 101st That the young Widows which are weak ought to be maintain'd at the Expence of the Church to which they belong The 102d declares That it is the
in which they Excommunicated Eusebius as an Impostor for making default Sometime after Antoninus died and his Death caused new Troubles in the Churches of Asia In this juncture of time the Clergy of Ephesus and the Bishops of that Province made application to S. Chrysostom and prayed him to come into their Countrey to establish some Order in the Church of Ephesus He came thither in the end of Winter of the Year 401 and assembled a Synod of Seventy Bishops wherein Six Bishops were deposed who were convicted of giving Antoninus Money for their Ordination The Heirs of that Bishop were enjoyned to return them the Money he had received and they Ordained Heraclides a Deacon Bishop of Ephesus What concerned the Church of Ephesus being thus regulated S. Chrysostom returned through Nicomedia where he turned out Gerontius who was formerly S. Ambrose's Deacon but went to the East and was ordained Bishop of Nicomedia He settled in his room Pansophius and going on in his Journey in every place he took from the Novatians and Quartodecimani the Churches which they were in possession of While S. Chrysostom was doing these things in Asia Severinus Bishop of Gabala a famous Preacher to whom at his going away he had committed the care of his Church did all he could to get the applause both of the Nobility and People This begot some jealousie in S. Chrysostom who expelled him out of Constantinople after he returned and this he did by the Sollicitation of a Deacon of his named Serapion But the Empress caused him to come again having reconciled them though with much difficulty This Reconciliation was followed by another quarrel with Theophilus Bishop of Alexandria an old enemy to S. Chrysostom The Historians represent that Bishop as an ambitious Man passionate fierce covetous and cunning who would never yield but compass every thing he undertook who easily provoked Men to be his Enemies and sooner or later would undoe them He was no friend to S. Chrysostom because he was obliged to ordain him against his will but the hatred he bore to him broke out upon the account of three Egyptian Monks Dioscorus Ammonius and Euthymius Sir-named the Long-brethren Theophilus was very angry with them because they reproved his Conduct and received Isidore that was become his enemy He condemned them in a Synod of Alexandria assembled in 399 because they would not subscribe the Condemnation of Origen After this Condemnation he went himself with Souldiers to drive them away with all the Monks that lived under their Rule These poor Monks not knowing whither to go because Theophilus persecuted them every-where came to Constantinople and represented to S. John the Violences of their Bishop beseeching him to have compassion on them S. Chrysostom gave them leave to say their Prayers in a Church he assigned for them but did not admit them to the Communion of the Eucharist He only writ to Theophilus to re-establish them On the contrary Theophilus sent Men to Constantinople who delivered to the Emperor a form of Accusation against these Monks who in their own defence accused their Bishop also S. John Chrysostom gave Theophilus notice of it who answered him fiercely That he ought to have known that by the Canons of the Council of Nice a Bishop is forbidden to judge of Causes that are out of the limits of his own Jurisdiction That he had no right to receive Accusations against him and that if he must be judged the Judgment belong'd to the Bishops of Egypt and not to the Bishop of Constantinople S. Chrysostom having received this Letter exhorted both the one and the other to Peace but neither were disposed towards it The Monks accused by Theophilus and some of their Brethren perswaded of their innocence continually Petition'd the Emperor who yielding to their Supplications at last appointed Judges who after examination of the Accusations against the Long-brethren found them to be Calumnies and so gave Judgment against some of the Monks that were the Authors of them All this happened in the Year 401. In the Year 402 S. Epiphanius Bishop in Cyprus who held with Theophilus because he was a great enemy to Origen came to Constantinople S. Chrysostom invited him to take a lodging in his House but Epiphanius pre-ingaged by Theophilus writing to him gave him this answer That he was so far from lodging in his House he would not so much as enter into it nor joyn in the publick Prayers whilst he was there unless S. Chrysostom first banish'd the Long-brethren and condemn'd Origen S. John having refused to doe it S. Epiphanius designed to go himself into the Apostle's Church on the Lord's-day and there publickly condemn Origen's Books and excommunicate the Long-brethren with their Adherents But as he was going he met with Serapion the Deacon who told him from S. Chrysostom that he undertook things against Order and against the Canons That he had ordained a Deacon out of his own Diocess and celebrated the Eucharist without permission from the Ordinary and that he was about a thing that was neither just nor reasonable and dangerous for himself for he had to doe with a populace which would soon be up and that S. Chrysostom would not answer for what might happen This discourse made Epiphanius withdraw and desist from his enterprise The Long-brethren after this went to him and complained that he condemned them before hearing and without conviction they shewed that they had not dealt so with him having every-where defended both his Works and his Person Epiphanius reflecting upon this Remonstrance and considering what Troubles Theophilus had engaged him in returned towards Cyprus At his going away he told the Bishops I leave you the Town the Palace and the Theater He died before he got to his own Country After the departure of S. Epiphanius S. Chrysostom made a Speech against the Disorders of Women The Empress Eudoxia supposing that it was meant of her complained to the Emperor and urged Theophilus to come to Constantinople This Bishop who waited for an opportunity to destroy S. Chrysostom came immediately about the beginning of the Year 403 and brought with him several Egyptian Bishops Those of Asia that were deposed by S. Chrysostom or were not satisfied with his behaviour repaired likewise to Constantinople Theophilus had his Apartment in one of the Empress's Houses from whence he sent the Accusers of John to the Emperor who commanded that both they and Chrysostom should appear before Theophilus his Synod to be judged there S. Chrysostom denied them to be his Judges affirming That it appertained to the Bishops of his and of the adjacent Provinces and not to Strangers to take cognizance of that matter Notwithstanding this reason which Theophilus himself had alledged to avoid being judged by S. Chrysostom he held a Synod of Six and Thirty Bishops in the Suburbs of Chalcedon to condemn S. Chrysostom One John exhibited Nine and Twenty Articles against him S. Chrysostom was cited to the Synod
appears that he had never seen S. Cyril's Thesaurus because he quotes the Second Book of that Work which was never divided into Books Urban IV. hath alledged it after S. Thomas but upon the Credit of that Author In the Council of Florence S. Cyril's Thesaurus is quoted in general but when it was seasonable to produce this Passage there is nothing said of it All this makes it evident That neither this Passage nor any other like it cited by the same S. Thomas in his Catena upon S. Matthew as being in S. Cyril's Thesaurus which is not found there no more than the former are not nor can be this Father's nor are taken out of his Thesaurus I wonder that F. Labbe should so openly profess himself a Defender of these two supposititious Passages The Style of S. Cyril's Dialogues is not so rough and scholastick as that of the foregoing Book There are Seven of them upon the Trinity and Two upon the Incarnation He proves in these last That Jesus Christ is one only Person made up of the Humane and Divine Nature At the end of this Volume we find some clear Resolutions upon the Mystery of the Incarnation where he Answers the Objections which were propounded to him Photius speaks of this little Book in the One hundred sixty and ninth Volume of his Bibliotheca To this Treatise may be joyned a Discourse of the Orthodox Faith to Theodosius the Treatise addressed to the Empresses the Sermon which is annexed to it which are in the Second Part of this Tome In them he proves That Jesus Christ is God and that all the Properties of the Divine Nature may be attributed to him To prove this he makes use of a great number of Texts of Holy Scripture and the Testimonies of some Fathers These Treatises are also in the Acts of the Council of Ephesus Paschal Homilies are not peculiar to S. Cyril It was the Custom of the Bishops of Alexandria whom the Council of Nice had particularly charged with the care of publishing Easter-day I say It was the Custom to declare it in Alexandria by a solemn Discourse Theophilâ—s S. Cyril's Predecessor had made that Usage very famous and S. Cyril kept it up with a great deal of Splendor so that so long as he was Bishop there passed noâ— a Year but there was a Sermonâ— at the end of which he gave notice of the beginning of Lent and of Easter-day Of the Thirty which he made we have Twenty nine The ordinary subject of these Sermons was the Use and Advantage of Fasting and the way how Christians ought to â—it themselves for the celebration of Festivals In them also he sometimes exhorts the Faithful to joyn Alms-giving and Charity with Fasting He speaks in some of them of double-mindedness In â—…y of them he treats of the Trinity and Incarnation against the Arians and â—â—torians He sometimes speaks also against the Jews and Idolaters These Sermons are flat and tedious they are nothing else almost but a contexture of Texts of Scripture which he mingles with mystical Explications There are also here some other Discourses of this Father which are for the most part against the â—â—ror of Nestorius The First and Second are entirely upon that Subject They were preached at Ephesus The Third is a small Discourse which he made after the Sermon of Paul Bishop of Emesa about the Time that the Oriental and Aegyptian Bishops were reconciled to each other The Fourth and Fifth are two Sermons preached at Ephesus against Nestorius The Sixth is against John Bishop of Antioch The Seventh is a Discourse which he delivered also at Ephesus when he was imprisoned The Eighth is upon the Transfiguration The Ninth upon the Lord's Supper In this he speaks very strongly for the Presence of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist as well as in his Commentary upon S. John's Gospel The Tenth is a Discourse in praise of the Virgin Mary preached at Ephesus The Eleventh upon the Feast of the Purification The Twelfth upon the Feast of Tabernacles The Last is upon the Day of Judgment These Sermons are written in a close Style and more sententious than the former They are full of Points Allusions and Jinglings of Words There is also a short one upon the Incarnation which is extant in Latin only Almost all his Letters concern the History of the Council of Ephesus and the Disputes which S. Cyril had with John Bishop of Antioch and the other Eastern Bishops for which Reason it is that we intend to speak of them when we come to treat of the Council of Ephesus where they are inserted Nevertheless there are Five or Six at the end which relate to other Matters The First is the Letter of Atticus Bishop of Constantinople to S. Cyril wherein he exhorts him to put the Name of S. Chrysostom into the Diptychs among the Bishops that died in the Communion of the Church as he had done by the Example of Alexander Bishop of Antioch S. Cyril returns him answer That he disapproved his Action being contrary to the Decrees of the Council of Nice and that John Bishop of Constantinople having been degraded in his life-time by the Judgment of the Church he could not put him among the Bishops in the Communion of the Church after his Death That what he had done had given great Offence in all the Provinces of Aegypt He takes notice that they were counted but Six viz. Aegypt Augustamnicum Arcadia Thebais Libya and Pentapolis The Third of the Letters of which we are speaking is written to Domnus Bishop of Antioch Athanasius Bishop of a City belonging to the Patriarchate of Antioch although far distant from that City being offended by some of his Clergy who would expel the Stewards out of his Church against his Consent made his Complaint to a Synod held in Constantinople where S. Cyril was But since Athanasius was not subject to the Jurisdiction of the Bishops of that Synod they would not judge of his Cause But S. Cyril wrote in his behalf to Domnus relating to him the Trouble which this Bishop unjustly suffered and desiring him to constitute Judges who might summon the Stewards accused and their Accusers and condemn the Guilty He tells him That the Metropolitan was mistrusted by the Bishop and that the City of which he was Bishop was far from Antioch These Circumstances are remarkable for otherwise the Judgment of it did in the first Place appertain to the Metropolitan or if he were excepted against to the Patriarch In this Example we see 1. The Authority of Patriarchs over their Patriarchate 2. The Antiquity of making such Persons Judges as were near to the Accused and Accusers 3. How exactly the Bishops of one Patriarchate kept themselves within the Bounds of their own Jurisdiction without meddling in other's 4. That this Caution did not hinder them from helping Persons afflicted and persecuted which fled to them but yet only by Intercessions for them
examined He speaks the same things to Hincmarus in his Letters written to him at the same time but more especially blames his Carriage and Administration in many sharp reflexions and concludes telling him That he takes it ill that he makes use of the Pall on such occasions as were not allowable In a third Letter he thanks King Charles the Bald for the satisfaction he had given him in making the Bishops of France unanimously join in the Restoration of those Clerks but could not blame Hincmarus Lastly In his fourth Letter he Congratulates Wulfadus and the other Clerks for their Restoration and Exhorts them to be subject to Hincmarus and tells them That he would allow them a Years time to prosecute that Affair at Rome if they thought fit These four Letters bear Date Dec. 7. 866. These Letters of Pope Nicolas are extant Tom. 8. of the Councils p. 268. and 480. They are also Printed with a Collection of his Epistles Published at Rome 1542. Fol. By what has been said it is evident that the Bishops of France would not bring these Causes The Carriage of the Bishops of France to Rome nor be obliged to appear there themselves to maintain the Justice of their Sentence nor would endure it to be Disanulled or blamed in the least the contrary to which Pope Nicolas pretended to do He required that the Councils which Judged any Causes at the first Hearing should be called by his Authority That both the Accused and the Accusers had liberty of Appealing to Rome before and after their Sentence That all Synods should give him a large and full Account of their Proceedings before they passed Sentence That in case of Appeal the Holy See might put the Condemned into the Places and Condition they were formerly in conditionally and then the Judges should be obliged to come or send their Deputies to Rome to maintain their Judgment where the Cause shall be Examined a-new as if it had never been decided From this time the Bishops of France who were most Learned and best Skilled in the Canons to evade the Pretensions contrary to the Canons which tended directly to the utter ruining of the Episcopal Authority and overthrow of all Church Discipline and that without quarrelling with the H. See Judged all Ecclesiastical Causes that came before them in their Synods and that their Judgment might be of greater Authority they caused the Contending Parties to choose their Judges because according to a Maxim of Law It is not Lawful to Appeal from the Sentence of those Judges whom they had Elected Lastly They caused that Judgment to be Executed and in case the Persons Condemned referred themselves to Rome they would send the Pope their Reasons and require his Confirmation or rather Approbation of their Judgment but tho' often cited never would go to Rome nor send their Deputies with a Commission to act in their Names to call any Matter in Question but left it to the Pope to do as he pleased without opposition And if it so happened that they were obliged eitheir for the good of the Church or for Peace sake or in Obedience to the Will of that Prince to do as the Pope would have them they protested that it was without any Abrogation of their Sentence which was Valid and Just but only to shew Mercy to the faulty Thus they behaved themselves in this Cause Hincmarus first of all caused those Clerks to present their Petition in Writing and to leave it to the Synod of France He then made them choose their Judges by agreement after he had withdrawn from the Tryal After the Judgment was passed he had it executed and confirmed by the Pope but at last Nicolas I. being solicited to it by Wulfadus and being desirous to have that Cause re-examined in a Synod Hincmarus ordered the matter so that not only their Decree was kept in force but was confirmed without any offence to the Pope who had resolved to restore these Clerks or to the Emperor who favoured Wulfadus For he perswaded the Bishops not to deal so rigorously with Wulfadus and his Fellows as in Justice they might and to consent to their Restoration if the Pope desired it This shewed a great deal of complaisance to the Pope in leaving the thing to his dispose in respect to the H. See but it was not what the Pope desired He would have had the Synod which he called to have quite Disanulled what was done at Soissons and himself to be made Judge in that Affair and upon an Appeal both Parties should have come to Rome to Contest about it And for this Reason it was that he would not determine the Matter definitively but satisfied himself to Restore Wulfadus and the Clerks Ordained by Ebbo conditionally Before Nicolas's Letters were brought by Egilo Charles the Bald who had so great a favour for Wulfadus and would have him Ordained Archbishop of Bourges by all means whatsoever sent Wulfadus Ordained Archbishop of Bourges his Son Carolomannus Abbot of S. Medard to have him Ordained and Installed which was done in September by some Bishops who were not very well Skilled in the Laws of the Church which Wulfadus had provided and Carolomannus had scared into it It was Aldo Bishop of Limoges who Consecrated him and some have said that that Bishop in the midst of the Ceremony was taken with a Fever of which he Died soon after Egilo being returned with four Letters from Pope Nicolas in the Year 867 Charles the Bald called a Council at Troyes at which were the Archbishops The Council of Troyes of Reims Tours Rouen Bourdeaux Sens and Bourges with those 14 Bishops who were present at the Council of Soissons the Year before in which some Bishops favouring Wulfadus to please Carolus Calvus would encounter Hincmarus but he defended himself so well that they only resolved to satisfy the Pope to send a Synodical Epistle containing a large Relation of what had passed in the Deposition of Ebbo his pretended Restoration and the Ordinations of Wulfadus and others who had been Consecrated after his Deposition In it they relate how the Children of Lewis the Godâ—y would have deprived him of his Estate and for that end had made use of Ebbo and some other The Letter of the Council of Troyes to the Pope against Ebbo Bishops who having obliged that Prince to confess some forged Crimes had put him in a State of Penance and deprived him of his Authority How afterwards when Lewis the Kind was again restored by the Authority of his Bishops Ebbo had left his See and fled how he was Apprehended and carried to the Emperor by Rothadus Bishop of Soissons and by Ercaraus Bishop of Chalons how he had himself Signed and Approved the Restoration of Lewis the Kind and owned that he was unjustly and contrary to the Canons put to Penance after which manner having acknowledged his fault in Writing at the Council in Thion-ville held 835 in which
as two different Sacraments He speaks of the Eucharist as of a Sacrament wherein the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ is received and which requires great Purity and great Preparation to be worthily received He establishes the matter of this Sacrament but he urges the necessity of mingling Water with the Wine with too much heat He is the firâ—â— that talked largely of Penance and of the Power of the Priesthood to bind and unbind He zealously demonstrates how necessary it is towards Salvation to be within the Church He discourses very advantageously of the Bishop of Rome and looks upon the Bishop of that See to be the Superintendent of the first Church in the World But then he was of Opinion that he ought not to assume any Authority over the rest of the Bishops that were his Brethren or over their Churches That every Bishop was to render to God an account of his own Conduct That the Episcopal Authority is indivisible and that every Bishop has his Portion of it That in case of neoessity all Bishops may assist their Brethren with their Counsels though they are not under their ordinary Jurisdiction That Causes ought to be determined in the respective Provinces where the Accusers and Witnesses are to be found That Councils or Assemblies of Bishops are extremely useful That the Keys were given to the whole Church in general in the Person of St. Peter to denote Unity It may be proved out of his Writings That they used to Offer Sacrifice for the Dead in his time That they were perswaded that the Saints interceded for us and that Sacrifices were Offered in Honour of their Memory That they made use of Holy Water that they had Virgins who made Profession of Virginity and that this condition was mightily honoured amongst the Christians I take no notice of abundance of other points of Discipline and Morality which may be observed in the Abridgment we have made of his Works where the Reader as he peruses them may collect them for himself and indeed they are of great importance to all People The first Edition of St. Cyprian which appear'd a little after the Invention of Printing neither bears the name of the Printer nor of the City where it was Printed It is more Correct and freer from Faults than the following ones The second Edition is that of Spire by Wendelinus in the Year 1471 in Folio It is mighty full of Errors In the Year 1512 Remboldus caused this Author to be Printed at Paris and was the first that divided the Letters into several Books Afterwards Erasmus having review'd and Corrected it Printed it with a Preface and some Annotations in the beginning in 1520 and 1525 for Frobenius It was likewise Printed the very same Year at Colen Afterwards at Paris for Langelier in 1541. At Antwerp in Octavo in the Year 1542. by Crinitus and for Frobenius in 1549. At Lyons for Gryphius in Octavo in 1544 and 1550. At Basil according to Erasmus's Edition in Folio for John Hervagius in 1558. Gravius caused it to be Printed with some Notes at Colen and it was also Printed at Lyons in 1535. 1543 1549 and 1556 in Octavo At Venice in the same Volume in 1547. After these Editions which are none of the most Correct Manutius caused it to be Printed at Rome Corrected by several Manuscripts in 1563 in Folio in a very neat Character and augmented with a fifth Book of Letters Morellus's Edition at Paris in the Year following is larger and more accurately done It was Printed too at Geneva in the Year 1593. with the Notes of Goulartius and Pamelius Pamelius after he had taken pains with Tertullian set himself to Publish a more exact Edition of St. Cyprian's Works He is the first that disposed the Letters according to the Series of Time distributing them as we have done into five Classes but he has not been very exact in distributing those of the same Class in their natural Order He likewise writ St. Cyprian's Life and has made large Observations upon this Author wherein he applys himself more to confirm the Doctrine and Discipline of our Times than to explain the difficulties of his Author Pamelius's St. Cyprian has been Printed twice at Antwerp in 1568 and 1589. And at Paris in 1607 1574 1616 1632 and 1644. These Editions are compared with several ancient Manuscripts and the former Editions In imitation of him Rigaltius after he had Published Tertuillian undertook St. Cyprian and without making the least alteration in the Order observed by Pamelius he only Corrected the Works of this Author upon the different Readings of two Italian Manuscripts which Monsieur de Monchal Archbishop of Tholouse had Copied in the Margin of his St. Cyprian and made some Notes to explain the most difficult places and some Observations to enlighten the Discipline that was in vigour in this Saint's Time Some of these Observations seem to be bold and he endeavours to excuse himself for them in his Preface This Edition was Printed at Paris for Dupuis in 1648. In the Year 1666 Dupuis Reprinted the Works of this Saint as he did those of Tertullian that is to say he added to the Trxt which is conformable to the Edition of Rigaltius the entire Notes and Observations of that Learned Man together with some choice Observations of Pamelius and joyn'd to this Author Minutius Felix Arnobius Firmicus and the Instruction of Commodianus In the Year 1681. Frederic Reinard a Minister in Germany put out St. Cyprian's Letters at Altdorf There is nothing particular in this Edition but the great number of Manuscripts with which it was compared Monsieur Lombert having Translated the Works of St. Cyprian into French and follow'd Pamelius's Method in his Translation has reformed some part of this Method in his Preface and has given us by the assistance of several judicious Men a more accurate order of the Letters and Treatises of St. Cyprian than that of Pamelius He is quoted with great respect by the Bishops of Oxford and Chester in the Oxford Edition of this Father's Works After all two English Bishops not long since put out a new Edition of St. Cyprian which is more correct and exact and larger than all the former The Text is here Printed in a very fine Character Revised upon four new Manuscripts and several different Readings Copied out of other Manuscripts by very able Men. The Margin is all along charged with a very short and clear Summary of all that is contained in the Text. Just under the Text the different reading of the Manuscripts and Editions are set down At the bottom of the Page are placed the Notes some of which are borrowed from Rigaltius and Pamelius and the rest which are new are made by the Bishop of Oxford Most of them are Theological His Tracts precede the Letters in this Edition and are disposed according to the Order wherein they are supposed to have been written The Letters likewise are distributed after a new
obliged to remain Unmarried and several Reasons are alledged for it Priests and Bishops say they are to preach Continence to the People With what Confidence shall they do this if they keep it not themselves They are obliged to offer frequently the Holy Sacrifice to Baptize Consecrate and Administer To do it with the greater Reverence they must be Chast both in Body and Spirit In the Fourth those seem to be excluded out of the Clergy that have born any Secular Offices In the Fifth Canon it is observed That the Church of Rome doth not admit to Sacred Orders those who defiled the Sanctity of their Baptism by any carnal Sin In the Sixth other Bishops are exhorted to follow the Custom of that of Rome because that as there is but One Faith in the Church so there should be but One Discipline It is observed in the Seventh Canon That Priests and Deacons may administer Baptism in the Easter Holy-days in Parishes in the presence of the Bishop in whose Name they administer it at that time but when Necessity obliges them to Baptize at any other time that must be done by the Priest and not by the Deacon The Eighth Canon about the Benediction of the Holy Oyl is very obscure It is probable that all that is said there amounts to no more than That there is no need o◠several Persons to Bless it The Ninth declares That it is not lawful now as it was under the Old Law to Marry a Brother's Wife nor to keep Concubines with a Wife The Tenth forbids those to be ordained Bishops that have exercised Secular Functions though they were Chosen by the People because their Approbation is of force only when they chuse one worthy of that Office The Eleventh Canon speaks very ambiguously concerning a Man's Marrying his Uncle's Wife or an Aunt 's Marrying with the Son of her Husband's Brother The Twelfth appoints That a Bishop should be chosen out of the Clergy The Thirteenth declares That those who go from one Church to another shall be deprived of their Office The Fourteenth contains that Order so often repeated in the Canons That a Clerk deposed by his own Bishop is not to be admitted This Order is defended in very strong Terms and established upon very good Reasons If another Bishop's Clerk is not permitted to do the Functions of his Ministry except he brought his Dimissory Letters how much rather is it forbidden to receive and admit to the Communion a Clerk condemned by his own Bishop This would be to partake of another Man's Sin to offer Injury to a Brother and suspect him without ground to have done Unjustly The Fifteenth Canon confirms and renews the Law of the Council of Nice touching the Ordination of Bishops by the Metropolitan and the Bishops of the Province and forbids Bishops to meddle with those Ordinations that belong not to them The Sixteenth is against the Abuse of those Bishops who had Ordained some Lay-men that had been Excommunicated by their own Bishop The Council of Milevis THis Council was assembled at Milevis a City of Africa the 26th of October 402. It is Council of Milevls 〈◊〉 ccccii one of those the Africans called General that is it was not composed of Bishops only of one Province but of Deputies from all the Provinces of Africa Aurelius Bishop of Carthage presided there The Bishops confirmed at first what had been done in the last Councils of Hippo and Carthage and then made some New Orders about some particular Contests among the African Bishops The First is concerning the Precedency of the Older Bishops Having justified the Equity of following the ancient Order according to the established Custom of Africa it was ordained to prevent the Contests that might happen upon that Subject That they should keep Two Lists which they called Matricula's or Archives of all the Bishops of Numidia the one to be preserved in the City of the chief See that is in Carthage or in that City whose Bishop was Metropolitan by Seniority and the other in the Civil Metropolis that is in Constantina This Order seems to have been made upon the Occasion of that Contest betwixt Victorinus and Xantippus Bishops of the Province of Numidia who both pretended to the Primacy of that Province as appears by St. Augustin's 59th Letter The Second Canon is touching the Accusation formed against Quodvultdeus Bishop of Centuria His Accuser presented himself to the Synod and caused Quodvultdeus to be asked Whether he would have his Cause debated in the Council The Bishop consented at first but the next day he was of another mind and retired The Bishops ordered That he should not be admitted to the Communion of the other Bishops till his Business was decided yet without depriving him of his Bishoprick because they thought it unjust to do it before his Cause was judged The next Order was concerning Maximianus Bishop of Vaga who offered to quit his Bishoprick for the good of the Church as it is observed in St. Augustin's 69th Letter The Council ordained That a Letter should be sent both to him and to his People to oblige him to withdraw and That the People should chuse another The Fourth Canon is likewise to prevent Contests about the Seniority of the Bishops enjoyning the Bishops Ordained in Africa to take Testimonial-Letters of those that Ordained them marking both the Day and the Year of their Ordination The Last Canon forbids any Man to be admitted into the Clergy of one Church who performed the Duty of a Reader in another These Canons are in the Code of the African Church from the Eighty sixth c. to the Ninetieth inclusively Of the Councils held by St. Chrysostom at Constantinople and at Ephesus in the Years 400 and 401. Councils at Constantinople and Ephesus by St. Chrysostom cccc cccci BOth these Councils examined the Accusations brought by Eusebius of Valentinople against Antoninus Bishop of Ephesus The History of them is in the Life of St. Chrysostom pag. 8. of this Volume A Council assembled in the Year 403. in a Suburb of Chalcedon called The Oak in which St. Chrysostom was Condemned THe History of this Synod is likewise in the Life of St. Chrysostom pag. 9. It is taken Council at the Oak against St. Chrysostom cccciii out of Palladius and out of the Abridgment of the Acts of this Council quoted by Photius Cod. 59th of his Bibliotheca The Council of Carthage in the Year 403. UPON the Three and twentieth Day of August in the Year 403. was held at Carthage a Council of Carthage cccciii general Council of Africa wherein the Bishops that had been sent to the Churches beyond the Seas about the Donatists Business having reported what they had found and the Excuses of those Provinces that had sent no Deputies being allowed a Command was laid upon the Catholick Bishops of each City to send a sort of a Summons to the Donatist Bishops of the same
which had been already approved and â—â—â—â—ed by all the Bishopâ— which appeared more numeroâ—s in this Session than any other Several Metropolitans signed it in their own and in the Name of the Bishops of their Province whose Names they set down and that 's the reason that the number of the Bishops of the Council of Châ—lcedâ—â— amounts to so many although if we count the number of Biâ—hops named in this place of whom above One hundred were absent it comes to noâ—more than 470. Then the Bishops began some loud Acclamations again but the Emperor pâ—t 〈◊〉 stop to them by wishing good Success to their Assembly and declaring That whosoever shall celeâ—â—ate any publick Assemblies about Religion c. stir up any troubles by his Disputes shall be thrust out â—f the Imperial Ciâ—y if he be a Lay-man and Deposed if he be a Clergy-man The Matter of Faith being determined in this manner he required the Synod to approve some Regulations which he had made and which he thought more for the honour of the Synod to confirm by the Authority of the Bishops than to make them himself by a Law The first was this That although they were to be had in great esteem who live a Monastick Life yet because some persons under a pretence of embracing Monkery disturb the Church and the Publick Peace it shall be forbidden any Church to build a Monastery in any City without the permission of the Bishop and the 〈◊〉 of the Lâ—nds on which it is built That the Monks should be subject to their Bishop and content themselves with Fasting and Prayer without concerning themselves either with Civil or Ecclesiastical Affaiâ—s unless they are called to it by the Bishop of the City Lastly That Monks should not be allowed to receive Slaves into their Monasteries nor any Persons obliged to the Service of another without the consent of those to whom they belong * This Regulation is wanting in Baronius and Longus The second was to forbid the Clergy to hold farms or be Managers of Civil Affairs yet they were not prohibited to take care of the Revenue of the Church if their Bishop ordered them to do it The third was That it should not be allowed a Clergy-man of one Church to leave it and officiate in another but eâ—ery one shall be obliged to continue in the Church to which he was at first appointed And if any Bishop hereafter shall receive the Clerk of another Bishop he shall be Excommunicated with the Clerk he hath received All the Bishops approved of these Constitutions and gave their Blessing to the Emperor Lastly The Emperor said Thâ—t in respect to S. Euphemia and the Council he did bestow upon the City of Chalcedon the title of a Metropolis nevertheless not encroaching upon the rights of the City of Nicomedia The Bishops having approved it requested That they might have leave to depart home but the Emperor desired them to stay three or four Days longer to compleat Regulations Evagrius says That in the following Session they made other Canons and indeed there are some MSS of Ancient Versions wherein there are some Canons made after the Sixth Session But Liberatus places the Canons in the Fifth Session as they were in the Greek Copies The MS. of the Church of Paris wherein there are some Canons after the Sixth Session may well be thought to have been disordered and the Canons put out of the Natural place for we read at the end of the 14th Action Explicit Actio XIV The 14th Action is ended Incipit XVI The 16th beginneth An evident proof that one Action is omitted which can be no other then the 15th The Contest between Maximus Bishop of Antioch and Juvenal Bishop of Jerusalem is certainly the first which was discussed Octob. 26. It continued not long but was determined by the Act VII Council with the Consent of both parties They left both the Phaenicia's and Arabia to the Bishop of Antioch and the three Palestines to the Bishop of Jerusalem The same Day but at another Session they finally determined the cause of Theodoret as we have already said in the life of that Author Act VIII In another Session on the same Day they entered upon the business of Ibas who had been condemned Act IX in the Council of Ephesus under Dioscorus He pleaded that he was Innocent and as a proof of it he alledged the Judgment given by Photius Bishop of Tyre and Eustathius Bishop of Berytus who were put in Commission by the Emperor to judge of his Cause They read the Judgment of those Bishops by which he was proved to be of Orthodox Sentiments and to be reconciled with his Accusers by those Bishops to have publickly Anathematized Nestorius to satisfie those who had taken Offence at some of his Discourses and also promised to forget what had passed and not to be severe against those who had accused him of Managing the Revenues of the Church by Stewards according to the Custom of the Church of Antioch The next day they went on in the same business They read the Acts of the Synod held at Berytus in which he was accused of several Crimes viz. Theft Simony and Bribery and that he did affirm that he envyed not Jesus Christ the Name of God because he could become one But his Accusers not being able to produce any Witnesses nor any proof to convict him of these things they wrangled some time about his reproving a Clergyman for affirming That our Life is dead But he cleared himself by saying to him that he spoke it as if he understood by our Life the Godhead that it was not true that the Life is dead but if he understood the enlivened Flesh of Jesus Christ it was true They accused him also of speaking against S. Cyril and having cursed him he answered That before he was united with the Eastern Bishops he had rejected his Chapters and had condemned him in which he was not more blame-worthy than the rest of the Eastern Bishops But since the Union he had communicated with him and had never condemned him They produced his Letter to Maris the Persian which proved nothing more In it he condemned S. Cyril's Chapters and praiseth the Writings of Theodorus of Mopsuesta but he approved of the Peace and Union made with S. Cyril after he had explained himself On his behalf he caused a Letter from the Clergy of Edessa to be read attesting that they had never heard him speak any thing like that which they accused him of When they had read these Acts they would have had that which was done against Ibas in the Council of Ephesus under Dioscorus read but the Legats said that it was needless to read any thing of this Council that the Bishop of Rome had declared all that was done in it void except the Ordination of Maximus Bishop of Antioch whom S. Leo had received to his Communion that they ought to Petition the Emperor to
had subjected Valentia Tarentasia Geneva and Grenoble to the Bishop of Vienna and left the other Churches under the Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Arles Caesarius was at Rome when this Canon was made as appears by the ninth Letter dated Novemb. 13th in the Year 502. But let us return to the former Letters The third is a Letter of Complement to Patricius Liberius upon the Election of a Bishop of Aquileia It is dated Octob. 15. in the Year 499 but the Date appears to be added this is the first Letter of the fifth Book of Ennodius and it may be that he compos'd it for this Pope The fourth is not a Letter of Symmachus to Laurentius of Milan as the Title supposes but it is the third part of the Rhetorick of Ennodius of Pavia Any one may be satisfy'd by reading it that it was never a Letter The Letter or Memorial of Caesarius Bishop of Arles contains four Requests which he made to Pope Symmachus In the first he remonstrates to him that among the Gaules the Possessions of the Church were easily alienated from whence it came to pass that the Goods design'd for relieving the Necessities of the Poor were daily diminish'd He prays that this Alienation may be wholly forbidden by the Authority of the Holy See except what shall be thought convenient to be given to the Monasteries He requests in the second place that it may be declar'd also that the Judges and Governours of Provinces cannot be appointed until they have been try'd a long time before 3. He desires that it may be forbidden to marry the Widows who have wore a Religious Habit for a long time and the Virgins who have been for many years in Monasteries 4. He requests that care may be taken to hinder all Canvassing and giving of Bribes for obtaining a Bishoprick The Pope answers these Requests in the following Letter of Novemb. 6th which is the fifth and says That altho the Ecclesiastical Canons have provided for these things which he desires yet it is good to renew them 1st Then he forbids the Alienation of the Possessions of the Church by any Contract and upon any pretence whatsoever but yet he allows some part of them to be given to Clergy-men to Monasteries and to Strangers who are in necessity provided always that they shall only enjoy the Profits of them during their Life 2. He threatens those with the rigor of the Canons who endeavour to promote themselves to the Priesthood by promising to give away the Possessions of the Church 3. He ordains that Lay-men shall observe the Times appointed by the Canons before they be promoted to the Priesthood 4. He declares that he abhors those who ravish Widows or Virgins consecrated to God and that he condemns even those who marry them altho they who are married mean well He ordains that such shall be cast ouâ— of the Communion of the Church and he forbids Widows who have liv'd a long while unmarried and Virgins who have been a considerable time in Monasteries to marry 5. He forbids all Sollicitations and Promises which are made for Promotion to a Bishoprick The sixth Letter of Symmachus is his Apology wherein he vindicates himself from the Crimes charg'd upon him by the Emperor Anastasius In it he writes to this Emperor with great boldness and shews him that he ought not to take in ill part his Answer to the Reproaches spoken against him That if he be consider'd in the quality of Roman Emperor he ought to hear patiently the Messages of the People and even of the Barbarians and if he be consider'd as a Christian Prince he ought to hear the voice of the Bishop of the Apostolick See That for his own part he could not dissemble these Calumnies altho he ought to bear with them and that it was even the Interest of the Emperor to have the falshood of them discover'd that the scandal might be remov'd He taketh the whole City of Rome to witness that he was no Manichean and that he had never warp'd from the Faith he had receiv'd in the Church of Rome since he first left Paganism He accuses the Emperor in his turn of being an Eutychian or at least of favouring the Eutychians and communicating with them He reproves him for despising the Authority of the Holy See and of the Bishop who was Successor to St. Peter He maintains that his Dignity is higher than that of the Emperor Let us compare says he to him the Dignity of a Bishop with that of an Emperor There is as great difference between them as between the things of this Earth whereof the latter has the administration and the things of Heaven whereof the former is the Dispenser O Prince you receive Baptism from the Bishop he gives you the Sacraments you desire of him Prayers you wait for his Blessing and you address your self to him that you may be put under Penance In a word you govern the Affairs of Men and he dispenses the Blessings of Heaven Wherefore the Office of a Bishop is at least equal if not superior to yours After this he proposes That as the Emperor would undoubtedly make him lose his Dignity if he could prove the Articles of Accusation alledg'd against him So he should hazard the loss of his if he could not prove it He admonishes him to remember that he is a Man and that he can no ways avoid the discussion of this Cause before the Tribunal of God That 't is true due respect ought to be paid to Secular Powers but then they ought not to be obey'd when they desire such things as are contrary to the Laws of God in fine That if Obedience is due to Superior Powers it is chiefly due to those that are Spiritual Honour God in us says he and we will honour him in you but if you have no respect for God you cannot claim that priviledge from him whose Laws you despise You say adds he that I have Excommunicated you with the Consent of the Senate In this I have done nothing but follow'd the righteous Example of my Predecessors You say that the Senate has evil entreated you If you think that you are abus'd by exhorting you to separate from Hereticks can it be said that you would have treated us well when you would have forc'd us to joyn with Hereticks You say that what Acacius has done does not at all concern you If it be so trouble your self no more about him joyn no more with his followers If you do not this it is not we that Excommunicate you but your self by joyning your self to one that is Excommunicated He concludes with a smart Remonstrance wherein he exhorts the Emperor to return to the Communion of the Holy See and to separate from the Enemies of the Truth and the Church The seventh Letter is the fourteenth Epistle of the eleventh Book of Ennodius's Letters It may be he wrote it in the Pope's Name The eighth Letter of Symmachus is
Cabals which are us'd for the Election of a Pope contrary to the Order of this Council and that if he who shall discover them had a hand in them he shall not be molested These Canons were read by a Notary and approv'd by the reiterated Acclamations of all the Fathers of the Council Anastasius or the Author of the Pontifical which goes under the Name of Damasus make mention of a second Council of Rome under Symmachus in which they pretend that this Pope was acquitted by 115 Bishops and that Peter of Altinum who was nam'd Visitor was Condemn'd together with Laurentius who had been Symmachus's Competitor But we have no Monument of this Synod neither is it probable that there was such a one since there is no mention made of it in the Synod which we are now about to speak of nor in the Apology of this Synod compos'd by Ennodius wherein he would never have fail'd for the Defence of Symmachus to alledge the first Judgment that was given in his favour The Synod which is now reckon'd the third was call'd by the Authority of King Theodoric in the Year 501 to judge of the Accusations charg'd upon Symmachus The Bishops of Emilia Liguria and of the Country of Venice went to Ravenna and enquir'd of the King for what cause he call'd them together He answer'd them That it had been reported to him that Symmachus was accus'd of many horrible Crimes and that he thought it necessary to examin the matter and determine in a Council whether he was guilty of them or no. The Bishops remonstrated that he who was accus'd should have call'd a Council himself because they were perswaded that the Merit and Primacy of St. Peter and the Decrees of the Holy Councils had appropriated to his See a supereminent Power and that it was never heard that the Bishop of Rome submitted to the Judgment of his Inferiors The King said That the Pope himself had consented to the Calling of a Council and caus'd the Letter to be shown them wherein he signified that he desir'd it This Conference is as it were the first Session of this Synod When the Bishops were come to Rome the Pope came the first time to the Assembly and having testify'd his Obligation to the King for Calling this Synod he demanded in the first place that the Visitor who had been appointed for his Church contrary to Order should withdraw and that all things should be restor'd to him of which he had been depriv'd The Synod found his Demand just but durst not decide any thing without knowing the Will of the Prince Whereupon a Remonstrance was sent to him but he would not look upon it and order'd that Symmachus should first justifie himself before his Patrimony and his Churches were restor'd to him The Synod being assembled a third time in the Chappel of the Palace it was desir'd that the Libel might be receiv'd which contain'd the Articles whereof Symmachus was accus'd but here the Council found two Difficulties The first was That therein it was alledg'd that the Crimes whereof Symmachus was accus'd had been prov'd before the King which could not be since he had order'd them to judge of them The second was That in this Libel it was desir'd that Symmachus should be condemn'd to give up his Slaves that so he might be convicted by their Depositions of of the Crimes wherewith he was charg'd This Proposition appear'd contrary to the Canons of the Civil Laws since Slaves were not permitted to accuse any Man in a Court of Judicature These Difficulties retarded the progress of this Affair but on the other hand the Pope press'd the Decision of it and said That he was set upon as he came by a Multitude who had abus'd him as appear'd by his Wounds and that he should have been kill'd if the King's Officers had not reliev'd him This Session pass'd in confusion without being able to do any thing 'T was resolv'd to go again and wait upon the King and inform him how the matter stood The Deputies at the same time told him That the Pope had declar'd that hitherto he was willing to offer himself to the Judgment of the Synod but at present it was not safe for him to come thither after he had been in so great danger of his Life That the King might do what he pleas'd in this Case but the Synod could not force him to come thither according to the Canons of the Councils The King made Answer That it concern'd the Synod to consider what they had to do for his part he would not interpose in Ecclesiastical Affairs but only show all due respect to the Determinations of the Bishops that he would leave the Bishops at their liberty to decide this Cause or let it alone provided they restor'd Peace to the City of Rome The Bishops having receiv'd his Orders thought that they had nothing more to do but exhort the Romans to Peace And for this end they sent Deputies to the Senate which was against Symmachus and remonstrate to them the dangerous consequences of urging Pope Symmachus to Extremities and exhorted them to re-unite themselves unto him After which they declar'd in a fourth and last Session That Pope Symmachus the Bishop of the Holy Apostolical See against whom many Articles of Accusation had been propos'd should be acquitted and discharg'd from these Accusations in regard of Men for with respect to God the Judgment of them was left to him and that he shall freely perform his Office in all the Churches of his Jurisdiction and that in consequence of the Prince's Declaration they exhorted all the Faithful to return to his Communion and embrace Peace reserving the Judgment of the Justice of this Cause to God As to his Clergy who had separated from him and made a Schism 't is ordain'd That upon their making satisfaction to him he shall pardon them and restore them to their Offices but that those who for the future should dare to Celebrate in any place without communicating with him should be Excommunicated and treated as Schismaticks This is what is contain'd in the Acts of this Council after which follow the Monuments which concern the Council The first is a Letter of Theodoric to the Council written after the second Session dated the ninth of August The second is another Letter to the same Bishops written the 28th of the same Month The third is the Relation of the Council after the third Session when the Pope had declar'd that he would come no more to the Council The fourth is the Answer of Theodoric wherein he exhorts them to determine the Pope's Affair but leaving them at liberty to do in it as they should think fit provided they restor'd Peace to Rome This Letter is dated the last of September The last is a Memorial of Instructions given to him whom the King sent in his Name to the Council The Dates of these Monuments serve to fix the Epocha's of the four
should lay down his Arms he declared him Excommunicated and all his Soldiers which were the greatest part of the Province of Reims if they did not reform and do Penance before the 11th of March. Hincmarus sent this Letter of Excommunication to Remigius Archbishop of Lyons and to the Bishops of his Province and wrote on purpose to Hincmarus Bishop of Laon to require his consent under Hand to this Excommunication but he gave him no Answer to it wherefore he wrote a second time more earnestly to him Then he answered That he would not give his consent to it because he had not answered his desire made to him by Eddo which he ought to have added in that Act. Hincmarus Arch-bishop of Reims replied That Eddo had never spoke to him about it and that he had not any thing to add Nevertheless he desired him to tell him plainly what he would have added promising that he would do it if it were reasonable being always ready to learn of others follow their advice and reform any thing that was amiss In the rest of the Letter he speaks with loftiness to his Nephew and shews that he is greatly displeased with his Disobedience 'T is Dated Aug. 19. On the 5th of May a Clergy-man of Laon called Teutlandus coming to Reims the Archbishop ordered him to bid his Bishop to send his consent immediately to the Excommunication of Caroloman Lastly Hincmarus Bishop of Laon being admonished a 6th time by a Letter from his Metropolitan answered That he wondred he should desire his consent to that Excommunication since he had not taken his Advice in issuing it out He also complains that his Unkle had sent his Summons by the Clergy-men of his own Church and that he had pronounced a Benediction in the Diocess of Laon upon some of the Confederates of Caroloman On the 14th of May Hincmarus Archbishop of Reims cited the Bishop of Laon to a Synod which Hincmarus of Laon cited to a Synod was to be held that he should answer to the complaints and accusations brought against him but he instead of giving a civil answer wrote a Letter full of Invectives and Affronts in which he accuses him of betraying and delivering him up when he was apprehended and of being his Enemy ever since he opposed him in his putting a Bishop into Rothadus's place till he should receive the Popes pleasure about that Affair Nevertheless Adrian wrote two Letters in favour of Caroloman to the King his Father to the Bishops of France and the Lords in which he forbids the last taking Arms against Caroloman and the others to Excommunicate him These Letters bear Adrian's Letter in favour of Caroloman date July 13. but they did Caroloman no serâ—ice as we shall shew anon This Pope wrote also to Hincmarus Archbishop of Reims March 25. to call a Synod for the Reformation of Abuses in his Diocess and under this pretence Hincmarus Archbishop of Reims cited Hincmarus Bishop of Laon in the Name of the Pope and by his Authority to the Synod which was to be holden at Douzi Aug. 5. The Act says July 5. The Council being assembled at Douri King Charles presented a Bill to them containing several The Council of Douzi heads of Accusation against Hincmarus Bishop of Laon the beginning of it is lost In that part which remains he accuses him for Writing to Rome against him at the same time when he acknowledged in France that he had not meddled with any of the Revenues of the Church for going out of his Kingdom into Lotharius's for not coming to him when he had commanded him and for hindering his Servants to come to him for Writing a second time to Rome against him for flying from Attigni after he had Sworn Allegiance to him Lastly for Arming his Servants to hinder the Governor of the Province that he might not apprehend certain suspicious Persons which were at his House to send them to the Council but let them escape When this Bill was read the King desired that since the Bishop of Laon who had been cited by his Metropolitan to appear before the Council did not come they would search what the Canons and Laws decreed concerning those heads of Accusation brought against him and if he came to the Synod that the differences between him and his Metropolitan should be Judged and Determined Hincmarus Archbishop of Reims presented another Petition to the Synod in which he briefly relates all that had passed between him and Hincmarus Bishop of Laon the causes of complaint he had against him the heads of Accusation that he charged him with and the consequence of the whole matter setting down under every Article the Decisions of the Popes and Councils shewing wherein the Bishop of Laon had offended and the punishment he deserved He defends himself against the Accusation that he had betrayed him and produces three Letters written at the time he was seized to shew that he had no hand in his Imprisonment but had disapproved it He also justifies himself against the Accusation that he had no respect to the Judgment of the H. See and slighted its Authority and treats of what passed at Attigni about that matter Lastly He concludes that Hincmarus Bishop of Laon having been Summon'd three times by the Council and not appearing ought to be condemned for his Contumacy notwithstanding the Appeal he had made to the H. See because it is irregular and he hath not prosecuted it The Bishops of the Council desiring some time to Answer the King's Request made a Collection of the Canons Laws and Testimonies of the Fathers upon every head of the Accusation contain'd in that Bill concerning the false Oaths and Perjury the Sedition and Violence he had used concerning the alienating of the Revenues of his Church the Calumnies he had written to Rome against his Prince his Disobedience and Rebellion and for having made many of the King's Subjects to fly This Memoir was read in the Council and Hincmarus Bishop of Laon summoned again to the Council But he answered That he had Appealed to the H. See The Bishop of Soissons who Cited him told him That he ought to appear at the Synod and if it were necessary for him then to appeal they would suffer him to prosecute it Hermerardus also was cited by the Synod These Citations having been repeated three times at last Hincmarus appeared before the Council but Hermerardus would not come They then read to him the King's Bill and a Letter from the Pope sent to him in which he was ordered to be obedient to his Metropolitan with an allowance of an Appeal to the H. See if there were just Cause The next day he was summoned to the Council to answer to the Accusations brought against him by the King On the 14th of August he came and Hincmarus Archbishop of Reims having ordered him to answer to the King's Petition he said That he was deprived of all his Revenues and would
against Photius and his Adherents should continue in their full force and exhorts him not to act contrary to them The third Letter of John is directed to the Clergy and Laity of Langres in France who had petitioned his Authority for re-establishing of Argrin their Bishop who had been turn'd out of his Bishoprick by the Sentence of Stephen the Predecessor of Pope John He being well informed that this Bishop had been elected canonically that he was turn'd out upon false grounds and that there had been never another put in his place re-establishes him by this Letter notwithstanding the decree of Stephen wherein he tells them That he did not revoke what was done but that he altered it for the better for the benefit of the Church and out of pure necessity as his Predecessors had done upon several occasions He wrote the very same Words at that time to Charles the Simple and prays him to re-invest Argrin in his Bishoprick which is his fourth Letter We have two Letters likewise of Pope Benedict on the same subject wherein writing to the Bishops of The Letters of Benedict IV. France to the Clergy and Bishop of Langres he confirm'd the sentence of his Predecessor in favour of Argrin and very earnestly presses for his Restitution We have likewise two Letters of the Bishops of Germany directed to this Pope The first is writ in the name of Hatto Archbishop of Mayence and his Suffragans After protestation The Letter of Hatto Archbishop of Mayence to John IX made that there were no Churches more submissive to the Holy See than Theirs nor any Bishops paid greater deference to it than they did they acquaint him that the Emperor Arnulphus being dead his Son Lewis had been elected in his place by the Advice of the Princes and with the consent of the People according to the Ancient custom of continuing the Kings of France always in the â—â—me Line They told the Pope that the reason why they did it without his permission was because all the Passes that open'd from Germany to Italy were in the possession of the Barbarians so that they could not send Deputies to Rome nor could the Pope send his Legats to them that having at last found an opportunity of conveying this Letter to his hands they pray'd him to confirm by his Benediction the choice which they had made After this they inform'd him of the Complaints which the Bishops of Bavaria made upon the account that the Solavonians who had possess'd themseves of Moravia and were declar'd Rebels against the French pretended that they were out of their Jurisdiction and would have a distinct Metropolitan of their own and they accus'd the Bavarians of entering into Alliance with the Pagans and partaking of the disorders which they committed They assur'd the Pope that this accusation was a malicious calumny and gave him to understand that iâ— he should grant the Moravians a Metropolitan and permit them to withdraw themselves from the Jurisdiction of the Bishops of Bavaria he would be the cause of great diâ—ordâ—rs for this would give them an occasion of rising against the powers to which they ought to be subject and of making a new War with them They added that they gave him this caution with somuch the more freedom because they thought themselves oblig'd to inform him when ever any thing happen'd to the Church of Rome which deserv'd correction that so some speedy and necessary Remedy might be apply'd thereto The Letter of Theotmarus Metropolitan of Bavaria and of the other Bishops of that Province upon the same subject is as strong 'T is written not only in the name of the Bishop but also in the name of the Clergy and people The Letter of the Bishops of Bavaria to John IX of Bavaria They remonstrated to the Pope that having learn'd from his Predecessors and the Holy Fathers of the Church that the Bishop of Rome had always taken care to maintain the Peace Union and Discipline of each Church they could not tell how to believe what they had notice of every day that there was issued out of the Apostolical See the Origine of the Christian Religion and the source of their sacerdotal Dignity a Decree unjust and contrary to the Doctrine and Authority of the Church but that an Archbishop called John and two Bishops who gave out that they were sent by the Pope to the Moravians had given occasion for this Report That these People were formerly Dependants on their Prince and on their Bishops who had converted them That the Bishop of Passaw had always liberty of entring among them and of holding Synods there till such time as they rose up in Arms and renouncd Christianity That of late indeed they boasted that they for a summ of Money had prevail'd upon the Pope to send three Bishops who in the Bishoprick of Passaw had undertaken such a thing as they could not believe proceeded from the Holy Apostolical See being so directly contrary to the Intention of the Canons namely to canton that Bishoprick into five parts and to place an Archbishop and three Bishops into that Diocess without the consent of the Archbishop and Bishop They cited two Canons of Africa and several passages out of the Letters of Pope Leo and Celestine wherein this very thing was prohibited They add that his Predecessor had consecrated Wichinous Bishop at the instance of the instance of the Duke of Zutphen but withal had sent him not into the Dutchy of Passaw but into a Conquer'd Country They likewise complain'd that his Legats giving credit to the Stories of the Sclavonians accus'd them of several falsities They likewise took notice that their Prince was descended from the House of the King of France who were Christians whereas the Moravians and Sclavonians were originally Pagans and Enemies to the Christian Religion They prais'd their King Lewis and observ'd how zealous he was for Religion and the Holy See They refuted the Reports which the Sclavonians had rais'd of their entering into a prophane Alliance with the Hunns and of their supplying them with money to go into Italy They said that the Sclavonians were the persons who were in confederacy with the Hunns when they pillag'd burnt and ravagâ—d all before them That for their parts they design'd to have oppos'd their entering Italy and to have march'd to the Assistance of Lombardy and that they might be in a condition to do it they desired a Cessation of Arms from the Sclavonians but could not obtain it They concluded by conjuring the Pope not to give credit to the calumnies which the Sclavonians cast upon them nor suffer such a division in their Church One of the two Councils held under John IX conven'd at Rome and the other at Ravenna The Institutions of the former are divided into twelve Articles The first condemns the Proceedings of the Synods held under Stephen VI. against the Body of Formosus which they had dug out of his Grave cited
he sought for after the example of his Predecessours who had long ago form'd a Design to bring the Church of Rome under subjection to their Dominion and upon that account favour'd the Schismaticks and excited Divisions in that City That Octavian had absolutely made him the Master of his Fortune that he laid the Marks of the Pontifical Dignity at his Feet and that he afterwards receiv'd from him the Investiture of the Church of Rome by the Ring and Staff causing the Imperial secular Power to triumph over the Priesthood That the Emperor call'd a Council to confirm that Choice and compell'd the Bishops by force to sign a Writing by which they own'd Octavian as lawful Pope That that Writing was full of manifest Untruths and that the Bishops could not by their definitive Sentence render an Election valid that was null in its Original Besides that the Gallican Church which always had the good fortune to maintain Justice and Truth and to afford a Sanctuary to the Popes when persecuted by the German Princes after having examin'd the Elections of Alexander and Octavian in a Council call'd by the King's Order for that purpose had determin'd in favour of the former but that the King had prudently defer'd the Publication of that Resolution by reason of the union between him and the King of England to the end that they might act jointly together That the latter had in like manner sufficiently declar'd on Alexander's behalf in regard that he receiv'd his Letters and more especially protested that he would not own any other Pope having also rejected those of Octavian In the mean while he admonish'd them to take care that Injustice might not prevail over the Truth through the sinister practices of some English Noble-men who gave it out that they were related to Octavian and exhorted them when ever they met together strenuously to maintain the Truth without fear of offending those Opponents In another Letter written to the Cardinals he gives a particular account of divers remarkable Circumstances of the Elections of Alexander and Octavian viz. That the Bishop of Frascati who was the first of the three Electors of the latter being a voluptuous Man took great delight in Feasting and soon retir'd from the Conclave because Dinner-time drew near That one of the two others took it ill that he was deny'd the Office of Chancellor and that the third was Octavian's Kinsman That as soon as those three had given their Votes for him he himself took the Cope and thrâ—w it over his Shoulders with so great Precipitation that that part which ought to lie on the Neck fell to the Ground that he got upon the Papal Throne in that Equipage and that having causâ—d the Doors of the Church to be set open it was immediately fill'd with his Guards who conducted him to the Palace That the King of France call'd an Assembly of the Estates of the Realm as well of the Clergy as of the Nobility to determine which of the two Elections ought to be ratify'd That some were of Opinion that nothing should be done in a hurry about an Affair of that importance and that it ought to be deferr'd for some time longer because it was dangerous to excite a mis-understanding between the King and the Emperor upon that account That they also added that the Church of Rome was always burdensome to Princes that 't was requisite to shake off the Yoke since so fair an Occasion offer'd it self to that purpose that the Death of the two Competitors would put an end to the Contest and that the Government of the Bishops might be sufficient till God should more clearly make known his Will Lastly that the Respect due to the Emperor's Ambassadors who were present and to the King of England whose Sentiments the King of France declar'd himself ready to follow caus'd those Measures to be taken in the Assembly Arnuâ—phus in the end of this Letter advises the Cardinals not to exasperate the King of England by their Threats but to pacifie him since the Obedience of the Kingdoms of England France Spain Ireland and Norway depended on his Declaration Although Arnulphus had done such notable Services to Alexander III. nevertheless that Pope upon the Accusations brought against him by Sylvester Treasurer of his Church and by John Nephew to the Bishop of Seez did not forbear to nominate the Bishops of Mans and Avranches Commissioners to take cognizance of that Cause Arnulphus appear'd before them and William Bishop of Paris and Cardinal was present at the Tryal The Treasurer own'd before the Judges the Falshood of the Complaints that he had made against his Diocesan and promis'd that he would not renew them for the future John still maintain'd what he had averr'd but the Sentence not being favourable to him he appeal'd from that Court to the See of Rome although the Pope gave Commission to the two Bishops to pass Judgment without any Appeal However Arnulphus who upon that account might have exempted himself from going to Rome and might have refus'd to suffer his Cause to be tried again there after having inform'd the Pope of the manner of the Proceedings assur'd his Holiness that he would repair to Rome as soon as it was possible and entreated him to detain John till he arriv'd to shew how that Person and the Bishop of Seez his Uncle have committed a Trespass against the Church and the Holy See He explains this in the following Letter directed to Alexander One of his Relations was sometime Bishop of Seez who substituted Regular Canons in that Church in the room of Secular This Reformation was approv'd by the Popes Honorius II. Eugenius III. and Adrian III. and by Henry II. King of England who made them a Donation These Canons were to have all their Goods in Common according to their Original Institution and the Bishops his Successors were likewise oblig'd before they were install'd to maintain that Settlement The Bishop then incumbent design'd to ruine it or at least to obtain a License of the Pope to confer the Arch-deaconries on Lay-men that he might have wherewithal to bestow on his Nephews and Relations Arnulphus sent word to the Pope That that Bishop palliated his Carnal Affections with the pretence of Piety giving it out That there was not any Person in that Diocess capable of performing those Functions as if the Simplicity of the Canons were not to be preferr'd to the worldly Wisdom of others or in case there were none to be found at Seez worthy of possessing those Benesices some might not be taken out of the Church of St. Victor and St. Rufus He adds that having been Arch-deacon of Seez and educated in that Church he thought himself oblig'd to maintain its Rights and Privileges and that for that reason he judg'd it expedient to certifie his Holiness thereof by a Letter Notwithstanding this Information the Pope granted to the Bishop of Seez a License to Secularize his Arch-deaconry but
Arnulphus wrote a very smart Letter to him on that Subject in which he remonstrates That he had no Authority thus to abolish an Institution made by his Predecessors under colour that they could not impose Laws on their Successors He maintains That that Maxim is false and that it tends to the ruin of all the Establishments of the Saints That the Privileges of the Popes of Rome are as it were Testaments which are not made void but rather confirm'd by the death of the Testators That 't is true indeed that the Errors of Predecessors may be corrected by their Successors and that the latter may make some alteration for the better in the Sanctions of the others when 't is requisite for the publick Advantage and when it may be done without any detriment to Religion That for that very reason Secular Canons may be chang'd into Regular because the Order of the latter is more perfect but a more strict Institution cannot be chang'd into one less perfect by which means Remissness in Discipline would be authoriz'd And lastly that there are some Persons so prodigal of Dispensations that they retain nothing as an unalterable Law and Sacrifice every thing to the Interests and inordinate Passions of private Men. He reproves the Pope for not shewing sufficient Constancy in maintaining the Rights of the Church and gives him to understand that he had scandaliz'd it by revoking the Sentence of Excommunication denounc'd by his Predecessors against Laicks who shall attempt to get themselves admitted into the Chapter of Seez by adjudging to a Lay-man all the Revenues of the Arch-deaconry that the Regular Canons enjoy'd in Common and part of which they distributed to the Poor and by permitting a Man adorn'd with gorgeous Apparel to take place amongst the Canons cloath'd in Sack-cloth He adds That 't is further to be fear'd lest the Arch-deaconry should be left vacant by reason that it is already appointed for another young Nephew when he shall be of Age That in the mean while the Bishop has turn'd out the Prior of the Canons and substituted a Person of no Repute in his Place to the end that he might make himself Master of the Church-Revenues Therefore he exhorts the Pope to revoke what was extorted from him by surprize in order to re-establish the Rule in that Chapter and to put an end to the Complaints and Murmurings occasion'd by that Innovation The four following Letters are directed to the same Pope and contain an account of particular Affairs In the last he accuaints him That the King of England was dissatisfied with his Holiness because he deny'd him those Favours he su'd for at Rome He congratulates in another Gilbert Bishop of London in regard that the Pope had ordain'd that his Cause should be decided without an Appeal and observes that Appeals to Rome often put false Accusers in a Capacity to oppress innocent Persons and give them an opportunity to avoid the Punishment due to their Crimes In another Letter he reproves a certain Abbot for leaving his Monastery to sollicit Law-suits at Court and enjoyns him to return thither In a Letter that he wrote to Henry Cardinal Bishop of Pisa sending him the Works of Ennodius he passes a very disadvantageous Judgment on that Author In his Letter to the Bishop of Angoulesme he determines that the Engagements that a certain Child was under whom his Uncle had bound to a Clerk upon Payment of a Sum of Money ought not to be ratify'd and that that Bishop cannot suffer the said Child to be detain'd by him In a Letter written to Arnold Abbot of Bonneval he treats of the Usefulness of the Sacrifice of the Mass. Nothing says he can be offer'd up more precious than JESUS CHRIST nothing more efficacious than this Sacrifice nothing more advantageous both to him who offers it and to him for whom 't is offer'd if the unworthiness of the Persons doth not render it unprofitable 'T is requisite that he who offers it have pure Hands and that he for whom it is offer'd should know the Value of it by Faith that he should earnestly desire it and that he should embrace it with a perfect Charity Oh how great is this Benefit which is sufficient for the Person who receives it and for him that administers it For how extensive soever the Priest's Charity may be towards certain Persons this Sacrifice remains altogether entire for every one in particular It is communicated to many so as its Efficacy is not diminish'd with respect to every Individual and altho' different Persons partake of it yet it does not suffer any Division Quoscunque enim Sacerdos effusa charitatis latitudine complectatur totum simul omnium totum uniuscujusque est Sigillatim nec integritatem dividit communicatio plurium nec soliditatem minuit participatio diversorum He has also inserted amongst his Letters a Discourse that he made in the Council of Tours A. D. 1163. in the presence and by the Order of Pope Alexander III. In the beginning of it he says that there are three Qualities requisite in a Preacher viz. Sanctity of Life to procure respect for what he delivers a perfect Knowledge to be capable of teaching the necessary Truths and Elcquence to cause them to be approv'd to the end that his Sermons may be Holy Learned and Sublime In the Body of this Sermon he treats of the Unity and Liberty of the Church shewing that those two Qualities are necessary therein and that the Ministers ought to use their utmost endeavours to maintain them more especially at a time when both are attack'd that is to say the former by the Ambition of Schismaticks and the other by the Oppression of Tyrants That nevertheless 't is impossible that either should compass their Design For although the former separate themselves from the Communion of the Church yet it is not divided by that means but the Chaff is only separated from the Wheat and although the latter seizes on the Temporal Revenues of the Church nevertheless it does not cease to be free and to exercise its Power with Spiritual Authority However that the Bishops ought to make use of all possible means to re-unite the former to the Communion of the Church and to oblige the others to quit their unjust Claim to the Ecclesiastical Revenues This is the Subject of a long and very pathetical Exhortation made by him to the Bishops of the Council and in the sequel of the same Discourse he wishes that the Emperor would humble himself under the Almighty Hand of God that he would acknowledge that the Dominion of the Church is above his and that he would submit to the See of Rome which conferr'd the Empire on his Predecessors He observes that Bishops may possess large Revenues provided they do not take themselves to be the Proprietors but only the Dispensers of them and are persuaded that the Patrimony of JESUS CHRIST is the Inheritance of the Poor which ought to
Richard of St. Victor are of Two Sorts some of them being Pieces relating to Points of Doctrine and others being Treatises of Piety and practical Divinity Among the former are to be reckon'd his Treatise of the Trinity divided into Six Books A Tract dedicated to St. Bernard concerning the Attributes appropriated to every one of the Divine Persons His Treatise of the Incarnation Two Treatises of the Emmanuel or on these Words of the Prophet Isaiah Behold a Virgin shall conceive and bear a Son and shall call his name Emmanuel in which he proves against a certain Jew that these Words can be interpreted of none but the Virgin Mary and Jesus Christ A Treatise of the Power of Binding and Loosing in which he follows the common Opinion of the School-Divines of his time concerning the Effect of the Keys and the Power of the Ministers A Discourse of the Sin against the Holy Ghost Certain Explications dedicated to St. Bernard on some difficult Places of Scripture A Discourse to explain in what Sense the Holy Ghost is said to be the Love of the Father and of the Son And a Treatise of the difference between Mortal and Venial Sins His Works of Piety and Morality are these viz. A Treatise of the means of rooting out Evil and promoting Good A Discourse on the State of the inward Man Three Books of the Instruction of the inward Man or of the Spiritual Exercise upon occasion of the Dreams of Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel A Treatise of the Preparation of the Soul for Contemplation Five Books of the Grace of Contemplation on the Ark which was set in the Tabernacle with an Addition containing some Allegories on the Tabernacle A Discourse or Meditation on the Plagues that will happen on the Day of Judgment Another Discourse on the Day of the last Judgment A Treatise of the Degrees of Charity Another of the Four Degrees of fervent Charity A Discourse of the Two Passovers with a Sermon on the Festival of Easter A Discourse of the Baptism of Jesus Christ A Sermon on the Effusion of the Holy Ghost A Tract concerning the Comparison that is made of our Saviour to the Flower and of the Virgin Mary to the Branch Another about the Quality of Standard of the People attributed to Jesus Christ And lastly Two Discourses viz. One concerning the difference between Abraham's Sacrifice and that of David and the other relating to the difference between the same Sacrifice and that of the Virgin Mary This Author died March 10. A. D. 1173. and his Works were printed at Paris in 1518. and in 1540. as also at Venice in 1592. at Colen in 1621. and at Rouen in 1650. He shews a great deal of subtilty in his Theological Treatises and argues methodically with an Exactness befitting an able Logician His Critical Pieces are very accurate for his time but his Style is not very lofty and upon that Account it is that his Treatises of Piety though full of excellent Matter have not all the Grandeur nor all the Energy that might be wished for CHAP. XVII Of Gratian's Collection of Canons ALthough many Collections of Canons Decretals and Passages of the Fathers relating to the Canon-Law were compil'd before the Twelfth Century yet none of them was generally follow'd or publickly taught They were looked upon as the Work of private Persons and the Decisions contain'd in them had no greater Authority than the Monuments out of which they were taken whilst every one apply'd them to his particular Benefit but none made them the subject of publick Lectures The Collection which GRATIAN a Monk of St. Felix Gratian. at Bononia and a Native of Chiusi in Toscany compleated in the Year 1151. met with much better Success for as soon as it appear'd it was so favourably receiv'd that the Canonists taught it publickly and in a little time a great number of Commentaries were written on that Work In the Ancient Manuscripts and in the First Editions it bears this Title viz. The Concord of disagreeing Canons and afterwards was call'd The Book of Decrees or simply The Decrees It is divided into Three Parts the First of which contains Matters relating to the Law in general and the Ministers of the Church under the Name of Distinctions the Second divers particular Cases upon occasion of which are debated many Questions that are call'd The Causes and the Third entituled Of the Consecration such Matters as relate to the Divine Offices and the Sacraments In the First twenty Distinctions of the First Part he treats of the Division of the Law of the different sorts of Laws as well Civil as Ecclesiastical of the Authority of the Canons of the Councils and of the Decretals of the Popes of the sacred Orders of the Qualities of Persons who ought to be ordain'd of the Form and Ceremonies of Ordination of the Functions and Conduct of Clergy-men of the Power of the Pope and of the Bishops of the use of the Pall and of every Thing that relates to the Ministers of the Church This Part is divided into 101 Distinctions In the Second containing Thirty six Causes every one of which comprehends divers Questions every Question being likewise divided into several Chapters the Author treats of Simony of Appeals of Incumbents depriv'd of their Benefices of the Quality of Witnesses and Accusers of Elections of the Government of Churches of Ecclesiastical Censures of last Wills and Testaments of Burials of Usury of what ought to be observ'd with respect to * Furieux outragious or distracted Persons of Sentences passed contrary to the due Forms of Law of Monks and Abbots and their Rights of those who assault Clergy-men of Commendams of Oaths of War of Heresies of Infractions of the Canons of Sorcerers of Marriage and its Impediments of the Degrees of Consanguinity and of Rapes In the Thirty second Cause he has inserted a Dissertation concerning Repentance in Seven Sections in which he follows the Error of some Writers of Penitentials who do not believe Confession to be of Divine Right or absolutely necessary for the remission of Sins The Third Part contains Five Distinctions or Sections viz. the First concerning the Consecration of Churches the Celebration of Mass and the Divine Service the Second concerning the Eucharist the Third about the solemn Festivals of the Year and the use of Images the Fourth about the Sacrament of Baptism and its Ceremonies and the Fifth concerning Confirmation Fasts manual Labour and some other Points of Discipline Some Articles have been since added from time to time under the Title of Palea which is suppos'd to be the Name of the Author of these Additions which were call'd Protopalea or Palea The First Edition of this Work was printed at Mentz A. D 1472. and the Second at Venice Four Years after The Third is that of Paris in 1508. which is the First that bears the Name of Gratian whose Text is to be found in these Editions after the same manner that
sets down Four infallible Signs whereby to discover them taken out of the same Gospel They love the first Places in the Feasts the chief Seats in the Synagogues to be saluted in publick Places and to be call'd by Men Rabbi He afterwards explains those Tokens after the following manner On the First says he it ought to be observ'd That they may be said to love the First Places in Feasts who frequent the Tables of Kings Princes and Prelates who are the first at them to get the best of the Treat which is unbecoming Regulars and especially Preachers c. He likewise adds another Proof of the Love they have to the Uppermost Places in Feasts viz. The Curiosity they have of diving into the Affairs of Great Men and of intermeddling with them Upon the second token which is the Loving of the Uppermost Seats in the Synagogues he observes That they are justly to be charg'd with this who get themselves to be nominated by the Secular Powers for to Preach in Churches on the Great Festivals without having any deference to the Authority of the Bishops and other Prelates who intrude themselves into the Ministery without being Call'd thereto and who aim more at shewing their own Parts and Eloquence that at Preaching the Word of God Upon the Third Sign or Token of Loving to be Saluted in the Publick Places he applies it to the Regulars who get themselves to be summon'd into the Consistories of Princes and Prelates who frequent them who concern themselves in giving their Judgments and Counsels in them in order to attract the Respect of those who have any Business there Lastly on the Last Token viz. Their Desire of being Call'd Rabbi Rabbi he Observes That it is very Applicable to the Regulars who make use of Excommunication and raise a Scandal in the Church in order to obtain the Quality of Masters This Discourse is only an Introduction of that which William of Saint Amour establishes in his Book concerning the Perils of the Last Times In the First Chapter he Proves from that Place of St. Paul 2 Tim. 2. 1. That at the Latter End of the Church there should happen Perilous Times In the Second he describes the Characters of those who shall be the Cause of those Perils as they are set down in the same Place Men Lovers of themselves Coveteous Boasters Proud Blasphemers Disobedient to Parents and Superiors Unthankful Unholy Unnatural false Accusers Incontinent without Charity Traytors Heady High-minded Lovers of Pleasure more than Lovers of God Such as creep into Houses c. He adds That they are those false Teachers and false Prophets foretold by our Saviour which he applies to those who Preach without a Call without a Mission and without the leave of the Curates under Pretence That they have Permission from the Pope or the Bishop He observes That he would not Dispute the Authority of the Pope or of the Diocesan Bishop but that the Licence which they Grant to some to Preach signifies only in case they be Invited thereto since the Bishops themselves can do nothing out of their own Diocess unless call'd by their Brethren and that 't is not to be suppos'd That the Pope Grants a Power to a great many Persons of Preaching to one and the same Auditory if they be not invited to it by the Curates In the Third he demonstrates what those Characters were by which those Dangerous Men shall sow those Disorders Namely a semblance of Piety Religion and Charity which shall make them to pass for true Christians In the Fourth he explains the Perils to which the Faithful shall be expos'd by the Imposture of those false Preachers who shall resist the Truth as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses that is to say who shall seduce Princes and the Christian People by their shew of Wisdom and shall divert them from obeying the Counsels of their Lawful Superiors in order to follow their Corrupt Maxims and Morals In the Fifth he shews the ways which they shall make use of to seduce them viz. by creeping into Houses by making them discover their Secrets in Confessions by seducing Women and the Simple by making themselves Lords and Masters of their Souls and by forcing them to make Vows and by diverting them from the Submission which they ow to their Pastors In the Sixth he says that those who shall not foresee those Perils shall be in danger of perishing by them He proves in the Seventh That those who are the Cause of them shall perish In the Eighth he endeavours to prove by the Signs set down in Scripture That these Perils are not far off In the Ninth he shews That it chiefly belongs to the Prelats to foresee discover and divert those Perils In the Tenth he demonstrates the Punishments to which they are liable in this World and the next if they do not oppose them In the Eleventh he proves That tho' those Perils have been foretold yet they might be diverted for a time if vigorously oppos'd In the Twelfth he explains the Methods which ought to be made use of in order to divert them Which are 1. To consider who those Persons are who creep into Houses and whether there be any such in the Church 2. When one shall have discover'd them to inform others of them 3. To Injoyn them to avoid such 4. To hinder them from Preaching and Teaching 5. To oblige those who are of their Sect to withdraw themselves from them 6. To hinder others from entring into their Sect and in general to shun the False Prophets the Idle who will not work with their Hands and the Inquisitive He in this place oppugns the Practice of begging when one is strong and Lusty and when a Man may get his Living by his Labour and says That 't is a piece of Injustice In the Thirteenth he examines among what sort of Persons we ought to search after these Seducers and pretends That 't is not among the Pagans nor among the Wicked or Ignorant Christians that this Search ought to be made but amongst the Wise Persons among those who profess to follow the Dictates of Jesus Christ who seem to be most Holy and most Prudent that one would think them to be the Elect of Jesus Christ. In a word in the last Chapter he reckons up Forty one Marks to distinguish the False Apostles from the True of which says he some are Infallible and others Probable In the beginning he protests that he had no Design of advancing any thing against any particular Person or against any State or Order of Men but only in general to declaim against the Sins of the Wicked and the Perils of the Church However 't is easy to see that he means the Dominican Friars and that 't is at them he aims and whom he sets upon in this Book which he submits to the Correction of the Church This Treatise is follow'd by two Pieces wherein he resolves two Queries viz. In the First