St. John Damascene commends him in the beginning of his Treatise of the Trisagion which he composed to draw this Abbot out of the Error which he thought him engaged in about this Point They attribute to him a Treatise against the Jews published in Latin in Canistus's Antiquities and in the Bibliotheca Patrum Tom. 13. but it might be supposed to be made a more modern Author for the Author of it says That 800 years ago Christ's Oracles were fulfilled that the Jews were dispersed and Jerusalem destroyed by Vespasâ—an Which makes me think that he lived to the ninth Century This Author does not only bring Proofs for the Christian Religion but he answers the Questions and Objections of the Jews The Work is imperfect It is found in Greek in the Vatican Library and in the Jesuits at Rome It is written well and the Reasons he alledges are pretty solid He observes That when Christians honour Images they do not adore the Wood but their Respect refers to Christ and his Saints and that they are so far from adoring Images that when they are grown old and spoiled they burn them tomake new ones EGBERT of YORK EGBERT an English Man Brother to * Alià s Eadbert Etbert King of Northumberland was Arch-bishop of York from 731 till about 767. The chief Work of Egbert was a Penitential published in four Books which are found in Manuscript in the Libraries of England We have different Extracts of it There is one containing divers Canons concerning Clerks Another composed of 35 Constitutions against divers Sins of Clerks and other Christians These Collections are ill contrived and of little Authority Egbert of York There was printed in 1664. at Dublin together with Boniface's Letters a Treatise about the Life of Clergy-men bearing Egberâ—'s Name It is made up of Questions and Answers and the Questions are not directed to one Archbishop but to many Bishops 'T is therefore a Consultation directed to a Council but it seems to me to be much later than Egbert The small Tract of the Remedies of Sins ascribed to Bede is one of the ancientest Extracts of Egbert's Penitential All those Pieces are of no great use They are found in the end of the sixth Volume of the Councils of F. Labbe's Edition St. JOHN DAMASCENE JOHN Sirnamed MANSUR by the Arabians or Chrysorrhoas from his Eloquence was born at Damascus of rich and godly Parents He was taught and brought up by Cosmas a St. John Damascene Monk of Jerusalem who had been taken by the Saracens After his Father's decease he succeeded him in the Place of Counsellor of State to the Prince of the Saracens Being in that Office he began to write in the Defence of Images which did so highly provoke the Emperor Leo Sirnamed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that he formed a design to destroy him by an unparallel'd piece of Treachery He caused one to counterfeit the Hand of John Damascene and to contrive a Letter in his Name whereby he betrayed his Master advising Leo to come speedily to Damascus to take that City This Letter he sent to the Prince of the Saracens who if we believe the Author of St. John Damascene's Life caused John's Hand to be immediately cut off and to be for many hours exposed to the sight of the People in the middle of the Town In the evening John demanding it joyned it to his mangled Arm afterward having prayed to the Virgin and thereupon going to sleep it was found re-united to his Arm when he awoke out of his Sleep This Miracle struck the Prince of the Saracens with amazement and forced him to acknowledge John's Innocency he prayed him to continue in his Court but John chose rather to withdraw himself from the World and therefore betook himself into St. Subas's Monastery at Jerusalem where he was committed to the care of a very severe old Monk who imposed on him a perpetual Silénce for the breaking of which he was turned out of his Cell by that old man who commanded him for his Penance to carry away the Filth of the Cells of the Monastery When he had made himself ready to obey his Order the good old man embraced him and caused him to return About the end of his Life he was ordained Priest by the Patriarch of Jerusalem but he returned immediately again into his Monastery from whence he did valiantly oppose the Opinion of the Iconodastes He died towards the year 750. This Author wrote a great number of Works of all kinds They may be divided into Doctrinal Historical and Moral * Such as treat of the Festivals of the Year Heortastical Ecclesiastical and Prophane Among the Doctrinal Works we may place in the first Rank the four Books of the Orthodox Faith in which he hath comprehended the whole substance of Divinity in a Scholastical and Methodical manner The first Book is of the Nature Existence and Attributes of God and of the three Persons of the Trinity In all Points he agreeth with our Divines except in the Article of the Procession of the Holy-Ghost which he believes to proceed from the Father only The 2d Book treats of the Creatures the World the Angels and Daemons of Heaven and Earth and all Things contained therein of Paradise and of Man He teaches that Man is composed of a Body and Soul that his Soul is Spiritual and Immortal he distinguisheth the Faculties of it he speaks of its Passions Actions Thoughts Will and Liberty which he places in the power of doing what we please He treats also of Providence Prescience and Predestination or Predetermination He affirms that this taketh no place in free Actions that God permits them but ordains them not He concludes with Man's Fall of which Adam's Sin was the cause This leads him to the Incarnation of the Son of God which is the Subject of his third Book He explains this Mystery with great exactness he establisheth the distinction of the Existence of the two Natures he speaks of their Proprieties of the Wills of Christ and of his Free-will which he believes to be different from ours in that the Determination of it is without any doubt or deliberation proceeding He enlargeth upon the two Wills of Christ he explains in what sense these Expressions are to be understood There is in Christ an Incarnate Nature a Theandrick Will and an Human Nature Deified He shews that Jesus Christ was subject neither to Ignorance nor to Temptation that the quality of Slave does not belong to him that he increased in Knowledge and Wisdom so far forth only as it did more appear outwardly according as he grew into years He proves the Human Nature 〈◊〉 really suffer whiâ—… the Divinity remained impassible He maintains that the Divinity never ceased to be united to Christ's Soul and Body no not in the time of his Death In the 4th having discoursed of Christ's Resurrection and examined some Questions about the Incarnation he treats of Baptism of the
has a Guardian Angel yet owns that the same Angel may serve as a Guardian to several Persons and afterwards proceeds to examine in what particulars the Knowledge of the Angels may be augmented In the following Sections to the Sixteenth he explains the Work of the Creation In the Sixteenth and Seventeenth he treats of the Creation of Man and enquires in what his likeness to God consists when his Soul was created and in what Place he was set He discourses in the Eighteenth of the Formation of Woman and endeavours to explain why she was taken out of the Man 's Rib. In the Nineteenth he treats of the State of Immortality in which the First Man was created In the Twentieth he debates concerning the Manner how Men were to be brought into the World and how they were to be nourished in case the State of Innocence had continu'd In the Twenty first he gives an Account after what manner the Devil tempted Man He discusses in the Twenty second divers Questions relating to the Quality and Circumstances of the Sin of Adam and Eve In the Twenty third he resolves this difficult Point Why God permitted Man to be tempted knowing that he was to Fall And afterwards treats of the Knowledge with which the First Man was endu'd In the Twenty fourth he begins to discourse concerning the Free Will and Grace inherent in the First Man and treats in general in the Two following Sections of the Freedom of Grace according to St. Augustin's Principles In the Twenty seventh Section he discourses of Vertue and Merit which are the Effects of Grace and Free Will. In the Twenty eighth he confutes the Errors of the Pelagians as also those of the Manichees and of Jovinian In the Twenty ninth Section he returns to the State of the First Man and after having shewn that Man even in the State of Innocency stood in need of operating and co-operating Grace for the doing of Good he debates certain Questions about the manner how he was expell'd Paradise and concerning the Tree of Life which preserv'd him from Death In the Thirtieth Thirty first Thirty second and Thirty third he treats of Original Sin and enquires in what it consists how it is transferr'd from Parents to their Children after what manner it is remitted by Baptism whether Children contract the Sins of their Parents as Original Sin c. In the Thirty fourth and Thirty fifth he discourses of the Nature of Actual Sin In the Thirty sixth he shews that there are Sins which are both the Cause and the Punishment of Sin He makes it appear in the Thirty seventh that God is the Author of the Actions by which Sin is committed and of the Punishments of Sin although he is not the Author of Sin In the Thirty eighth he demonstrates that it is the End and Intention of the Will which renders the Action either Good or Bad and that in order to its being Good it must of necessity be terminated in God In the Thirty ninth he enquires into the Reason Why of all the natural Faculties the Will only is susceptible of Sin In the Fortieth he continues to shew that an Action to be denominated Good ought to have a good End and Intention In the Forty first he produces divers Passages of St. Augustin about the necessity of Faith and of an upright Will to avoid the committing of Sin and shews that the corrupt Will is the cause of Sin He enquires in the Forty second Whether the Will and the Action be two different Sins And Afterwards explains the Division of the Seven Capital Sins shewing that they derive their original from Pride and Concupiscence In the Forty third he relates the Opinions of St. Ambrose and St. Augustin concerning the Sin against the Holy Ghost Lastly he makes it appear in the Forty fourth Section that the Power of committing Sin proceeds from God and that the Power the Devil has to tempt us to Evil ought to be resisted The Third Book begins with the Questions relating to the Mystery of the Incarnation In the First Section the Author lays down the Reasons Why it was more expedient that the Son should be Incarnate rather than the Father or the Holy Ghost and discusses this Question Whether Two Persons were in like manner capable of being Incarnate In the Second Section he treats of the Union of the Word with the Body and the Soul In the Third he shews that the Body taken by the Word was free from the corruption of Sin that the Virgin Mary herself was then also free from Sin and that in the very moment that the Humanity of Jesus Christ was conceiv'd the Word was united to it He enquires in the Fourth Why the Incarnation is attributed to the Holy Ghost rather than to the other Persons of the Trinity and in what Sense it is said Jesus Christ was conceiv'd and born of the Holy Ghost In the Fifth Section he treats of the Union of the Person of the Son with the Human Nature and shews that the Word was not united to the Person but to the Nature In the Sixth he gives an Account of these Propositions viz. God was made Man God is Man and produces Three several Explications of them made by the Fathers The same matter is farther handled in the Seventh Distinction In the Eighth he resolves this Question Whether it may be said that the Divine Nature was born of the Virgin Mary And discourses of the two-fold Nativity of Jesus Christ. In the Ninth he produces certain Passages of the Fathers concerning the Adoration of the Body of Jesus Christ. In the Tenth he proposes this Question viz. Whether Jesus Christ quatenus Man be a Person or a Thing He maintains the Negative and afterwards proves that the Quality or Title of adoptive Son cannot be appropriated to him In the Eleventh he asserts that neither ought Jesus Christ to be call'd a Creature without adding quatenus Man In the Twelfth he discusses divers Questions viz. Whether it may be said of Jesus Christ as Man that he always was or that it was possible that he might not be God He determines that it cannot be said of the Person of Jesus Christ but only of his Human Nature In the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Sections he treats of Knowledge Grace and the Power of Jesus Christ quatenus Man In the Fifteenth and Sixteenth he proves that Jesus Christ took upon him the Infirmities of Human Nature Sin and Ignorance only excepted and that he was capable of undergoing Sufferings In the Seventeenth he explains the two-fold Will of Jesus Christ. In the Eighteenth he discourses of what Jesus Christ merited for himself and of what he merited for us In the Nineteenth he treats of Redemption In the Twentieth he enquires Why Jesus Christ redeem'd us by his Passion and Death And whether he could not have done it by some other means In the Twenty first he proposes this Question viz. Whether the Word remain'd united
other Questions printed at Lyons in 1497. and in 1518. A Commentary also upon the Proverbs of Solomon is attributed to him printed at Paris in 1515. but it belongs rather to Thomas Gualensis There are some other Works of Holkot's in MS. in the Libraries at Cambridge as his Quodlibetical Questions in Pembroke-Hall Sermons and Allegories in Peter-House RICHARD HAMPOLE Born in Yorkshire in England an Augustine Monk died Sept. 29. 1349. Richard Hampole has Composed several Treatises of Piety Some of them were printed at Cologne and are extant in the 26th Tome of the Bibliotheca Patrum A Treatise of the Amendment of a Sinner An Explication of the Lord's Prayer Another of the Apostles and Athanasius's Creed The Praise of the Name of Jesus A Treatise of the Embraces of the Love of God An Exposition upon these words of the Canticles of Solomon The Daughters will love thee affectionately in which he also treats of the Love of God These Treatises are full of the Spirit and very affecting He also Composed several other Spiritual Commentaries upon the Holy Scripture as the Psalms Job Lamentations of Jeremiah A Treatise Intituled The Sting of Conscience Scala Mundi A Book of the Contempt of the World The Commendation of Chastity and some other Treatises which are found in the Libraries of England as the Cotton Archbishop of Canterbury's at Lambeth and Bodleian JOANNES HONSEMIUS or HOXEMIUS a Dutchmâ—n 〈◊〉 Canon of the Church of Leige made a Joannes Honsemius Continuation of the History of the Bishops of Leige composed by Aegidius Aureae Vallis from 1247. to 1348. It is printed in the Collection of Historians upon the same Subject put out by Joannes Chapeavillus and printed at Leige in 1613. GERARDUS ODONIS a Native of Rovergne in France a Grey-Friar was chosen General of Gerardus Odonis that Order in 1329. in the place of Michael de Caesena and after preferred to the Dignity of Archbishop of Antioch by John XXII he died at Catana in 1349. He Composed a Comment upon the Ten Books of Aristotle's Morals printed at Venice in 1500. The Office of the Marks of S. Francis is attributed to him There is in the Covent of Cordeliers at Mirepoix in Languedoc a MS. Treatise of the Figures of the Bible which bears his Name and in the Vatican Library a Comment upon the Books of the Sentences Two Philosophical Questions and some Commentaries upon several Books of Scripture as Waddingus testifies in his Biblioth Frat. Min. p. 145. JACOBUS FOLQUIER an Hermite of S. Austin a Doctor and Reader of Divinity at Tholouse Jacobus Folquier dedicated in 1345. to Clement VI. a Work Intituled Viridarium Gregorianum or Allegories upon all the Books of Scripture which are found in MS. in the Library of the Great Augustines at Paris BERNARDUS Abbot of Mont-Cassin who flourished about 1347. Composed a Book Intituled Bernard The Mirrour of the Monks of the Order of S. Benedict printed at Paris in 1507. A Commentary upon the Rule of S. Benedict which is found in MS. in some Libraries Trithemius also mentions a Book of Regular Precepts and Sermons for his Monks THOMAS BRADWARDIN an Englishman of the Order of Grey-Friars Chancellor of the University Thomas Bradwardin of Oxford Confessor to Edward III. was chosen Archbishop of Canterbury in 1348. by a Chapter of that Church two several times for the King of England and the Pope having preferred John Ufford the first time before him he was not consecrated but this last dying a little time after he was chosen a Second time and his Election being confirmed by the Pope and approved by the King he was consecrated at Avignon by Cardinal Bertrandus but he died within Forty Days after his Ordination and before he had taken Possession of his Archbishoprick This Author Sirnamed the Profound Doctor Coomposed a large Work Intituled The Cause of God and the truth of Causes against Pelagius published by Sir H. Savil and printed at London in 1618. in which he strongly maintains the Principles of S. Austin and S. Thomas concerning the Operation and Power of God over the Actions of his Creatures Some attribute to him also a Treatise of Geometry and Arithmetick viz. a Treatise of Proportions printed at Venice in 1505. A Treatise of Speculative Arithmetick printed at Paris in 1502. and a Treatise of Geometry printed at Paris in 1512. and 1530. Bradwardin in his Work De Caussâ Dei c. does not only treat of Liberty and Predestination but also of the Existence of God his Perfections Eternity Immutability Immensity and other Attributes particularly his Knowledge Power and Will He shews that God preserves all Beings that he hath Created That he doth all things immediately that are done by his Creatures That his Will is effectual invincible and immutable That all that he Wills infallibly comes to pass That the things which he knows are not the cause of his Knowledge but his Will He explains in what sense God Wills or Wills not Sin He proves the Necessity of Grace against Pelagius and shews that it is gratis given and that Man deserves not the first Grace That it is the immediate Cause of all good Actions and principally of Repentance He holds Predestination to be gratuitous and rejects the middle Knowledge These are the Chief Points he treats of in his First Book His Second Book is upon Free Will He affirms That it consists not in being able to Will or not Will the same thing but in a Power of Willing freely all that we ought to choose and willing all that we ought not to choose He shews that no Second Cause can necessitate the Will but that the free Will cannot conquer Temptations without the special Assistance of God which is nothing else but his invincible Will That without this help no Man can avoid Sin That Perseverance is the Effect of Grace Lastly He explains the Co-operation of Man's Will with God's He affirms That God hinders not Liberty though he causes a kind of Necessity He treats of several Kinds of Necessity and Contingence and recites several Opinions of Philosophers and Divines about the Contingency of things which he numbers as far as 33. and concludes that all future things happen by one kind of Necessity with relation to Superior Causes which agrees nevertheless with Liberty but that is not Absolute Natural violent or forced He concludes his Works with a brief Recital of the Errors which he hath opposed and the Truths he hath established which he hath reduced to 36 Propositions ALBERICUS de ROSATE or ROXIATI Born in Bergamo a Lawyer flourished about 1350. He hath Composed a Commentary upon the Sixth Book of the Decretals printed in the Collection Albericus de Rosate of the Treatises of Famous Lawyers made at Venice in 1584. A Dictionary of the Civil and Canon Law printed at Venice in 1573. and 1601. and some other Treatises of Civil Law PETRUS de PATERNIS an Hermit of the
the Holy Church your Mother mourn for you let her wash away your Faults with her Tears ..... And yet we have reason to answer those who think that Penance may be done more than once because this is to abuse the Mercy of Jesus Christ for if they should once do true Penance they would not believe that they had Power to reiterate it As there is but one Baptism so there is but one publick Penance for we ought also to do Penance for the Sins we commit every Day But this last Penance is for small Sins and the former for great ones I have found more Persons who have preserv'd the Innocence of their Baptism than who have done Penance as they should after they have lost it For 't is believ'd that Penance may be consistent with the Ambition of aspiring to Offices with Pomp and high Feeding with the Pleasures and Use of Marriage But they must renounce the World and allow less time for Sleep than Nature requires they must break their Sleep with groaning and sighing and employ some part of that time in Prayers they must live in such a manner that they may be dead to the Use of this Life let such Men deny themselves and change themselves wholly c. This place teaches us many Remarkable Circumstances concerning the Penance which was in use in the time of St. Ambrose First That the Sinners themselves desir'd to be put under Penance Secondly That by putting them under Penance they were separated from Communion Thirdly That they did Penance publickly Fourthly That they us'd many Fasts Austerities and Humiliations during the time of their Penance Fifthly That this Penance was impos'd but once Lastly That this Penance was only for enormous Crimes and that ordinary Sins were pardon'd by the daily Penance For the better understanding of this place 't is necessary to observe How the Fathers understood this Distinction of great and little Sins Tertullian who was the first who spoke distinctly of it in his Book of Chastity places among the Number of little Sins Anger Evil-speaking a vain Oath a Failure in our Promise a Lye extorted by shame or necessity c. He calls these Capital or Mortal Sins Murder Idolatry Fraud Apostacy Blasphemy Fornication and other Crimes of this Nature These are also the Crimes which St. Cyprian calls great Sins in his Treatise of Patience Origen in Homily 15th upon Leviticus says That there are Mortal Sins which are not in the rank of great Sins I know very well that Monsieur Arnaud has affirm'd That in this place we must read culpa moralis for culpa mortalis as it is to be found in one Edition But ever since the Master of the Sentences time who cites this place it has been read culpa mortalis and if one minds well the Sence he will perceive that it is to be read so This place of Origen has much affinity with those of St. Ambrose whereof we are now speaking for he says That Penance is allow'd but once and that but seldom to those who have committed great Sins whereas the Sins of every Day are pardon'd every Day He explains himself also almost after the same manner in his Sixth Treatise upon St. Matthew where he handles this Question Whether a Man may not be treated as a Heathen and a Publican that 's to say separated from the Church when he does not amend his ways after he has been reprov'd for slight Sins The Examples which he gives of The true Reason why Slander Evil-speaking Anger Covetousness and such sort of Sins were not subjected to publick Penance in the Primitive Church seems only to have been because they are not so easy to be proved and Delinquents cannot so well be convicted Sins of the Flesh and Crimes against publick Society are Matters of Fact liable to Proof and Examination and therefore come under Cognizance of Civil Laws as well as Ecclesiastical whereas Circumstances may so alter the Nature of Spiritual Crimes that what in some cases may be damnable in others may be venial in others again highly commendable and accordingly the self-same Actions in all those Cases shall meet with different Appellations To speak evil of Dignities is a Sin expresly forbidden in Scripture yet to defend the Cause of Truth unjustly trampled upon even against those whom in lawful and indifferent things we are bound to obey may be very often our Duty This with due alterations may be extended to all other Crimes where the Good and Evil depends so visibly upon such Circumstances wherein a Criminal's word must of necessity be taken And this I suppose was the true Reason why those things were left to God and their own Consciences since it is most manifest that the Fathers esteemed these Sins if unrepented of to be as damning as any of those of a grosser Nature slight Sins are Evil-speaking lying idle Words addictedness to Wine c. And those which he gives of great Sins are Murder Adultery c. He concludes That there is no doubt but what is said in the Gospel that we ought to look upon those as Heathens and Publicans who do not Reform after they have been Reprov'd is to be understood of great Sinners He adds That it may also be understood of other Sinners with respect to the Judgment of Men but that it does not belong to us to judge whether they are such before God St. Austin distinguishes in many places Two sorts of Sins the great Sins for which Men are put under Publick Penance such as are Murder Adultery Fornication c. And the other Sins which are daily committed and are pardon'd by a daily Penance He says of the First that they kill the Soul all at once and that Christians who have Faith and Hope do not commit them But there is one place that is in Ch. 26. of the Book of Faith and Works where he treats more clearly of this Matter and distinguishes Three Sorts of Sins There are some says he so great that they deserve Excommunication and for which Sinners will want Reconciliation There are others for which this Penance is not necessary but they may be healed by the Remedy of Chastisements And lastly there are some that are very light which are blotted out by the Lord's Prayer from which no Man is free in this Life This distinction seems to be more just and reasonable for there are certainly many Sins which are not of the number of great Crimes neither are they so small but they may be Mortal The difficulty is to know to which of these Two Classes we should referr those Sins which hold the middle place between the First and the Second for since this distinction was not very common and since all the Fathers and St. Austin himself in many places did not distinguish but Two Sorts of Sins and Two Sorts of Penance it may be doubtful under what Class this Third Sort was comprehended For my part I believe that for
after his return into Africa about the Year 389. In the First Book he speaks of Musick in general In the Second of Syllables and Feet In the Three following he discourses of Measure Harmony and Verses In the Last he shows That Musick ought to raise up the Mind and Heart to a Divine and Heavenly Harmony St. Augustin's Discourse of a Master was written about the Year 395. It is a Dialogue betwixt himself and his Son Adeodatus wherein he shews That it is not by Men's Words that we receive Instruction but from the eternal Truth viz. Jesus Christ the Word of God who informeth us inwardly of all Truth The First of the Three Books of Free-Will was composed at Rome in 387. and the Two others in Africa in 395. In the First St. Augustin resolves that hard Question touching the original of Evil And having explained what it is to do Evil he shews That all manner of Evil comes from the Free-Will which readily followeth the Suggestions of Lust adding That our Will makes us either happy or unhappy That if we are not happy though we desire to be so it is because we will not live conformably to the Law of God without which it is impossible to be Happy In the Second Book the Difficulty alledged by Evodius VVhy God hath left in Man a Liberty of Sinning which is so prejudicial to him hath started these Three other Questions How we are sure that there is a God Doth all Good come from him Is the VVill free to do Good as well as Evil St. Augustin clears all these Difficulties proving That Free-VVill was given for a good End and that we received it of God that there is a Being more perfect than our Soul that this Being is Truth it self Goodness VVisdom it self that every good and perfect Thing cometh from it and that Free-VVill is to be reckoned among the good Things That there are Three sorts of Goods The greatest are the Vertues that make us live VVell the Idea's of Corporeal Objects without which we cannot live VVell are the least and the Power of the Soul are the middle Ones That the First cannot be abused but both the Second and the Last may be put to ill Uses That Free-VVill is of the Number of these middle Goods When the VVill adheres to the sovereign Good it renders Man Happy but when it departeth from that to cleave to other Objects then Man becometh Criminal and so Unhappy VVherefore neither the VVill nor the Objects it embraceth are Evil but it is a Separation from God that makes all Evil and Sin but God is not the Author of this Separation From whence then is this Principle of Aversion This St. Augustin clears in the Third Book It is not Natural since it is Guilty It is Free and Voluntary and it is enough to say That we may chuse whether we will follow it or no to justifie God's Justice But how can this Liberty agree with the fore-knowledge of God Nothing is more easie according to St. Augustin in this Place VVe are Free when we do what we please But Prescience doth not take away our Will on the contrary it supposes it since it is a Knowledge of our Will But are not the Creature 's Faults to be imputed to the Creator Why did he not make it impeccable Had not Men been more perfect if they had been created at first in the same condition with the Angels and the glorified Saints that cannot be separated from the love of God But St. Augustin replies Doth it therefore follow That because we may conceive a more Perfect State therefore God was obliged to create us in that State Should we not rather believe that he had his Reasons why he did not create us more Perfect There are several sorts of Perfections If the State of a Creature that enjoyeth God makes Soveraign Felicity then the State of a Creature that is subject to Sin which liveth in hope of recovering the Happiness which it lost is also in God's Order and exceedingly above that of a Creature that lies under the necessity of sinning eternally The Condition of these last is the worst of all and yet God cannot be accused of Injustice for giving a Being to Creatures which he knew would be eternally miserable He is not the Cause of their Sin That Being which he gave them is still a Perfection their Sins and their Misery contribute to the Perfection of the Universe and to exalt the Justice of God by the Punishment of their Sins What then is the Cause of Sins There is none but the Will it self which freely and knowingly inclineth to do Evil. For if Sin could not be resisted it were impossible to know or to avoid it and then there would be no Sin Wherefore then doth God punish Sins of Ignorance How cometh it to pass that he blameth those Actions that are done out of Necessity What mean those words of the Apostle I do not the Good that I would but the evil that I would not All that saith St. Augustin is spoken of Men born since Mankind was condemned to Death because of the First Man's Sin For were this Natural to Man and not a Punishment for his Sin it is certain there would be no Sin of Ignorance nor Necessity But when we speak here of Liberty we speak of that which Man had when God created him Here St. Augustin answers the greatest Objection that can be urged against Original Sin Though say they both Adam and Eve have sinned yet what had we done wretched Persons that we are to be thus abandoned to Ignorance and to Lust Must we therefore be deprived of the knowledge of the Precepts of Righteousness and when we begin to know them Must we see our selves under a kind of Necessity not to keep them by reason of the resistance of Lust St. Augustin confesseth That this Complaint were just if Men were under an impossibility of overcoming their Ignorance and Lust. But God being present every where to call his Creature to his Service to teach him what he ought to believe to Comfort him in his hopes to confirm him in his Love to help his Endeavours and to hear his Prayers man cannot complain That that is imputed to him which he is unavoidably ignorant of but then that he must blame himself if he neglects to seek after that which he knows not It is none of his fault that he cannot use his broken Members but he is guilty if he despiseth the Physician that proffers to cure him for none can be ignorant that Man may profitably seek for the Knowledge of what he knows not and which he thinks to be necessary And it is well enough known that Men ought humbly to acknowledge their Weakness to obtain Help In a word If Men do that which is Evil out of Ignorance or if it so happens that they cannot do the Good which they would there is Sin in that because it is in consequence
Excellent Principles of Morality and is full of very profitable Instructions We may also find there several Curious Remarks relating to the Discipline of that Time But it is not absolutely free from the Errors and Defects which we have observed in the other Works of Origen As this Discourse is very Instructive and not very much known I have thought it convenient to give a Summary of it Origen begins it by a Common Place to wit that there are an Infinite Number of Things which we cannot know without being enlightned from Heaven He applies this Reflection to his Present Subject saying that it would be impossible for him without the Assistance of Heaven to explain how we ought to Pray what we ought to say when we Pray and what are the most Proper Times for Prayer That he who treats of this Matter must be enlightned by the Heavenly Father instructed by the Son and inspired by the Holy Ghost That in order to Pray as we ought 't is not sufficient to repeat some certain Prayers but we must have Good Dispositions and that our Prayer may be acceptable to God it must be accompanied with a Conscience Pure and without Blemish Afterwards entring upon his Subject he observes that the Greek Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifies Prayer is mentioned in Scripture the first time in that Place where it is said that Jacob coming from Mesopotamia made a Vow to offer unto God the Tenth of all that he should bring from that Country He adds that the Word is often taken in this Sense to signifie a Promise or Vow of Performing a Thing if God grants us what we ask of him in our Prayers But he observes at the same time that there are other Places where it is taken for Prayer it self and he sets down some Examples wherein it is taken in both Senses After having spoken of the word Prayer he treats of the necessity of the thing it self He confutes the Arguments of those who pretended to maintain that it was to no purpose to pray he observes that this Errour could not be maintained by any but notoriously-wicked Persons and by Atheists who deny God's Providence but that the Devil endeavouring by all means to spread detestable Doctrines among those that bear the Name of Christ had put it into the hearts of some persons to reject every thing that is sensible in Religion to despise the Holy Eucharist and Baptism and to neglect Prayer as a useless thing Now these are the Reasons which these Persons bring for their Opinion First God knows every thing say they therefore what need is there of Praying Secondly He does not only know what must happen but he ordains it therefore what necessity is there of asking that of him which shall infallibly come to pass Thirdly If we are Predestinated before our Birth it is to no purpose to pray since we shall be necessarily Sav'd or Damn'd Fourthly God being immutable we do but deceive our selves in believing that we are able by our Prayers to make him alter his Decrees Origen in answer to these difficulties distinguishes Three sorts of Things which are in motion The first are those that are moved by a Foreign Power such as Inanimate Beings The second are those that are moved by their own Nature but without Knowledge as Animals and Plants The Third are those that move themselves and determine themselves as Intelligent Creatures He proves That these are free and that Prescience and Predestination does not at all destroy this Liberty because God ordains nothing relating to free Actions but what he has foreseen that intelligent Creatures would do freely And that so Prescience is not the cause of Things nor of Actions which are done freely but it only supposes that these things will be or will not be and that the knowledge which God has of them is followed by the Decree whereby he is resolved to grant or not to grant his Grace to hear or not to hear That he foresees the Good and Evil which Men shall commit That he knows whether they will repent or no and that in consequence of this knowledge he Predestinates or Reprobates them He adds That God has appointed Angels over Men to preserve them as long as they deserve it One might here take notice of his particular Opinion concerning the Sun the Moon and Stars which he says are intelligent and free Agents After having confuted the Reasons of those who reject Prayer he shews the advantage of it He says in the first place That he who prays puts himself in a condition of presenting himself before God and of conversing with him That in order to this he ought to drive away all evil Thoughts to banish all earthly Affections to raise up his mind towards Heaven to forget Injuries to pardon his Enemies and by no means to repine against God From hence he concludes That Prayer cannot be of any advantage if it be not preceded with great preparation Secondly He assures us That Christ Jesus the High-Priest of our Offerings prays with us That the Angels pray with him and that the Saints which are departed pray with us and this here is one of the most ancient and excellent Monuments to prove the Intercession of Saints His words are these The Souls of the Saints which sleep among the number of the Just pray with us as it is said in the Book of Macchabees And since the imperfect Knowledge which we have in this World is made perfect in the other Life 't is a very great Absurdity not to believe the same thing of the other Virtues and principally Charity towards our Neighbour which we ought to believe to be much stronger in the Saints than in mortal◠Men who are subject to Weaknesses and Imperfections He adds That every faithful Person has his Angel that hears him and preserves him whilst he prays Lastly He proves the necessity of continual Prayer by the Example of Jesus Christ by that of Just Persons and by the reckoning up of those Benefits and Graces which have been bestowed upon Men from their Prayers He exhorts the Faithful to pray for spiritual and heavenly Things rather than for earthly and sensual Goods such as Beauty Nobility Riches He shews the meanness and the vanity of these things He distinguishes four kinds of Prayers after the Apostle S. Paul in his first Epistle to Timothy The 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is to say Supplication which is to ask any Good of which we stand in need The second called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is according to Origen a request that is made in any danger with assurance of obtaining what we desire He observes that this kind of Prayer is commonly joined with Doxology that is to say with Praising of God's Holy Name The third 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is a Prayer made by a Person who has great confidence that he shall obtain what he asks he being much in God's Favour The last is Giving of
not rather encrease the Evil than diminish it But this Censure which he wrote when he was vex'd with the Council of Constantinople which had not treated him very favourably ought not to pass for a Rule but only for a Testimony of his resentment which came from St. Gregory in his Passion The 59th and 71st wherein he exhorts his Brother and Posthumianus to make Peace between the Bishops The 63d wherein he exhorts a Particular Person to embrace the Christian Philosophy and to despise the things of this World The 64th 66th 67th and 70th wherein he exhorts another Person to bear his Pains and Sickness patiently The 81st is an Excellent Exhortation to Patience and some others But the most considerable of them all is the 219 to Theodorus the Bishop of Tyanea which might be plac'd amongst the Canonical ones The Bishop to whom By Canonical Epistles here those are meant which were written to determine some particular Question in Discipline as the Canons of Councils usually did Of this Nature were St. Basil's Letters to St. Amphilochius mentioned above he writes had consulted him about an Oath or an Asseveration made in Writing in a certain Affair He who made this Agreement not willing to hold it longer cited him with whom he had agreed before a Judge and made void the Compact in Court Now it was ask'd whether this Man should be treated as a perjur'd Person since he had not made a Solemn Oath according to the ordinary Forms St. Gregory answers in this Letter That he is not at all of their Opinion who think that no Oaths but those which are made with the Mouth and according to the usual Forms by laying their Hands upon the Holy Gospels do oblige in Conscience and that Asseverations made in Writing do not bind after the same manner For says he if Contracts made in Writing do more bind a Debtor than bare verbal Promises Why shall not Oaths set down in Writing have at least as much Force as those which are spoken with the Mouth In a word Is an Oath any thing else but the Affirmation of him who promises or who assures any thing From whence he concludes That this Man who had brought his Action in Law to have this Compact dissolv'd which he was obliged by Oath to fulfil tho' he gain'd his Cause yet was guilty of Perjury and ought to do Penance for his Sin This is a very useful Admonition in our time wherein there is scarce any heed given to Oaths and Affirmations that are made in Writing as if they were nothing but mere Formalities of Law and not truly and properly Oaths St. Gregory teaches the same thing in the Poem made against those who Swear often where he says upon this Subject Is one less oblig'd by writing than by his Words and tho' he should not have touch'd the Gospels yet does he owe ever the less Reverence for God The Letters of St. Gregory are in number 242 if we comprehend in that number the 10 last published by Sirmondus but there are some of St. Basil's which are mix'd among them as the 30th the 206th and 207th His Testament tho' Ancient and Genuine relates only to his Domestick Affairs and contains nothing but the Disposal of his Estate This is all that we have to say in particular of the Works of Gregory Nazianzen The Judgment which may be made of them in general is this It cannot be doubted but this Author won the Prize of Eloquence from all the rest of his Age for he does certainly excell them for the Purity of his Words the Nobleness of his Expressions the Ornament of his Discourse the Variety of his Figures the Justness of his Comparisons the Beauty of his Reasonings and the Sublimity of his Thoughts St. Jerom and Suidas say That he imitated an ancient Author call'd Polemon but we may say That his Stile approach'd very near to that of Isocrates How lofty soever it be it is Natural flowing gently and pleasantly his Periods are full and hold up to the End he has a wonderful abundance of Words an unparallell'd easiness of Expression and a most agreeable turn of Wit His Orations are compos'd with much Art and Method for in them he uses such Characters as are most agreeable to his Subject and his Auditors so that one may say of him That he was one of the most perfect Orators of Greece yet he affected too many Antitheses Allusions Similitudes Comparisons and certain other Finenesses of Oratory which seem to render it Effeminate Sometimes also his Thoughts and Reasonings are false but then 't is cover'd with the sparkling of his Expressions and involv'd in the multitude of his words He is extremely Copious and says but few things in many Periods There are great numbers of Philosophical Thoughts interwoven in his Sermons and they are full of Illustrations taken from History and Fables He teaches Morality in such a manner as is more proper for Philosophers than the common People but he is very Sublime and very Exact in the Explication of Mysteries a Quality which made him deserve the Name of The Divine by way of Excellency He had much Piety but little skill in Managing of Business He was so passionate a Lover of Retirement that he could not for a considerable time apply himself to any Employment that hindered him from it He easily undertook great things but he quickly repented of his Undertakings He had in his Life-time three Bishopricks and yet it cannot be said that he was lawful Bishop of any one of them For he would not have that of Sasima to which he was Ordain'd and he did not accept of that of Nazianzum but only for a time to be Coadjutor to his Father but upon Condition that he should not Succeed him When he came to Constantinople he had no design to be Bishop of that Church neither did he take the Title upon him 'T is true that he was afterwards plac'd upon the Episcopal Throne by the Emperor and some Bishops but he was at last forced to leave it He was of a Morose and Satyrical Humour he lov'd Raillery and spar'd no body but chiefly the Bishops that were not worthy of their Ministry or that did not lead a Life agreeable to their Holy Orders These are the Editions of the Works of this Father In the Year 1504 Aldus Manutius a Printer at Venice publish'd one part of his Greek Poems In the Year 1516 he publish'd Sixteen Orations and Nine more in 1536. Afterwards all the Works of St. Gregory Nazianzen were collected together and printed in Greek at Basle by Hervagius in the Year 1550. The ancient Version of Ruffinus was printed at Leipsick about the Year 1522 without any Name The Translation of Billibaldus Pircheymerus was Printed at the same time with the Greek at Basle by Hervagius in 1550. In 1571 Leunclavius translated 19 Orations which were printed by the same Printer But all these Versions being very imperfect
Cyprian St. Ambrose St. Maximus St. Leo Faustus St. Gregory Alcuinus and Ivo Carnutensis St. Augustin's Sermons are written neither Artificially nor Methodically They are not regular Orations composed of all their Parts They are familiar Discourses spoken without much Preparation Most of them are very short and made up of concise Sentences and Phrases He doth not go to the depth of Points either of Doctrine or Morality as the Greek Fathers do but contents himself to speak of them succinctly and in few words Interrogations Antitheses and Quibbles are almost all the Figures that he beautifies his Discourse withal He doth not assert the Truth strongly nor inculcate it Pathetically but barely proposes it with agreeable Expressions and impresses it with some pleasant Thoughts This kind of Eloquence is much inferior to that of the Greek Orators but it may be that it relished best with the Men of St. Augustin's Age and agreed with the Genius of the Africans who not only admired his Sermons but were moved by them It would not be so now and I question whether a Sermon of St. Augustin's preached in our Pulpits would draw many Auditors Yet it must be confessed That few Latin Preachers are to be compared with him and that if he be much inferior to the St. Basils or the St. Chrysostomes he is much above the St. Maximus's the St. Chrysologus's and several other Latins that came after him I shall not enter into particulars upon his Sermons which were both a tedious and an endless Work The SIXTH TOME THE Sixth Tome of St. Augustin's Works contains his Dogmatical Books upon several Tome VI. Points both of Morality and Discipline He begins with some small Treatises containing Answers to several Questions upon various Subjects The First Is a Collection of Answers to 83 Questions which he resolved after his return into Africa about the Year 388. and which he Collected after he was a Bishop These are the Resolutions contained in those 83 Questions with most of the Principles from whence they are taken I. The Soul is not of its self nor by its self since it is not essentially the Truth II. God did not make Man like himself He is not good by Nature but by Will therefore he must be free III. If a Wise Man's Advice never makes another man worse than he was before Is it credible That God should make Men more wicked IV. What then may be the Cause of Man's Wickedness We must seek for it either in himself or in others or in nothing Consider it well and you will find That the Will of Man is the Cause of his Depravation V. Animals have no Knowledge and therefore cannot be Happy VI. All Corporeal and Spiritual Beings have a Perfection which makes their Essence Evil hath none therefore it is no Being VII Sometimes we confound the Soul with the Spirit and sometimes we distinguish them when the Actions of Man that are common to him with Beasts are attributed to his Soul the Spirit cannot be meant by that term for Beasts have no Reason and Reason is a necessary Adjunct of a Spirit VIII The Soul hath no other Motion besides its Will and its Actions It makes the Body change its place but changes not her self IX Our Senses only acquaint us with those Things that are in a perpetual change Therefore they cannot give us the Knowledge of Eternal and Immoveable Truth X. Whatsoever hath any Perfection cometh from God Bodies have Therefore God is the Author of them XI Jesus Christ was Man but he is Born of a Virgin Who can doubt then of his being come to save both Sexes XII God may be present indeed yet a defiled Soul cannot see him This Notion is not St. Augustin's but an Heathen's called Fonteius who was afterwards Baptized and died a St. Augustin Tome VI. Christian as St. Augustin assures us in his Retractations XIII Man can tame and dress a Beast but do we find that Beasts can do the same to Man XIV If Christ's Body had been but a Phantome Christ had deceived us but he is not capable of so doing XV. The Spirit of Man comprehends it self and knows no infinite Perfection in it self wherefore it is finite XVI The Time past is no more The Future is not yet Every thing is present with God XVII There should be three Causes of a Creature That which gives it a Being That which gives it such a sort of Being and that which gives it a Love to its Being Therefore the Cause of it is a Trinity This Argument is not the most convincing XVIII In Eternity there is neither time past nor to come all is present XIX God is no where and comprehends all things without being the place of any thing for he could not be in a place nor be a place without being Corporeal XX. Since God is the Author of Being he cannot be the Author of what tends to nothing Evil tends to nothing therefore God is not the Author of Evil. XXI The only reason why we need any thing is a defect in our selves God therefore needs nothing XXII Man is wise because he partaketh of wisdom but God is wise through Wisdom it self It is the same in all other Perfections XXIII If any thing should happen in the World by chance then there would be no longer Prudence but there is a necessity of Prudence for all Beings are perfect but can no further be so than as they participate of the Goodness and Perfection of God God and Man are the Authors of all that is done in the VVorld Good and Evil depend upon our own VVills XXIV It was the part of VVisdom to show that the most shameful Death is not to be feared And that 's one of the Reasons for which Christ endured such a one XXV There are Sins of Weakness Ignorance and Malice Weakness is contrary to the Strength of God Ignorance to his VVisdom and Malice to his Goodness Thus whosoever knows what God's Strength and VVisdom are may know which are Venial Sins And whosoever knows God's Goodness knoweth also what those Sins are which deserve to be punished both in this VVorld and in the next This well understood ought to be a Rule whereby to judge what sort of Sinners should be obliged to do Publick Penance though they confess their Sins Yet this Rule is very general and very equivocal XXVI God makes use of the VViâ—ked both to punish and to help Afflictions are an Exercise to the Righteous and a Punishment to the VVicked Rest and Peace corrupt the VVicked and sanctifie the Righteous God makes use of Men to accomplish the designs of his Providence though they know it not VVe act our selves when we follow God's Commandments but in all other things God guides us by the Springs of his Providence and we have no share in the Events XXVII VVe should not ask why God would create the VVorld that were to seek after a Cause of that which is the
Innocent I. addresses his Third Letter 68 F FAITH The beginnings of Faith of Conversion and of good Inclinations come from God and not from our Free-will 163. Faith stops not at a curious search into Natural things 179. The beginning of Faith and of Good Desires is the Effect of Grace 203. We ought to believe that God is what he hath Revealed to us himself We must not examine his Actions with a Rebellious Spirit but admire them with Faith and Submission 60 The Falls of Great Men should teach the most holy not to be Presumptuous 171 Fast. It is a great Scandal to Fast on the Lord's Day 139. Fast of Lent 20. Fasting ought to be accompany'd with Abstinence from Vice 53. Fasting consists not in a simple abstaining from Meats but also in abstaining from Sins and the Practice of Vertues 42. It concerns not the Mouth alone but the Ears the Hands the Feet and all the parts of the Body ibid. It consists not only in the retrenching our Meals but in the reforming the Manners ibid. We may have a reason for not Fasting but there can be none for not correcting a vicious habit ibid. Fear causes Charity to enter but Charity drives out Fear 174 Flavianus a Priest of Antioch Successor to Meletius in the Bishoprick of that City 6 Florentius Bishop of Tivoli to whom Innocent I. addressed his Eighth Letter 69 Frequent Communion 141 Free-will Vide Will in W. Friends Whom we ought to choose 41 G GAmes of chance are the occasions of Blasphemies Anger Injuries and all sorts of Crimes 46 Gaudentius Bishop of Brescia 59. The Life of S. Philastrius his Predecessor attributed to him ibid. Genesis is the Foundation and Source of all the Truths which are in the Law and the Prophets 53 Gerontius Bishop of Nicomedia driven from his See 8 God To think of the Glory of God in all things 43. God alone is the Sovereign good of our Souls 133 148. God is the Source of a Happy Life and true Vertue consists in the Love of God 154. True Blessedness consists in the knowledge of God 130. The Apparitions of God are made by the Ministring Angels who make use of Bodies to make those Apparitions 194 Goods We ought to consider all that we have received as not belonging to us 54. Men are not the Masters but the Dispensers of their Goods 55 Grace of God Man cannot be deliver'd from Ignorance and the Necessity of Sinning but by the assistance of God 133. The Grace of Jesus Christ necessary to make us good is intirely free 158. Twelve Articles which comprehend all that we are obliged to believe concerning Grace 163 Grace of Jesus Christ. Reasons of the Necessity of it 71 91. To implore it by fervent Prayer 215 Greatness is like Shadows and Fantoms which disappear after they have diverted us a very short time They are as Flowers that wither away of a sudden at once after having spent their lustre 55 H HAbits God hath given to Man Wool and Flax to defend him from the Injuries of the Weather 54 Hatred is as an Executioner that tears the bowels of those that harbour it 41 Heliodorus Priest of Antioch 123 Helvidius Heretick Disciple of Auxentius 124 Heraclides Deacon ordained Bishop of Ephesus 8 Heraclides ordained Bishop of Ephesus by S. Chrysostom deposed in the Council held against that Saint 9 Hereticks Those that return to the Bosom of the Church are put under Penance after they had quitted it to enter into a Sect of Hereticks 70. The example of some ill Catholicks cannot serve as a pretence to Hereticks to separate themselves from the Church 134 Historia Lausiaca vide in L. Honours How fine a Figure soever we make in this World the end is always the Grave which buries all men in eternal oblivion 55 Humility The greatest Action we can do and the most pleasing to God is to have low thoughts of our selves 44. Humility blameable that hath not Faith for its foundation Hypaepae a City of Asia 8 I JEsus Christ. His Divinity 16 19 John of Jerusalem Successor to S. Cyril in the Bishoprick of that City was a great Defender of the Books Opinions and Partisans of Origen 61. His Quarrel with S. Epiphanius ibid. S. Jerom his Birth Education and Studies 73 74. Passes into the East ibid. Receives the Order of Priesthood at Antioch ibid. Goes to Bethlehem ibid. Came to Constantinople and from thence to Rome ibid. Returns to Bethlehem where the Ladies Paula Eustochium and Melania came to him 75. His Death ibid. Censure upon his Works ibid. his Character 103 Impenitence Final is what we are to understand by the Sin against the Holy Ghost 158 174 The Incarnation If we could give a Reason for this Mystery it would no more be wonderfull if an example were to be found of such a thing it would not be singular 155 Injuries That we ought not to revenge them nor condemn those that have offer'd them to us but consider them as a punishment for our sins 3 Injustice It is not a less vertuous thing to suffer Injustice patiently than to give Alms 13 S. Innocent I. Successor to P. Anastasius 67 Interstices that ought to be observd in the conferring of Holy Orders 209 Invention of the Holy Cross Joannites a Name given by the Enemies of S. John Chrysostom to those who remained firm to that Saint during his Persecution 10 Isaac A Christian Author once a Jew 121 The Just God permits them to be afflicted for three Reasons 1. To correct them 2. To purifie them 3. To try them and this severity he exercises against them is the severity of a Father 59 Justice It is not Fear that renders us good but the Love of Justice 54 Justification We cannot be Justified but by Faith in Jesus Christ 159 Justina Empress favoured the Arians and persecuted S. Ambrose 59 K KINGS Wherein their Happiness consists 188 L LAusiaca Historia written by Palladius and addressed to one Lausus 66 Libanius S. Chrysostom's Master in Rhetorick 7 Liberty Evil consists in the ill use of our Liberty 192 193 Life The present Life being nothing but a Journey a Train of Miseries a Banishment from our Countrey we should be most miserable if it had not an end 48 Lord's-day and Festivals should be spent in Exercises of Devotion 38 Love of God is a strong fixing the heart on God which makes us despise all that is not of God 39 Lucian a Priest of Greece 122 Lucian Bishop of Signi to whom the Twentieth Letter of S. Innocent is Addressed 70 Lying is to say a thing which we think not with design to abuse 182. We ought not to tell a Lye neither for our Life or for any other Reason whatsoever 183. Tropes Parables and Figures are not Lyes ibid Lust. To preserve and encrease Charity we ought to oppose and weaken Lust 177 M MAcarius a Monk 123 Manners that young People ought to have 130 Mark the Hermit not he that lived under
That S. Prosper never wrote any thing against the Semi-Pelagians The Argument which is taken from the Testimony of Pope Gelasius who cites the Author of the Books Of the Calling of the Gentiles under the Name of a Doctor of the Church without naming it seems more plausible than the former for if this Work were S. Leo's how could Gelasius be ignorant of it Or knowing it what Reason could he have to conceal his Name But this Objection only proves That his Work was without a Name as I see all the World agrees and then all the Question will be To know if it is not S. Leo's who composed it without putting his Name to it The Reasons of F. Quesnel seem to make this Opinion very probable let us now see what Answers are given since we are already certain that there is no Argument to shew that these Books cannot be S. Leo's His Adversary contents himself to prove That S. Prosper uses S. Jerom's Version as well as S. Leo and that sometimes also he uses the Ancient Version and thinks that thus he hath answered the strongest Argument I will not stay here to examine which of the two hath Injury or Reason on his Side I will only confine my self to the Argument about the Agreement of Style in which M. Anthelmi yields to his Adversary since he owns That 't is the Agreement of Style of the Epistles and Sermons of S. Leo with the Books Of the Calling of the Gentiles that makes him attribute those Books to S. Prosper This Concession is very favourable to F. Quesnel for it being very certain that the Sermons and Epistles which bear the Name of S. Leo are that Fathers but not so that the Books Of the Calling of the Gentiles are S. Prosper's if it be necessary that these Works must both of them belong to one and the same Author it is much more reasonable to attribute the Books Of the Calling of the Gentiles to S. Leo than to fix the Epistles and Sermons of S. Leo upon S. Prosper F. Alexander and F. Oudin pretend that there is some Difference of Stile and that there are not in S. Leo so many Rhymes and Figures nor such a Cadence But they seem not to have taken sufficient notice of it for if there be any Difference 't is inconsiderable From all that we have hitherto said concerning the Author Of the Calling of the Gentiles we may conclude 1. That this Book did at first appear without the Name of the Author 2. That it was made since the Year 430 and before 496. 3. That in the Time of Pope Gelasius the Work was known but it was then without Name 4. That since it hath born the Name of S. Ambrose in some Manuscripts and of S. Prosper in others 5. That 't is certainly none of S. Ambrose's 6. That there is no probability that 't is S. Prosper's 7. That the Author having hitherto been always unknown 't is hard to know now whose it is 8. That if we judge by the manner of treating of Things and by the Agreement of Style S. Leo stands fairest for it 9. That there is nothing to prove that this Work is not his Nothing more can be expected but that it be positively asserted to be S. Leo's But that I dare not do upon the mere Conformity of Style although I confess it renders F. Quesnel's Opinion extreamly probable I have given no Answer to the Testimony of Photius alledged by M. Anthelmi but it is nothing to our Purpose It appears that that Author had a very confused Knowledge of the History of the Pelagians and that the Differences about S. Austin's Doctrine were not form'd till after his Death What he says concerning S. Prosper That he opposed the Remnants of the Pelagians under the Pontificate of S. Leo is wholly imaginary He had heard say That S. Prosper had written about Grace and thought he attack'd the Pelagians and knowing by Septimius's Letter and S. Leo's to Januarius Bishop of Aquileia That they had raised some Commotions under the Pontificate of this Pope he thought that it was at this Time that S. Prosper had opposed them and so much the rather because he knew that S. Prosper was then at Rome But it is discernable enough that Photius speaks all this by mere guess and as a Person so remote both in Time and Place as that he had not an exact History but contriv'd this Model of his own But yet were it true that S. Prosper had written against the Pelagians in the Popedom of S. Leo 't is a mere Surmise to apply it to the Books Of the Calling of the Gentiles which are not written against the Pelagians How knows he that Photius speaks of these Books Is it not possible that S. Prosper might compose some other Books against the Pelagians at that Time which are not come to us But there is no room as we have already said to bottom upon this Passage of Photius who himself doth not assert this but merely by Conjecture But we have insisted too much upon the Criticism of this Work an extract of it will be more useful and less tedious The Author in the beginning propounds the Question which he designs to handle in these words There is a great and difficult Question moved a long time since between the Patrons of Free-Will and the Preachers of Grace viz. Whether God Wills that all Men should be saved And because that cannot be denied it is further demanded Why the Will of the Almighty is not always accomplished If it be said That it depends upon the Will of Man this seems to exclude Grace which is no more a Free-gift but a Debt if it be bestowed according to desert It is further enquired Why that Gift without which no Man can be saved is not given to all by him who desires the Salvation of all Men The design of the Author is to resolve these Questions and to effect this he proposes to himself to Treat First of all Of the Motions of the Will against those who imagine that they deny all Freedom who Preach up Grace not observing that they may as well accuse them of denying Grace when they suppose that it doth not go before but only accompanies the Will For if we take away the Will where is the Original of Vertue And if we do not acknowledge Grace where is the Cause of Merit He then distinguishes Three sorts of Wills the Sensual Animal and Spiritual the Animal is in Infants the Sensual in Men without Grace the Spiritual is the Will of those Men who Act by Grace He distinguishes also Two sorts of Graces 1. General Graces which are nothing else but the exteriour helps as the Elements Nature the Law the Preaching of the Gospel and 2. Special Grace The first is useless without the latter which doth not destroy Nature but restore it doth not take away Freedom but enables it to act Without it there is no good all that
to be so much the quicker in providing some remedy against them Faelix having received this News wrote to his Legats that they should do nothing without the advice and approbation of this Cyrill and sent them a Letter Subscribed to the Emperor wherein he tells him of the Authority of the Council of Chalcedon and writes to him about the Persecution of the Orthodox in Africa We have neither of the Letters which Evagrius mentions The Legats being arrived at Abydos a Abydos Anastasius Bibliothecarius says that they were seized at Heraclea but Theophanes assures us that it was at Abydos were seized by the Guards who took away their Papers and put them into Prison They had orders not to communicate with the Adherents of Petrus Mongus nor Acacius who was joyned with him But the Emperor first made use of threatnings to force them to it but not prevailing that way he tryed them by Kindness and Promises and gained their Consent to communicate with Petrus Mongus and Acacius upon Condition nevertheless that it should be no prejudice to the Merits of the Cause which they entirely referred to the Judgment of Holy See Upon this Promise they received the Sacrament with Acacius and with the Deputies of P. Mongus The more Zealous of the Orthodox immediately made Protestations against the Action One they fastened upon the Cloaths of the Legats with an Hook the other they sent them in a Book and a third in a Basket of Herbs Vitalis and Mesenus having sped so ill departed to go again into Italy But they had with them an Advocate of Rome named Faelix who was forced to stay behind being taken Sick at Constantinople This Man because he would not conform to the Example of the Legats was cruelly handled by Acacius Vitalis and Misenus being returned to Rome found that the Acaemetae Monks had already given a Relation of what had passed and had likewise sent one of their Monks called Simeon to give the Pope an Account of it Faelix called a Council of Sixty Seven Bishops where they appeared to give an account of their Embassage and brought the Letters of Zeno and Acacius full of Invectives against John Talaia and the Praises of Peter They laboured to excuse themselves by saying that they had forced them and surprized them and they knew not that they had Communicated with Peter Bishop of Alexandria But Simeon proved it to their Faces that they knew what they did and that they never would harken to the Orthodox which came to them Silvanus who had been at Constantinople with them confirmed the Deposition of Simeon Insomuch that Vitalis and Misenus being Convicted of acting contrary to the Orders they had received were Deposed and Excommunicated They next Examined the Conduct of Acacius and Condemned him with Petrus Mongus This Judgment was passed July 28. Anno. 484. Faelix gave Notice of this Sentence to Acacius by his 6th Letter wherein he tells him that being found guilty of divers Crimes of breaking the Canons of the Council of Nice of Usurping the Jurisdiction of those Provinces that were not subject to him of having not only received into his Communion but also preferred to the Episcopal Dignity Hereticks whom he had heretofore condemned such as that John whom he made Bishop of Tyre although he was not received at Apemaea by the Orthodox and has been since expelled out of Antioch such was also the Deacon Numerius who was Deposed whom yet he raised to the dignity of the Priesthood Besides this he stood Convicted of having placed Petrus Mongus upon the Throne of St. Mark and received him into his Communion of having corrupted Vitalis and Misenus to gain their consent to what he desired instead of obeying and following the Commands which they had been injoyned on the part of the Holy See and by refusing to answer to the heads of the accusation which John had drawn up against him he seemed to acknowledge them That he had since contemned the Deacon Faelix and Communicated with the Hereticks and that he did persist in it so that he did not deserve to be ranked among those that he received to his Communion and that by this Sentence he declared him to be deprived of his Priesthood and the Communion of the Catholick Church faln from the Rights of the Priestly Office Condemned by the Judgment of Holy Spirit and his Apostolick Authority and bound for ever with Cords of an Anathema Nunquamque Anathematis Vinculis exuendus Besides this Letter there is a kind of a short Declaration against Acacius in which Faelix declares him deprived of his Priesthood for having not obeyed the Admonitions of the Holy See and Imprisoned his Legats and forbids all Men whatsoever communicating with him under the Penalty of an Anathema He wrote also to the Emperor Zeno the Ninth Letter in which having complained of the ill Usage that his Legats had met with he tells him that he had Deposed them and Deprived them of Communion for having consented to what Acacius had desired of them He assures him that he will never Communicate with Peter and that he gives him the Liberty to choose the Communion of St. Peter or Peter Bishop of Alexandria That he hath also condemned Acacius for being in Communion with Hereticks and he hoped that the Piety of the Emperor will incline him to suffer the Laws of the Church to be Executed That he ought to hold this for a certainty that as God hath entrusted the Sovereignty of things Temporal to Princes so he hath made the Ministers of the Church Ministers of Spiritual things and that when the Cause of God is in â—and the Will of Kings ought to submit to the Ministers of Jesus Christ that they ought to Learn Holy things of them and not to meddle with the Office of Teaching others to follow the Decisions of the Church and not take upon him to prescribe Laws This Letter is dated Aug. 1. Anno. 484. Lastly He lets us know by his 10th Letter to the Clergy and People of Constantinople the Judgment passed against Acacius that they may not too own him for their Bishop but separate themselves from his Communion Tutus the Advocate of the Church of Rome was commanded to carry the Sentence against Acacius and to declare it to him He discharged his Commission by fastening it to his Priestly Habit when he was Celebrating the Holy Mysteries and by publishing the Declaration made against him but afterward suffering himself to be corrupted by Maronas he Communicated with Acacius Faelix having convicted him of it by his own Letter he put him out of his Advocates Office and declared him Excommunicated He signifies it to the Monks of Constantinople by his Eleventh Letter and advises them to sever from their Communities those who would Communicate with Acacius permitting them notwithstanding to receive those who had been constrain'd to do it by Violence and did testifie their sorrow for it But notwithstanding all the endeavours
concluded that the Acts of the Condemnation of Eutyches should be read without more ado They read them all along with the acknowledgment that had been made of them at Constantinople When these Acts were read the Bishops declared That Eutyches having always professed the Faith of the Fathers of the Council of Nice and Ephesus was Orthodox and had been unjustly Condemned The Monks of the Monastery of Eutyches afterwards presented a Petition against Flavian in which they complain That this Bishop having unjustly Condemned their Abbot because he would not approve as he had done Errors contrary to the Faith of the Councils of Nice and Ephesus had sent Theodotus a Priest to them who enjoined them not to obey their Abbot to have no Society with him and not permit him to have the Management of the Revenue of the Monastery that the Altar which Flavian himself had Consecrated for them six months since had remained without a Sacrament that they were still themselves bound by that unjust Sentence that some of their Brethren were dead without receiving the Sacrament that they had always strictly followed the Orders of a Monastick life according to their Rule but had been deprived of their Sacraments that they had passed the Festivals of the Nativity Epiphany and Easter and continued 9 months in that Estate but Flavian had no Mercy on them that they prayed the Synod to have some pity on their Misery restore them to the Communion and to judge him with rigor who had passed that unjust Sentence upon them This Petition was Subscribed by 1 Priest 10 Deacons 3 Sub-deacons and 21 Ordinary Monks They questioned them about their Faith who answering That they received the Faith of the Councils of Nice and Ephesus the Faith of S. Athanasius S. Gregory and S. Cyril and that they agreed to the Confession of Faith that Eutyches had read they declared them Absolved and they received them to Communion Lastly They read the sixth Action of the former Council of Ephesus that they might get a pretence to condemn Flavian and when it was read and approved by the Bishops Dioscorus declared That Flavian and Eusebins Bishop of Dorylaeum having been the Cause of a Universal Scandal endeavouring to add to the Faith of the Council of Nice contrary to the Prohibition of the Council of Ephesus ought to be Deposed His Opinion was followed by Juvenal Domnus Thalassius and the Bishops who Signed the Condemnation of Flavian and Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum While Dioscorus gave his Judgment Flavian said aloud That he rejected him and Hilary the Deacon said That he opposed the Sentence of Dioscorus Some of the Bishops contradicted it others cast themselves at Dioscorus feet begging of him to spare Flavian but they were compelled by the threats of the Soldiers whom they had admitted to subscribe the Acts of the Council The next day Dioscorus Deposed Ibas Bishop of Edessa being accused of having spoken this Blasphemy That he envied not Jesus Christ the Title of God because he could himself become such if he pleased Nor did they spare Theodoret although he was denied the Liberty of coming to defend himself The reason of his Condemnation was That he had written against S. Cyrils Chapters and had heretofore taken Nestorius's part Labinianus Bishop of Paros was also Deposed and lastly Tho. Domnus Bishop of Antioch had Signed the Condemnation of Flavian and consented to all that Dioscorus desired yet he was also condemned under a pretence that he had heretofore written a Letter to Dioscorus against S. Cyril's 12 Chapters Dioscorus made use of the opportunity of his absence from the Council upon the account of some indisposition which took him suddenly Flavian Appealed from this Judgment given against him by â—he Synod The Reasons for his Appeal were these That they would not hear his Defence That Dioscorus had been an absolute Commander in it to order what he pleased That all things passed by force and contrary to the Canons That they had forced the Bishops by Threats to Subscribe That they would not read S. Leo's Letter That no regard was had to the refusal which he made against Dioscorus nor to the opposition made by the Popes Legats This Appeal was presented to the Popes Legats but it was referred to a General and Free Council and there to be Prosecuted This appears by the Letters and Carriage of S. Leo who in persuit of this Appeal did not concern himself with the Judgment of Flavian's Cause before his own Tribunal but importuned the Emperor to call a Council of the Eastern and Western Bishops to make void the Judgment given at Ephesus against all sort of Justice and Equity Dioscorus and those of his Faction being provoked by this Appeal set upon Flavian with a design to banish him and did it with so much violence that he died a little time after 'T is probable that having received several blows on his Feet when he was apprehended and afterward being hardly used in his Journey by those that carried him into Banishment he died a little after he came there of the ill usage and blows he had received Thus Liberatus and Evagrius relate his Death and this shews that it was not without Reason that Dioscorus was accused in the Council of Chalcedon of having been the Cause of Flaviau's Death because though he did not himself smite him yet it was by his order that he was so badly used Anatolius was ordain'd in the place of Flavian Maximus of Donnus Nonnus of Ibas and Athanasius of Sabanian They ordained none in the place of Theodoret Bishop of Cyrus and Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum for they were only thrust out of their Dioceses The first desired help of the Pope They did not spare the very Legats of S. Leo who were the only persons who shewed any Courage for the defence of the Innocent They were apprehended but Hilary found out a way of escape and having passed through many dangers they got safe to Rome During these transactions S. Leo was much perplexed about the success of this Affair He knew Ep. 35. that Eutyches was very considerable at Court and that Dioscorus and the Egyptian Bishops favoured him and was afraid that they would not have that respect to his Letter and Legats that they ought Flavian's silence increased his Grief and he could not but let him know it As soon as he understood by Hilarius the Deacon how things went he called a Council and wrote to the Emperor Theodosius in his own and Brethren's Name That the Council which he had caused to be held at Ephesus had depraved the Purity of the Faith and Discipline of the Church That Ep. 39. all things were carried according to the Humour of Dioscorus who had allowed the Bishops no Liberty and who had made them pass a very unjust Sentence He conjured his Majesty by the name of the Holy Trinity to leave all things in the same state that they were before the assembling of
refutes Severus's Error That the Two Natures became one in Christ. The same Subject is also handled in the next Writing directed to a Lord named Peter The 14th Letter which is the 41st piece of this Volume is also on the Mystery of the Incarnation but in the end of it he speaks of the Incursions of the Arabians which spoiled the Frontiers of the Empire The 15th is a Scholastical Tract of the Union and Distinction of the Two Natures in Christ directed to Conon a Deacon of Alexandria To it is joined a Letter directed to the same Deacon to exhort him to stand up in the defence of the Truth without being dismayed at the sufferings attending the defence of it The 17th is directed to Julian It is also about the distinction of the Two Natures The 18th is written in the Name of George a Noble-Man of Africa to some Nuns of Alexandria engaged in the Error of the Monâ—â—helites to dissuade them from it The 19th is written to Pyrrhâ—s before he was Patriarch and â—ad declared himself openly against the Church Maximus asks him How his saying is to be understood that there was but one Vertue or Operation in Christ. The following Letters to divers private persons are shorter than the former and contain nothing but some Moral or Mystical Discourses The Five Dialogues upon the Trinity which were Published under Athanasius's Name are here restored to S. Maximus upon the Authority of the Greek Manuscripts and Authors which have Quoted them under this Father's Name We have shewed already that Combefis was in the right to put them under Maximus's Name and that they are none of Theodoret's as F. Garner pretended After so many Writings of the Ancients upon the Trinity there is no need to make an Extract of this where that Mystery is handled after Maximus's Genius Scholastically and in the form of a Conference Maximus's * Or an Exposition of the Publick Liturgy of the Church Mystagogy are Considerations of the Church-Ceremonies He says there That the Church is the Figure and Image of God the World Man and the Soul That the Introitus of the Mass is a representation of Christ's entrance into our Souls That the Lessons signifie the Faith of Christians That the Songs are signs of the Spiritual Joy That the Gospel figures the Consummation of the World and the Perfection of Christians That when the Bishop descends from his Chair he represents Christ descending from Heaven in the Day of Judgment That the going out of Catechumens teaches us that those that have not Faith shall be rejected That the Doors shut the Kiss of Peace the saying of the Creed are the figures of the perfect Union of Christians That the Trisagion and the Sanctus are Types of our future Glory and present Adoption This whole Book is full of such Allegories Lastly The last of Maximus's his Works is a Collection of sundry passages of Ecclesiastical and Prophane Authors set down under different Titles concerning Vertues Vices Women ' Duties Moral Precepts and Maxims We have moreover a Comment or Scholia of Maximus's upon the Books ascribed to the Areopagite which is Printed with Dionysius's Works He writ also some Scholia upon S. Gregory Nazianzen which were Printed at Oxford in 1681. Petavius hath Published a Kalendar for Easter ending in the Year 641 ascribed to Maximus Photius saith This Author hath extraordinary well turned Periods but that he often useth Hyperboles and Transpositions and is not careful at all to speak properly which renders his Writings obscure and difficult That he affects a kind of harshness of swelling Stile which renders his Discourse unpleasing and ungrateful to the Ear That in his Rhetorical Figures he does not make choice of that which is neat and handsome That he tires out his Reader with his Allegorical and Mystical Explications so far distant from the Letter and the truth of History that one cannot see any coherence between his Answer and the Question That yet he excells in the Allegorical and Mystical way and that they who take delight in it can meet with nothing more accomplished That his very Letters are not without obscurity which is the only Epistoler Character he hath kept to That he is plainer and clearer in his Treatise of Charity and in his Maxims meerly Moral Lastly That the Conference with Pyrrhus is of a Stile somewhat low and that he hath not kept the Laws of Logick One may add to this Judgment of Photius That Maximus handles matters after a meer Scholastical manner That he Speaks and Reasons as a Logician That he gives his Definitions Terms and Arguments in form That he maketh use of great big Words signifying no more than what might be expressed in other terms That he is acute and close striketh his Adversaries home and stands firm to his own Principles That he was very quick of Apprehension of Reasoning and Disputing very free of Speech Stiff and Firm. He was of the Opinion of the Latins about the procession of the Holy Ghost Original Sin Christ's Grace and the Celibacy of Bishops and the Greatness and Power of the Roman Church He had the Monastick Life in high esteem and was much given to Mystical Thoughts In a word He was a Scholastical Mystical and Speculative Man ANASTASIUS Disciple of Maximus ANASTASIUS Disciple of Maximus who suffered so much with him for the same cause wrote a Letter to the Monks of Cagliari against the Monothelites wherein he refutes Anastasius those that said That in Christ there was One and Two Wills from whence he concluded that they admitted Three It is in the Collections of Anastasius Bibliothecarius Published by Sirmondus at Paris 1620 and among Maximus's Works He Died in Exile at Lazica ANASTASIUS Apocrisiarius of Rome THIS * A Commissary or Chancellor to a Bishop Apocrisiarius of Rome suffered also the same Persecutions for the same cause He wrote a Letter to Theodosius Presbyter of Gangra upon S. Maximus's Death There he Anastasius Quotes some fragments of the Writings of Hippolytus Bishop of Porto It is in Anastasius's Collections and among Maximus's Works THEODOSIUS and THEODORUS THESE Two Brothers made an Historical Memorial of the Life and Conflicts of Anastasius and the other Champions of the Faith This is also found among Anastasius's Theodosius and Theodorus Collections THEODORUS THEODORUS Presbyter and Abbot of Raithu to whom Maximus directed his Treatise of the Essence and Nature wrote a Tract upon the Incarnation There he sets Theodorus down at first the Errors of Manes Paulus Samosatenus Apollinarius Theodorus of Mopsuesta Nestorius and Eutyches about that Mystery Then he Expounds the Faith of the Church opposite to those Errors He shews How they have been revived by Julian of Halicarnassus and Severus to whom he opposed the Fathers Testimonies but we have not now this last part This Work was Published in Greek and Latin by Beza and Printed at Geneva in 1576 Quarto Since that time it was
is evident that he was not Bishop of Constantinople when the Council began no Author says He was Deposed or Expelled for that Heresie neither is it probable that it was the cause of his leaving his See seeing George who was put in his room was also a Monothelite Secondly Put the case Theodorus had been condemned by the Council how is it likely that he durst have ventured to falsifie the Acts of the Council it self And tho' he durst do it it had been enough for him to cross out his own Name without substituting that of Honorius and put even the case he could have taken that resolution can it be thought that he could have brought it about How could he falsifie all the Copies of the Acts of this Council sent out to all the Patriarchal Sees How could he bring the Emperor the other Patriarchs and all the Bishops to consent to this Cheat Why did not the Legates and the Popes complain of this falsification Why did they acknowledge after that Honorius was condemned in the 6th Council Why did they not discover this Imposture by the Copy of the Acts of the Council which the Deputy of the Holy See brought and which the Popes Agatho's Successors communicated to the Western Bishops and which he sent into Spain If they were corrupted when he brought them why did he suffer that Corruption And why did the Popes use them If they were not corrupted why did they not use them to discover the Fraud of the Enemies of the Holy See Thirdly Honorius is found condemned in some places where they could not have spoken of Theodorus In the 13th Action his Letter to Sergius is particularly censured as contrary to the Apostolick Doctrine and the Definitions of the Councils It cannot be said this was spoken of Theodorus In the 14th Action his Letter to Sergius is again condemned as perfectly agreeable to the Doctrines of the Hereticks In the 18th Action his Letter is condemned to be burnt as containing the same Heresie and Impieties as the other Writings of the Monothelites In the same Session he is condemned together with Sergius Anathema to Sergius and Honorius and after Anathema to Pyrrhus and Paul If Theodorus's Name had been put in the room of Honorius's they would not have placed him before Pyrrhus and Paul but after them Lastly He is almost every where called Bishop of Rome All this shews there is nothing more unwarrantable than Baronius's conjecture Fourthly 'T is a plain matter of Fact that Honorius was condemned in the 6th Council And of this we have proofs more than sufficient The Council it self owns it in its Letter to the Pope the Emperor in his Edict declares it Agatho who was one of the Notaries testifieth it in a relation which is in the end of a Manuscript of the 6th Council Leo the Second Agatho's Successor asserts it in Three of his Letters the whole Church of Rome acknowledges it in the forms of the Oath which the Popes newly Elected are to take and in her Ancient Liturgy the Two General Councils following look upon this condemnation as true Lastly No Body ever questioned it and consequently Baronius's fancy must pass for a matchless piece of rashness You will yet be more sensible of it when you shall see the weakness of the proofs whereon he founds his bold conjecture The first is a place of Pope Agatho's Letter which says the Apostolick Church of Rome did never swerve from the way of the Truth and that his Predecessors did always confirm the Faith of their Brethren This Letter says he having been read and approved in the Council how is it likely that after this they durst have condemned one of Agatho's Predecessors as an Heretick or favourer of Heresie If this Popes Letter had contained but that one point or it had been read in the Council to justifie Honorius this Objection might have some strength But this being said but by the by in Agatho's Letter containing a long Exposition of the Faith of the Catholick Church and a very great number of the Fathers Testimonies and Reasons against the Error of the Monothelites and the Council having caused it to be read on purpose only to know the Doctrine of the Holy See and the Western Churches It is evident their approbation does not fall upon this particular place of his Letter but upon the Exposition of Faith and the Doctrine it contained And tho' we should suppose that the Council had taken notice of the Commendation which Agatho maketh of his Church and his Predecessors and had perceived that it was not absolutely and strictly true they ought not upon this account to have refused their approbation of his Letter nor excepted against this place of it It were a silly thing to imagine that a Council called to decide a Question of Faith should busie it self to wrangle about a Commendation slipt in by the Pope in his Letter in behalf of his Predecessors But Pope Agatho's praises of his Predecessors in general ought not to be taken in a strict sense for if we understand them so all the World will see that they cannot be true because it cannot be denied but Liberius and Honorius did but weakly defend the Faith as well as tolerate Error they must then be understood in general of almost all Agatho's Predecessors and not of all in particular so that no exception could be made to it Besides it were an easie thing to retort Baronius's Argument upon himself For if the commendations of Agatho's Letter ought to be taken strictly as also the Council's approbation of it so that it was not lawful for them to condemn those whose Religion and Piety he commends How durst Baronius charge the Emperor Justinian with Heresie Perfidiousness and Impiety since he is commended in Agatho's Letter as a most Religious Orthodox and Godly Prince whose Memory is had in Veneration among all Nations But I stand too long upon so weak an Objection He makes one more which is not harder to solve How is it possible saith he that the Pope's Legates who were present in this Council should say nothing to vindicate Honorius But why would he have them to engage in a bad cause Honorius had approved Sergius's Letter had consented that they should speak neither of One nor of Two Operations had asserted but One Will in Christ had silenced Sophronius who would have defended the Faith These Facts were evident by the very reading of his Letter there is enough for his condemnation and they could not stand up in his defence without furnishing their Adversaries with Arms. The same Reasons which they should have used to justifie him might have been urged also to justifie Sergius and the rest therefore in forsaking Honorius they took the right course they did the same thing in the Roman Council under Martin the 1st for when they read Paul's Synodical Letter who defends his own Error by the Authority of Honorius neither the Pope nor any of
Bishop in the World and if he could not come himself to send some Legates in his Place that the ancient Tradition of the Church might be confirmed in this Synod and that there might be no Schism hereafter in the Apostolick and Catholick Church of which Christ is the Head They add they send him Constantine Bishop of Leonce in Sicily to bring him this Order desiring him to send him back again with an Answer as soon as he can Tarasius whom the Emperor and Empress had caused to be chosen Patriarch though he was but a Lay-man and Officer of the Crown having excused his accepting of that Dignity set forth the Division of the Church about Images and the Necessity of calling a General Council The Assembly assented to it he was ordained Patriarch and wrote Synodical Letters to the Patriarchs of Rome Alexandria Antioch and Jerusalem Pope Adrian sent * Viz. Petrus Vicedomus and Petrus Hugumeus to Priests to hold his Place in the Council and the Eastern Bishops did the same After their Arrival the Emperor's Officers would have had the Council to sit at Constantinople but this became impracticable because many of them that had approved the Destruction of Images would have no more Synods to be held about that Affair which they thought to be already decided As they were discoursing these Matters in private Meetings the Emperor sent them word that it was not lawful for them to meet without the Consent of the Bishop of Constantinople and that in rigor they were Deposed Nevertheless they raised some ss Tumult The true Cause of this Tumult was that the Image-Worshippers being resolved to carry the point having gotten so powerful as well as Zealous Patron of their Idolatry as Irene the Empress was would have shut the contrary party out of the Council who thereupon endeavour'd to gain admission by force that their Doctrine might not be condemned unheard This being Granted them they carried themselves peaceably as well in Publick as in their Dispures in the Councils which they managed with such undeniable Arguments drawn from Holy Scripture that the Image-Worshippers were obliged to dissolve the Council at Constantinople without accomplishing their Design But not long after by the Empresses Order they called another Council at Nice where they Established Idolatry by a Law the Empress's Guards keeping the Iconoclusts from entring the Council and her self undertaking to put the Constitutions of it in force tumult when the Council Assembled the first time the 1st day of August An. 786. and having caused the Soldiers of Constantinople to rise they got them to Besiege the Bishops and to require with threatnings that no Council should be held So they were forced to seperate themselves and to the end they might hold another without constraint they sent the Soldiers to the Army under pretence that the Agarenians had made Incursions into the Empire After this the Council was Assembled at Nice about the end of 787. The Pope's Legates held the first place there Terasius Patriarch of Constantinople the 2d the Deputies of the Eastern Bishops the 3d after them Agapetus Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia John Bishop of Ephesus Constantin Metropolitan of Cyprus with 250 Bishops or Arch-bishops and above 100 Presbyters or Monks and two Commissioners of the Emperor and the Empress The First Action or Session was held the 24th of September in the Church of St. Sophia after they had declar'd the Cause of holding of the Council they read the Letter of the Empress Irene and the Emperor wherein they both assure them that they have Assembled the Synod with the consent of the Patriarchs that they leave the Bishops at full Liberty to speak their mind that Paul the last Patriarch of Constantinople acknowledging the Fault he had committed in receiving the Synod which enjoyn'd the destroying of Images having quitted his See he had Caused Tarasias to be chosen in his Room that he had refused this Dignity but being urg'd to accept of it he had required a Synod might be held to suppress the Schism which divided the Church in the point of Images that according to his request they had called this Council that they exhorted them to Judge justly and couragiously to condemn Errors and establish the Truth in Order to bringing Peace back again into the Church that they had received Letters from Pope Adrian which they would have read in the Assembly with the Papers sent by the Eastern Bishops After the reading of this Letter Basil Bishop of Ancyra Theodosius of Myra Theodosius of Amoru made very Large Declarations that they did Honour Reverence and Worship Images and that they were sorry for having been of another Perswasion and they were received After them Hypatius Bishop of Nice and four others who had been Caballing the year before did also present themselves to be received declaring that they did admit of Image Worship These gave an Occasion to examine how and in what Quality they should be received They searched several Ecclesiastical Laws touching the manner of receiving Heretics Thereupon they read the 53 Canon of the Apostles the 8 Canon of the Nicene Council the 3 of the Council of Ephesus the first Canon of St. Basil's Epistle to Amphilochius a Letter of the same Father to the Evesians the Definition of the Council of Ephesus against the Messalians St. Athanasuis's Letter to Ruffinian the Judgment of the Council of Chalcedon about the reception of the Bishops who had assisted at the Council of Ephesus under Dioscorus and some Abstracts of their Ecclesiastical Histories of Rusinus and Socrates They debated whether they ought to receive converted Heretics so as to leave them in the Sacerdotal Dignity Some insisted upon Athanasius's Letter to Ruffinian which imports that they shall be admitted to Pennance but shall not continue in the Clergy but it was answered that it was to be understood of Heresiarchs only Some Voted that according to the Nicene Council they should lay hands on them anew but some said that the Council did not mean a New Consecration but a simple Ceremony of Imposition of Hands They enquired whether the Heresie of the Iconoclasts was greater or lesser than the former Heresies and there was nothing determined upon that Point Lastly after many Allegations they declared that those who return'd from their Heresie yea and those also who had been Ordain'd by Heretics were to be received and to keep their Dignity if there was nothing else that hindred them from continuing in the Degree of Clerks In the Second Action of the 26th of the same Month after Gregory Bishop of Neo caesaria had presented himself and owned that he had done amiss in rejecting Image Worship they read Pope Adrian's Letter to Constantine and Irene in which having commended their Zeal he establisheth the Worship of Images and affirm that the Church of Rome received it by Tradition from S. Peter He proves by a false Relation that in S Sylvester's time S.
he had not been Canonically restored but had dared to Exercise his Priestly Function of which he had been justly divested In the Third Action Hincmarus's Ordination was Examined Rothadus Bishop of Soissons brought the Testimonial of his Election signed by the Clergy and People Hincmarus himself presented his Letters of Ordination a Letter of the French Bishops and the Kings Letters Signed and Sealed by which his Ordination was confirmed In the Fourth Session therefore they concluded that Hincmarus was Lawfully Ordained Arch-Bishop of Reims and began to Examine the Validity of the Ordinations made by Ebbo Immâ— Bishop of Noyon cited a Decretal of Pope Innocents that they can't receive Orders from them who have no power to Ordain Whereupon it was in conclusion resolved upon and determined unanimously In the Fifth Session that all that Ebbo had done after his Deposition except Baptism was null and void and all those who had been Ordained by him should be deprived of their Orders in what place soever they were Then Fredebert who was one of the Canons Ordained by Ebbo hearing this Sentence said that he was Ordained by that Bishop because he saw the Suffragans of the Archbishop of Reims of whom Rothadus Bishop of Soissons was one were come to Reims by the Order of Latharius and had restored Ebbo To prove this he produced a Letter signed by Eight Bishops It was proved that these Subscriptions were forged and Immo who was among them and therefore concerned to clear this Matter declared that these Clerks being Excommunicated had no right to accuse a Bishop but to satisfie the Council and Prince he presented a Record by which it appeared that the Suffragans of Reims had declared that they ought not to have any thing to do with Ebbo after his Deposition He adds that what was said in that Letter of the Staffs and Rings which they affirm that Ebbo had given to 3 Bishops Ordained in his absence was absolutely false and that those Men who dare so boldly to affront and abuse the Bishops should be punished according to the utmost Rigour allowed by the Canons In the Sixth Action the Cause brought against Hincmarus being thus decided he resumed his place and then they handled in particular the Validity of the Ordination of a Priest Abbot of the Monastery of Haut-Villiers called Halduin who having been Ordained Deacon by Ebbo was afterwards made Priest by Lupus Bishop of Chalons The Bishop excused himself that being made Governor of the Church of Reims during the Vacancy of that See by an Order of the Prince this Halduin was presented to him by the Arch-Deacon of that Church to be Ordained Priest The Synod judged that conformable to the Canons of the Council of Nice and Sardica the Priest Halduin ought to be deposed In the Seventh Action it was demanded how they ought to be dealt with who had communicated in the Sacrament and Prayer with Ebbo because the Canons had ordered that such ought to be Excommunicated especially if they knew that he was deposed Erpuin shewed that according to the Canons they might be favoured so far as to enjoy Communion still if they acknowledged their fault Hereupon in the Eighth Session the King desired of Hincmarus that the Clerks which had been Ordained by Ebbo and those who had Communicated with him should be granted Lay-communion which the Council consented to and when they had begged pardon of their fault and acknowledged it it was allowed them Thus was the Judgment of this Affair managed in the Council as the Acts of it relate more at large the substance of which is contained in the first of the Canons Hincmarus being desirous to make this Sentence irreversible used his utmost endeavours to get it The Confirmation of the Judgment of the Council of Soissons by Leo IV. and Benedict confirmed by the Pope And to this end wrote several Letters to Leo IV. but he refused to approve the Acts of this Council because they were not sent by some of the Bishops who were at the Council and because he had heard that some of the Persons who were deposed had appealed to the Holy See Nevertheless Hincmarus was still urgent to have the Judgment confirmed and the Clerks who were concerned in this matter carried their Complaints to Rome insomuch that Leo IV. having regard to what Pope Nicolas had written about it sent the Bishop of Spoletum his Legate to hold a Council in which the Case should be decided between the Parties at difference upon Condition nevertheless that if the Deposition of the Clerks were confirmed they should have liberty to appeal to Rome This was not executed but Leo being dead Hincmarus addressed his Successor Benedict and having desired the confirmation of those Priviledges granted by the Popes to the Archbishops of Reims prayed him also to confirm what had been done against Wulfadus and the other Clerks Ordained by Ebbo shewing him in what manner that Judgment had been passed Benedict answered him That if the Business were so managed as he had related and as it was set down in the Acts of the Council he would confirm their Decision with the Apostolick Authority and would make it to remain in force Pope Nicolas who not long after succeeded Benedict confirmed the Priviledges granted to Hincmarus Pope Nicolas's Judgment about Wulfadus in the same form but afterwards being changed in his affections towards Hincmarus and being sollicited by Wulfadus and his Fellows he resolved to review this Affair and to write to Hincmarus to shew those Clerks some favour to restore them or to have their Cause re examined in a Council of Bishops which should meet at Soissons and at which Remigius Arch-Bishop of Lyons Ado Archbishop of Vienna and Wemlo of Sens should be present with the Arch-Bishops and Bishops of France and Neustria where Hincmarus and the Bishops of his Province should meet and Walfadus and the Clerks in the same Cause should be summoned That the whole Matter being Examined they should determine as they thought fit concerning the Restoration of those Clerks but if they shall appeal to the Holy See or desire to be judged there both Parties should come to Rome or send their Deputies after the Council which should begin the 16th of August In fine That it ought not to be pleaded in excuse that those Clerks having not appealed in the year ought not to be received for besides that this exception is not in the Canons which speak of Appeals to the Holy See those Clerks did Appeal to Pope Leo within the year concerning the Judgment given against them as appears by a Letter of that Pope which he had by him Wherefore he Exhorts Hincmarus not to be severe with those Clerks He answers also to what might be alledged that he had the Grants of the Holy See by which this Judgment was confirmed by saying that if he read them attentively he would find that the final Decision of that Controversie was
Excommunication pronounced against him should be Reiterated Ignatius the Patriarch having made a Speech thereupon to the Council Stephen Deacon and Notary pronounced several times the Anathema against Photius and made several Acclamations to the Prosperity of the Emperour the Empress the Pope and the Patriarchs Deputies The Eighth Session was held upon the 8th day of November the Acts of the Council of Photius against Pope Nicholas being first burnt by the Emperour's Order There appeared Three Persons bearing such Names as Photius had given to the pretended Deputies from the Pope and the Patriarchs Who declared That they had not subscribed to those Acts and knew not what they were about Being pressed to pronounce an Anathema against those that had subscribed thereunto they did it This done one Theodorus Erithimius an Iconoclast being summoned to appear at the Council was called in The Emperour pressing him to own the Lawfulness of Image-worship to convince him thereof asked him Whether he honoured his Image upon a Medal He protested That he had for it all the Respect and Veneration which he ought to have If then said the Emperour you respect the Image of a Mortal Man much more ought you to honour the Image of Christ of the Virgin and the Saints Theodorus being puzled with this Objection desired Time but he was pressed to declare The Decree of Pope Nicholas relating to Images was read to him yet he refused to yield Three others Iconoclasts acknowledged their Error and pronounced an Anathema against all such persons as should refuse to honour Images Theodorus and all other Iconoclasts were Anathematized by the Council which repeated again their Excommunication against Photius and Gregory And so ended this Session with the usual Acclamations The Ninth Session was held Feb. 12th in the year following There was admitted a Deputy from the Patriarch of Alexandria who brought a Credential Letter from him to the Emperour in which he signify'd that he could not give his Judgment in the Difference betwixt the two Patriarchs of Constantinople because by reason of his Remoteness he had no certain Information of it that the Bishops and other Clergy-men under that Patriarchate were the more proper Judges that there was formerly two Patriarchs of Alexandria when Narcissus having withdrawn himself into the Wilderness another Patriarch was Ordained in his place that Narcissus being returned he Ruled some time with him after whose Decease Alexander Bishop of Jerusalem was chosen to Govern together with Narcissus the Church of Alexandria After the reading of this Letter this Deputy named Joseph was admitted as Vicar of the Patriarch of Alexandria and was asked Whether he was informed of what related to the Ordination of Ignatius and the Deposition of Photius His Answer was That he was not onely informed of the Matter but had himself examined all passages relating to it and approved of the same and to assure the Council of it he tendered a Writing which was read in full Council whereby he formally declared his Opinion in the Thing Next the Witnesses were called in who had appeared against Ignatius in the Synod held before Zachary and Radoaldus One of them called Theodorus was examined first of all who confessed That he had been forced by an express Order of Michael the Emperour to Swear falsly and to Depose against the Ordination of Ignatius that he had confessed his Fault to an Abbot who had therefore imposed upon him a Penance which he had performed But being asked Whether the Party who had laid that Penance upon him was a Priest or not he answer'd He knew nothing on 't but that he was an Abbot and had great confidence in him In short he owned this Council to be Lawful Another Witness named Leo did also averr That he had Falsly Deposed against the Ordination of Ignatius Being asked Whether he had done Penance for his Fault he answered He had not but if any were laid upon him he would submit to it Declaring That he owned this Council to be Lawful But being asked Whether he did Anathematize Photius and all those against whom the Council had pronounced an Anathema Who am I says he to pronounce an Anathema This is onely done adds he in case of Heresie whereas Photius is Orthodox Wherefore says he should I then Anathematize him The Patriarchs Legates answer'd That his Actions were worse than Heresie it self Upon which Leo did Anathematize him and all those whom the Council had Anathematiz'd when he saw that it might be done for other causes than Heresie Eleven Witnesses more were Examin'd who all confessed They had been compelled to bear False Witness against Ignatius Some of them had done Penance for it and those who had not received it from the Council As to the other False Witnesses then absent they had a General Penance laid upon them To be Two years out of the Church two years with the Hearers without receiving the Communion and to abstain from Flesh and Wine during these four years except Sundays and Holy-days to stand up Three years with the Faithful performing three times a Week the like Abstinence and were declared Excommunicated unless they came to acknowledge their Faults and submit to that Penance 'T is true the Council left it to Ignatius the Patriarch to moderate as he should think fit the Rigour of the Penance After this another Business was brought in before the Council relating to some Officers of Michael the Emperour who had took upon them to wear the Sacerdotal Habit and to perform the Office of a Priest one named Theophilus the Emperour's Master of the Horse having laid the Gospels upon their heads and said Prayers in derision of Ordination Theophilus was dead but three of those Officers were found guilty of this Sacrilege Who being brought before the Council the Patriarchs Legates obliged them to confess their Crime the Enormity whereof they exposed unto them and they freely submitted to what Penance should be laid upon them Lastly The false Deputies of the Patriarchs whose Names Photius had put in the Acts of his Council were examined before the Deputy of the Patriarch of Alexandria In the Tenth Session at which assisted both the Emperours the last day of February the Canons were read that were to be Authorized by this Council The First confirms the Canons and Rules set down by the Apostles by the general and particular Councils and by the Holy Fathers and Doctors of the Church The Second exacts a due Observation and Execution of what had been Decreed by the Popes Nicholas and Adrian upon pain of Deposition of Clerks Delinquents and Excommunication of Lay-men The Third requires the same Adoration to our Saviour's Image as to the Book of the Gospels because as our Salvation is to be obtained by the words contained in that Holy Book so in Images we learn by the Features and Colours what the Scripture Teaches by the Letters and therefore they ought to be honoured according to ancient Tradition with
but to Men and consequently 't is they not the Spirit which are the Authors of the Words and Expressions which they use although he inspires them with the Sense and Doctrine they ought to write In his Answer to the Third Objection he opposeth the Opinion of his Adversary who maintain'd that the Souls of Men were Created separated from the Bodies he affirms that we ought to believe that they are created in and with the Body although the Philosophers delivered the contrary and Austin doubts of it In the next place he answers a question put to him by his Adversary Whether Truth be any thing but God He answers That Truth is not always taken for God himself although 't is not to be doubted but that God is Truth The Fourth Question concerns the Righteous Men of the old Law Agobard maintains that they may be called Christians although they were not called so because they believed in Jesus Christ and belonged to him being anointed with the invisible Ointment of his Grace as well as those who were good Men among the Gentiles The Jews who were in credit at Court because they had Money obtained an Edict from the Emperour which contained many things in their Favour and among the rest that none of their Slaves should be baptized but with their Masters Consent This Edict being very prejudicial to Religion and contrary to Christian Piety Agobard addressed a Writing to Hilduin the King 's great Chaplain and to the Abbot Vala who was at Court in which he shews the injustice and impiety of that Prohibition being evidently contrary to the Design of the Gospel and the intention of Jesus Christ who will have all Men to be saved and hath commanded his Apostles to preach the Gospel to all Creatures and baptize all that believe whether Bond or Free He desires them to whom he writes to endeavour all they can to get this Edict recall'd which he hoped might be done more easily because he offered to pay the Jews the Ransom of those Slaves according to the appointment of the Canons made in that Case In the Letter written by Agobard in his own Name and Hildegisus and Florus's who were Clergy-men of Lyons to Bartholomew Bishop of Narbonne he speaks of a certain Distemper which took Men suddenly and threw them down like the Falling-Sickness Some also felt a sudden Burning which left an incurable Wound This ordinarily happen'd in the Churches and the astonish'd People to guard themselves from it gave considerable Gifts to the Churches to secure them Agobard disallows this practice and searching into the Cause of this Plague he says 't was nothing else but the will of God who punisheth Men by the Ministery of an Angel After which he relates several Examples of the like Chastisements out of Scripture in which God hath exercised his Justice by Angels and other Creatures He affirms that these sort of inflictions are not from the power of the Devil although he owns that God sometimes suffers the Devil to disquiet and torment Men. Returning then to the Question of Bartholomew viz. what we ought to think of the practice of those who coming into the Churches where they were seized with this Distemper bring presents to them He says that fear causes these people to do what they ought not and hinders them from doing what they ought for it were better says he to give Alms to the Poor or Strangers to address themselves to the Priest to receive Unction according to the Command of the Gospel and of the Apostle to fast and pray and do works of Charity It is true adds he that if the Offerings given to the Church be employed as they ought they are an Action of Charity but because at present they are used only to satisfie the Covetousness and Avarice of Men and not to honour God or relieve the Poor it is a shame to give them to such covetous Wretches to be kept or ill imployed by them The Injustice and Violence which was practised among the people of Lyons and could not be restrained obliged Agobard to write to Maâ—fredus a powerful Man in the Emperour's Court. He begs of him to use his Interest with his Prince to hinder those Disorders and cause justice to be done This Compliment is short but urgent The Letter to the Clergy of Lyons concerning the manner how the Bishops and Pastors ought to govern is an excellent instruction for them He says that those who are entrusted with the Government of the Church the Spouse of Christ who is Peace Truth Justice and the Author of all Good ought to love that his Spouse singularly as himself and apply himself entirely to the spiritual good of his only Spouse That those who neglect to do their Duty and place all their Pleasure and Affections upon Riches Finery Hunting and Debauchery are the destroyers of God's Work and the Assistants of Anti-christ That though they seem to be Bishops in the Eyes of Men they are not so in the Eyes of God no more than Hypocrites who affect to appear outwardly Holy but whose Heart is full of Impurity who seek not the Edification and Instruction of the Faithful but their own Interest and Glory such are those who seek to get into the sacred Ministery only to obtain Honour and Riches or to live finely He adds that all those that make it their main Business to gain themselves the Love and Respect of those that are under their Charge and not to make Jesus Christ be loved and honoured by them who is the only Spouse of the Church are Adulterers and unworthy of the sacred Ministery because they design rather to feed themselves than their Flock Nevertheless he advises that the Sheep should endure wicked Pastors through Prudence when they can't reform them His Book concerning the Dispensing of Ecclesiastical Revenues was not written against the ill usage which Clergy-men might make of them but against the Laity who took them away and kept them unjustly Lewis the Godly having called an Assembly of Clergy-men and Lords at Attigny in 822. for the Reformation of Church and State Agobard advises Adelardus Abbot of Corbey and another Abbot called Helissicarius that they ought to rectifie the Disorder that was in the Church about the Ecclesiastical Revenues which the Laity had appropriated to themselves that they might speak to the Emperour of it He zealously represents to them that the Churches having been enriched by the Gifts of the Emperours Princes and Bishops had made an abundance of Laws and Canons for the preservation of the Revenues and to hinder Lay-men from encroaching upon them That the necessity which they alledged was not a sufficient Reason to over-look those Laws nor to authorize the Usurpations they had made of them The year following this matter was more fully debated in an Assembly held at Compeigne where the Clergy again represented that the Laity were not to be suffered in the quiet Possession of the Revenues of the
Twenty fifth he examines divers Questions about the Terms of Unity Trinity and the Distinction in speaking of the Trinity In the Twenty sixth Twenty seventh Twenty eighth and Twenty ninth he discourses of the Relative Properties of the Three Divine Persons among themselves In the Thirtieth he treats of the Relative Properties of God with respect to Men as to be a Creator c. and shews that they do not imply any Change or Alteration in the Divine Nature In the Thirty first he shews that the Equality and Likeness of the Three Persons are not grounded on their Relative Properties but on the Identity of their Nature In the Thirty second he lays down Two principal Difficulties viz. Whether the Father and the Son mutually love one another by the Holy Ghost or whether the Father be Wise by the Wisdom he hâ—… begotten He acknowledges these Questions to be difficult yet declares that there is in God a certain Love and a certain Wisdom which are common to the Three Persons although the Son be a Wisdom which is not the Father nor the Holy Ghost and the Holy Ghost a Love which is neither the Father nor the Son nevertheless without imagining Two Wisdoms or TWo Loves to be in the Trinity In the Thirty third he proposes this Question viz. Whether the Properties of the Persons are to be distinguished from the Persons themselves and from the Divine Essence He maintains the Negative and condemns the contrary Opinion as Heretical He opposes the same Opinion in the Thirty fourth Section and shews that the Persons are not distinguished from their Nature In the Thirty fifth he begins to treat of the Attributes of God which deserve a particular Consideration such are his Omniscience Omnipotency Providence Will Predestination c. The Author shews in this Section that these Attributes are relative to the Creatures In the Thirty sixth he makes it appear that all Things are expos'd to God's Omniscience as well Good as Evil although Evil be not an Effect that proceeds from him In the Thirty seventh he treats of the manner of God's being every where by his Presence Power and Essence discoursing by the way of the manner how Spiritual Creatures are in a Place and how they pass from one Place to another Afterwards returning to the Question about the Fore-knowledge of God he says that it is not the Cause of Things if it be taken for a simple Knowledge but if his Will Decree and Inclination be comprehended under that Name in that Sense it is the Cause of all Things That upon this account God cannot be the Author of Evil because he does not require nor ordain it although he knows it In the end of this Section is produced the famous Distinction of the Composit and divided Sensation to explain how God's Fore-knowledge cannot be erroneous although the Things might happen otherwise It is impossible that that should not happen which God has fore-seen that is to say that it cannot so fall out that God should fore-see it and yet that it should not happen but perhaps it might not happen and then God should not have fore-seen it In the Thirty ninth he proves that the Omniscience of God has always been the same and that it cannot be diminished or augmented In the Fortieth he begins to treat of Predestination and distinguishes it from Fore-knowledge in regard that the former has respect only to the Good which God ought to do Then he again makes use of the Distinction of Composit and Divided Sensation to explain in what Sense it may be said that none of the Predestinated Persons can be damned nor any of the Reprobate sav'd He makes Predestination to consist in an eternal Decree of God by which he elected those whom he thought fit and prepar'd Graces for them and Reprobation in the Fore-knowledge of their Sins by virtue of which he prepar'd everlasting Punishments to be inflicted on them In the Forty first Section he treats of the Causes of Predestination and shews that it is purely Gratuitous and that God has not chosen the Elect because he knew them to be Righteous but that he call'd them to be so by his Grace From Predestination he passes to Omnipotency and explains in the Forty second Section in what Sense God is Almighty He proves in the Forty third that God can do an infinite number of Things which he does not and confutes the Arguments and Allegations brought by some Persons to evince the contrary In the Forty fourth he shews that God can absolutely make Things more perfect than he has done if respect only be had to the Quality of the Creature but cannot do so if the Wisdom and Intention of the Creator be taken into consideration He adds that God can always do what he has done because he always has the same Power although it happens that he cannot do in particular what he has already done He treats at large in the Forty fifth Section of the Will of God of its Nature and Effects and of its different Kinds In the Forty sixth he explains in what Sense the Will of God cannot be ineffectual and in what Sense he is willing or unwilling that Evil be committed He has no inclination to Evil yet he is not absolutely willing to prevent it He proves in the Two following Sections that the Will of God is always efficacious that whatever he thinks fit inevitably comes to pass and nothing happens but by his Will That although he does not approve all the Inclinations of Men nevertheless he willingly admits the Effects of their depraved Will but does not approve the Act of it In the First Section of the Second Book the Author confutes the Error of those Hereticks who admitted Two Principal or Sovereign Beings shews that God created Angels and Men and discourses in general of their Nature and of the End for which they were created In the Second he examines when and in what Place the Angels were created In the Third he treats of the State in which they were created and maintains that they were created in Uprightness and that their Fall happen'd but some Moments after their Creation He adds in the following Section that they did not enjoy perfect Blessedness till they were confirm'd in Good In the Fifth Sixth and Seventh Sections he debates divers Questions about the Fall of the Wicked and the Confirmation of the Just. In the Eighth he follows St. Augustin's Opinion who believ'd that the Angels have Aâ—rial Bodies and upon occasion of that Question he enquires after what manner God was wont to appear to Men and in what Sense it is said that the Devils enter into human Bodies In the Ninth he treats of the different Orders of the Angels In the Tenth he examines whether any Angels of different Orders were sent and gives an Account of the different Opinions of the Fathers with respect to these Questions He proves in the Eleventh that every one of the Elect
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
still put off the Meeting to Munday next being the 2d Day of March In this Session and the five following John the Theologue for the Latins and Mark of Ephesus for the Greeks disputed earnestly concerning the Procession of the Holy Spirit and after they had long contested concerning the Sense of divers Passages of the Greek Fathers each remain'd of his own Opinion without agreeing in any thing The Greek Emperor perceiving plainly That these Disputes were so far from procuring Union that they rather serv'd to exasperate their Spirits call'd his Prelats together to engage them to find out some Temper by means of which an Union might be concluded and he believ'd that he had found out an Expedient by remarking that John the Divine had said That the Father was the sole Cause of the Son and of the Holy Spirit The Greeks having search'd for divers Expedients thought at last they had found one in a Letter of St. Maximus who says That the Latins by affirming that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son do not pretend that the Son was the Cause of the Spirit and that they know very well that the Father is the sole Cause of the Son and of the Holy Spirit of the Son by Generation of the Holy Spirit by Procession but they mean only that the Holy Spirit proceeds by the Son because he is of one and the same Essence All the Greeks except Mark of Ephesus and the Archbishop of Heraclea agreed That if the Latins would approve this Letter the Union would easily be concluded The News of this was carried to the Latins who promis'd to give their Answer in the first Conference which was to be held March the 21st The Emperor would not have Mark of Ephesus nor the Archbishop of Heraclea to be there present so that John spoke alone in this Session and in the next which was held the 24th of March. The Greeks were divided among themselves some were Enemies to the Union others on the contrary desir'd it and sought out means to compass it The Emperor supported the latter and desir'd them earnestly to conclude an Union at any price whatsoever He caus'd them therefore to resolve in the Assembly that a Message should be sent to the Pope to tell him That Disputes were useless and they must find out some other way for Union The Pope made answer That the Greeks must acknowledge That the Latins had prov'd very well That the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Son or else they should have brought Testimonies of Scripture expresly contrary to this Doctrin If they did not That an Assembly must be held wherein they must make Oath upon the Gospels to speak the Truth That after this every one should give his Opinion and that Doctrin should be embrac'd which had a Plurality of Voices This Answer being reported to the Emperor he caus'd tell the Pope That this was not the way to procure an Union That this would end in a Dispute and then they must come to a Decision of it which is what they would avoid and therefore they must pray his Holiness to find out some other way In the mean time Bessarion made a Discourse concerning Union wherein he justified the Doctrin of the Latins The Emperor having a Mind to put an end to this Affair held after Easter a Meeting in the Patriarch's House where the Cardinal Julian was present who endeavour'd to persuade the Greeks to resume their Conferences but the Emperor would not hearken to this Proposal and therefore went himself to meet the Pope and agreed with him That Ten Persons should be appointed on each side who should meet and give their Opinion one after another of the Means which they thought convenient for obtaining an Union Bessarion propos'd in the first Conference That the Latins and Greeks should approve the Letter of Maximus to Marinus without any Explication but the Latins gave it a Sense which was not agreeable to the Greeks Mark of Ephesus propos'd after this That the Addition made to the Creed should be struck out others offer'd for a Model the Profession of Faith made by the Patriarch Tarasus wherein 't is said That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father by the Son In fine divers Expedients were propos'd in five Conferences which were held on this Subject but not one of them was agreed upon by both Parties After this the Latins drew up a Profession of Faith wherein they declar'd That they would not admit two Principles or two Causes in the Trinity but one only Principle which is the Action of the Father and of the Son and their Productive Power and that the Holy Spirit did not proceed from the Son as from another Principle or another Cause because there is but one Cause one Root and one Fountain of the Divinity which is the Father That notwithstanding this the Father and Son are two Persons tho' they Act by one and the same Operation and that the Person produc'd of the Substance and Subsistence of the Father and the Son is one That those who say the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father must acknowledge that there was a time when the Son was not or else separate the Substance from the Subsistence which is absurd This Profession of Faith was sent to the Greeks by the Latins April the 29th The Greeks not being satisfy'd with it the Latins sent them another which contain'd also the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son yet in such a manner that 't was said the Father was the sole Cause of the Son and of the Holy Spirit The Greeks after this gave one from their side wherein they declar'd That the Father was the Fountain and Root of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and that the Holy Spirit came forth from the Son and was sent by the Son The Latins desir'd they would explain these Terms and that they would tell in what Sense they took them if they meant them of the Eternal and Substantial Procession of the Holy Spirit or only of a Temporal Mission The Greeks made a Difficulty of doing this At last a Profession of Faith was drawn up conceiv'd in these Words We the Latins on one side do Affirm and make Profession That when we say the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son we intend not by this to deny that the Father is the Principle and Fountain of all the Divinity of the Son and of the Holy Spirit or that the Son proceeds from the Father or to admit two Principles and two Productiâ—… of the Holy Spirit but we assert and believe That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as one sole Principle and by one sole Production And we the Greeks on the other side do acknowledge That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and that he appertains to the Son that he came forth from him and proceeds substantially from these two viz. from the Father
the Priests hold it only of the Bishop Qualification Whatever may be said of the first part of this Proposition by reason of the Equivocalness of the Word Proper the Faculty declares That the Proposition in it self and as to all its parts and the Proof of the last part wherein 't is said That the Priest receives only his Power from the Bishop is scandalous erroneous in the Faith destructive of the Hierarchical Order and that it ought to be publickly retracted and abjur'd for the Preservation of that Order The second Proposition A Parishioner who has confess'd to these Friars has satisfied the Decretal Omnis utriusque Sexus and is not obliged to confess himself once a Year to his proper Rector nor to desire leave of him The Qualification This Proposition according to the Terms wherein it is conceived is scandalous contrary to common Right and ought to be publickly retracted upon the account of the Obedience and Respect which Inferiors owe to Prelats The third Proposition If a Rector refuse to administer the Eucharist to a Parishioner who has confess'd to a Regular he may come to this Regular and he shall administer it to him The Qualification This Proposition is false suspected of Heresie contrary to common Right and ought to be publickly retracted The fourth Proposition A Parish-Priest can receive nothing from his Parishioners for Confession nor for Administration of the Sacraments but the same is not to be said of the Mendicants The Qualification This Proposition is contrary to the Disposition of Natural Right and the express Command of God and therefore false and notoriously Heretical The fifth Proposition the Parish-Priest who affirms That his Parishioners are obliged to confess to him once in a Year under pain of mortal Sin is excommunicate and if he celebrate Divine Service he is irregular The Qualification This Proposition is false and reproachful The sixth Proposition He who causes Mass to be said by a Priest who keeps a Woman in his House or is otherwise of ill Behaviour sins mortally The Qualification This Proposition being indefinite is doubtful rash and ought never to be preach'd to the common People The seventh Proposition The Friars Mendicants are not obliged to pay what is enacted in the Clementine Dudum The Qualification This Proposition is contrary to common Right The eighth Proposition The Pope can destroy all the Canon Law and make a new one The Qualification This Proposition is scandalous blasphemous notoriously Heretical and Erroneous The ninth Proposition Some Saints are furiously mad The Qualification This Proposition is scandalous blasphemous offensive to pious Ears The tenth Proposition The Souls which are in Purgatory are under the Jurisdiction of the Pope and if he pleases he may empty all Purgatory The Qualification This Proposition in it self is doubtful and in the meaning of him who advanc'd it about ordinary Jurisdiction it is false scandalous and ought not to be preached to the common People The eleventh Proposition The Pope may take away from an Ecclesiastick the half of the Revenues of his Benefices and give them away to another without shewing any Cause for so doing The Qualification This Proposition is dangerous and ought not to be preach'd in these times The twelfth Proposition Whosoever contradicts the Will of the Pope acts like a Pagan and incurs the Sentence of Excommunication Ipso facto The Pope cannot be reproved by any person except in case of Heresy The Qualification This Proposition is false and contains a manifest Lye The fourteenth Proposition Friar John Angely has many times affirm'd That these Articles are true and that he would maintain them at Paris and over all the Earth even till he was burnt without ever revoking them and that he was not of the number of those Preachers who retract The Qualification This is the Discourse of a Man who is impudent and obstinate and there is sufficient Reason to proceed against him judicially as one who is very strongly suspected of Heresie Another Friar Minor Observantine called John Merchand having preached in 1486 in the City of Besancon many Impertinencies about the Prerogatives of St. Francis the Faculty of The Censures of some impertinent prepositions of John Merchand a Regular Observantine Theology at Paris by their Conclusion April the 10th censur'd twelve of his Propositions The 1st That Lucifer who was the Head of the Angels having left his place vacant which was wonderfully set off and adorn'd it was reserv'd for St. Francis only because as Lucifer was driven from it upon the account of his Pride so there was no Saint found upon Earth which had so much Humility as St. Francis upon which account he was preferr'd to that place He added if any Person will not believe me unless he go thither and see I would rather see it than believe it The Faculty examin'd this Proposition by its parts as to the 1st which is Copulative it was found false contrary to the Sentiment of the Saints the 2d which concerns the vacant place of Lucifer which was above the Angels whither the Preacher affirms that St. Francis was taken up appear'd to them rash presumptuous and derogatory from the singular Prerogative of the Virgin the 3d which is of the Humility of St. Francis is also declared temerarious presumptuous false reproachful to the other Saints and in fine the last part If any one will not believe c. is declar'd indecent The second Proposition is That St. Francis is like to Jesus Christ in forty Respects That he is a second Christ and a second Son of God This Proposition is justly censur'd as false and Heretical The third That the Conception of St. Francis was foretold to his Mother by an Angel like that of Jesus Christ This is censur'd as rash and groundless The following Propositions until the 11th contain the Fables about the Brands of St. Francis which are censur'd as having no Authority The 11th That St. Francis descends every Year on the Day of his Festival into Purgatory and delivers out of it all those of his own Order and that he carries them into Paradise as Jesus Christ carried thither the Souls of the ancient Fathers This Proposition is censured as suspected of Heresie contrary to the Justice and the Law of God preach'd for Interest and on purpose to deceive the People The 12th That St. Francis obtain'd of God That all the Regulars of his Order who do not observe his Rule as they ought shall not continue in this World and that those who shall speak evil of his Regulars shall be punished a thing which he never told to any but his Confessor who reveal'd it after his Death This Proposition is condemned as schismatical seditious notoriously false impertinent and suspected of Heresie As there were some Preachers who exceeded all due Bounds in their Devotion or Superstition towards the Saints so there were some others who fell into the contrary Extream and among The Censures of the Errors