10. and his Laterane Synod are ample witnesses that this Sanction was never repealed before that Synod for they f Conc. Later ses 11 complaine that by reason of the malignitie of those times or else because they could not helpe it his predecessors tolerasse visi sunt seemed to have tolerated that pragmaticall Sanction and that for all which either they did or could doe the same Sanction retroactis temporibus viguisse et adhuc vigere had in former times and did even to that very day of their eleventh Session stand in force and full vigor Now seeing that Sanction condemneth as hereticall as did the Council also of Basil that assertion of the Popes Supremacie of authoritie and infallibilitie of judgment in defining causes of faith which the present Romane Church defendeth it is now cleerly demonstrated that the same Assertion was taught professed and beleeved to be an heresie and the obstinate defenders thereof to be heretikes by the consenting judgement of Councils Popes Bishops and the Catholike Church even from the Apostles time unto that very day of their Laterane Session which was the 19. of December in the yeare 1516. after Christ 33 On that day a day never to be forgotten by the present Romane Church it being the birth-day thereof Leo the tenth with his Laterane Councill or as the learned Divines of Paris g Leo 10. in quedam caetu nescimus qualiter tamen non in Spiritu Domini congregato App. Vniv Paris account it Conspiracie they being not assembled in Gods name abolished as much as in them lay the old and Catholike doctrine which in all ages of the Church had beene beleeved and professed untill that day and instead thereof erect a new faith yea a new foundation of the faith and with it a new Church also Hee and his Synod then reprobated h Quae de authoritate Concilij supra Pontificem constituerunt sententia CoÌ„c Lateranensis plane reprobata sunt Bin. Not. in Conc. Const § Ex parte the Decree of Constance for the superioritie of a Councill above the Pope they reprobated i Reprobarunt decre tum Concilij Basiliensis Bel. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 17. § Denique also the Councill of Basil and the same Decree renewed by them That Councill they condemne as Conciliabulum or k Conc. Lat. sess 11. Conventiculam quae nullum robur habere potuerit As a Conspiracie and Conventicle which could have no force at all They reprobated the l Ibid. Pragmaticall Sanction wherein the Decree of Constance and Basil was for ever confirmed Now that Decree being consonant to that catholike Faith which for 1500 yeares together had beene imbraced and beleeved by the whole catholike Church untill that day in reprobating it they rejected and reprobated the old and catholike Faith of the whole Church In stead hereof they decreed the Popes authoritie to be m Hujus sanctae sedis suprema authoritate Ibid. pa. 640. supreme that it is de n Ibid. necessitate salutis a thing necessary to salvation for all Christians to be subject to the Pope and that not onely as they are severally considered but even as they assembled together in a generall Councill for they define Solum o Jbid. pa. 639. Romanum Pontificem authoritatem super omnia Concilia habere The Pope alone to have authoritie above all Generall Councills This the Councill at Laterane diserte ex professo docuit taught cleerly and purposely as Bellarmine tells p Lib. 2. de Concil ca. 17. § Denique us nay they did not onely teach it but expressissimè definiunt q Lib. cod ca. 13. § Deinde they did most expresly define it And that their Definition is no other then a Decree of Faith as the same Cardinall assures us Decrees of faith saith he r Lib. â—â—d ca. 17. § Ad hunc are immutable neyther may ever be repealed after they are once set downe Tale autem est hoc de quo agimus and such is this Decree for the Popes supreme authoritie over all even Generall Councils made in their Laterane Synod And what meane they thinke you by that supreme authoritie Truly the same which Bellarmine explaineth That because his authoritie is supreme therefore his judgement s Proinde ultimum judicium summi poÌ„tificis esse lib. 4. de Rom. pontif ca. 1. § Sed nec in causes of Faith is the last and highest and because it is the last and highest therefore it is t Restat igitur ut Papa sit Index ultimus et proinde noÌ„ possit errare Lib. 4. de Pont. Rom. ca. 3. § Contra. Et DicuÌ„t Concilij sententiam esse ultimuÌ„ judicium Hinc autem apertissimè sequitur non errare Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 3. § Accedat infallible So by their Decree together with supremacie of authority they have given infallibilitie of judgement to the Pope and defined that to be a catholike truth and doctrine of Faith which the whole Church in all ages untill then taught professed and defined to be an heresie and all who maintaine it to be Heretikes and for such condemned both it and them 34 Now because this is not onely a doctrine of their faith but the very foundation on which all their other doctrines of faith doe relie by decreeing this they have quite altered not onely the faith but the whole frame and fabricke of the church erecting a new Romane church consisting of them and them onely who maintaine the Popes Infallibilitie and supremacie decreed on that memorable day in their Laterane Synod a church truly new and but of yesterday not so old as Luther a church in faith and communion severed from all former generall Councils Popes and Bishops that is from the whole catholike Church of Christ which was from the Apostles times untill that day And if their Popes continue as it is to be presumed they doe to make that profession which by the Councils of Constance and Basil they are bound to doe to hold among other this fift Councill ad unum iôta this certainly is but a verball no cordiall profession there neither is nor can be any truth therein it being impossible to beleeve both the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to be hereticall as the fift Councill defined and the Popes Cathedrall sentence in such causes to be infallible as their Laterane Councill decreed So by that profession is demonstrated that their doctrine of faith is both contradictory to it selfe such as none can possibly beleeve and withall new such as is repugnant to that faith which the whole Catholike Church of Christ embraced untill that very day of their Laterane Session 35 Yea and even then was not this holy truth abolished Foure moneths did not passe after that Laterane Decree was made but it was condemned by the whole Vniversitie of v In Appel à Leon. 10. quae facta est 21 die Mart. an 1517. Decret
openeth another errour of Vigilius He to excuse Theodorus would perswade that d Symbolum quod Charisius Presbyter illic prodidit c. Vig. Const loc cit nu 173. Theodorus was not the composer of that impious and diabolicall creed before mentioned Heare now the words and and proofe of Pelagius taken from that creed The Ephesine Synod saith e Pelag. loc cit he condemned Theodorus nam cum ab ejus discipulis dictatum ab eo Symbolum for when that creed dictated and composed by Theodorus was brought forth before the Ephesine Synod cum authore damnatum est both it and the author of it was condemned presently by the same holy Fathers So Pelagius testifying against Vigilius both Theodorus to bee the author of that creed and both him and it to have beene condemned by the Ephesine Councell 7. What Pelagius saith was formerly delivered by the whole fift Councell who thus say f Conc. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 575. b. Theodorus besides other innumerable blasphemies ausus est impium exponere symbolum was so audacious as to set out that impious creed again hoc impium Theodori Symbolum this impious creed of Theodorus was anathematized tother with the writer of it in the first Ephesine Councell and againe when this creed was repeated which is by them g Coll. 5. pa. 575. b. called Impium Theodori Symbolum the impious creed of Theodorus the holy Synod h Coll. 4. pa. 537. a. cryed out anathema to him that composed it and that was Theodorus as themselves witnesse the holy Ephesine Councell accursed this creed una cum authore ejus together with the author of it Thus testified the whole Councell Before this fift Councell Iustinian in his most religious Edict witnesseth the same Theodorus saith i Iust Edict § Tuli hee who exceeds in impiety Pagans Iewes and all heretikes did not onely contemne the Nicene Creed sed aliud symbolum exposuit but he hath expounded another creed full of all impiety and this impious creed of Theodorus being produced in the first Ephesine Synod cum ejus expositore condemnatum est was condemned together with the author or composer of it by that holy Councell So the Emperour 8. Before all these this is testified and fully explaned by S. Cyrill who k Cyrilli verba ex ep ad Procl citantur Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 550 551. was the chiefe Bishop in the Ephesine Synod This creed saith he composed by Theodorus as they who brought it said or witnessed was rejected by the holy Councell and those who thought as that creed taught being condemned in which generall sentence Theodorus himselfe was especially included nullam viri mentionem fecit dispensatione nec ipsum nominatim anathemati subjecit propter dispensationem the Councell by a dispensation made no particular mention of Theodorus but forbare by name to denounce an anathema against him by a kinde of connivence or indulgence lest some who held him in great account should separate themselves from the Church So Cyrill Whence two things are evident the one that Theodorus though dead before was condemned in generall termes by the Ephesine Councell The other that they might in particular also have condemned him as they did Nestorius but they forbare that particular naming of him onely by a dispensation toleration or connivence at his name because Theodorus was then held by many in great account his impieties and blasphemies being not as yet so fully discovered to the world Wherein the Ephesine Councell imitated the wisedome and lenitie of the Apostles who for a time by a l Et talem dispensationem in divina scriptura est invenire Paulus ad hoc Timotheum circumcidit c. Conc. 5. Coll. 8. pa. 585. b. et Coll. 5. pa. 551. b. dispensation and connivence permitted the use of the Ceremoniall Law that so by insensible degrees the Iewes might be weaned from that unto which they had beene so long accustomed which examples of the Apostles the fift Councell even in their Synodall sentence apply to this very cause of Theodorus the Church and Ephesine Councell for a time spared by name to condemne him even then when by their generall sentence hee was as truly condemned as the Mosaicall ceremonies were dead though then not deadly to the end that the estimation which some but very unjustly had of him might rather dissui than dissecari rather by little and little be untwined and worne out than by a peremptory anathema be at once and as it were with one violent blow obliterated out of the hearts of such as admired him which they saw could hardly be effected 9. But as the Apostles when afterwards the Gospell had been long published and sufficient time allowed to forget and bury the ceremonies then did utterly condemne all that used the same saying If m Gal 5.2 ye be circumcised Christ shall profit you nothing Even so did the Church in this cause of Theodorus She expected that her generall sentence should have deterred all from that heresie specially seeing the Emperours Theodosius and Valentinian had strengthened that Synodall judgement by a severe Imperiall n L. 66. de haeret Cod. Theod. Edict set forth some foure yeares o Conc. Eph. babit an 431. Basso et Antiocho Coss ut ex Act. liquet Tom. 2. ca. 1. Edictum vero editum Theodosio 15 Coss id est anno 433. after the Ephesine Synod forbidding the bookes of Nestorius either to bee read or retained But it fell out farre otherwise for when the Nestorians could no longer shrowd themselves under the name nor countenance their heresie by the bookes and writings of Nestorius they found this new device to p Confingentes enim quae Nestorij sunt odisse alio iterum ea introducunt modo quae Theodori sunt admirantes Cyrill cujus verba citantur in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 550. a. â—t idem docet Liber ca. 10. commend their doctrine under the name dignity and authority of Theodorus of Mopsvestia whose doctrine was the very same with that of Nestorius he having suckt all his hereticall poyson from Theodorus and this they thought they might safely doe Theodorus being not by name condemned either in the Synodall judgement or by the Imperiall Edict To which purpose they and particularly p Ibas quaedam ex impijs Theodori Capitulis in Syrorum linguam transtulit et ubique transmisit Con. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 562. b. Ibas spred abroad the bookes of Theodorus in every countrey and corner translating them as Liberatus q Ca. 10. sheweth into the Syrian Armenian and Persian languages by which meanes they deceived and seduced many pretending Theodorus r Theodori scripta admirantes et dicentes eum recta sapuisse et consonantia sanctis patribus Athanasio c. Conc. 5 Coll. 5. pa. 550. a. writings to bee consonant to the ancient fathers The Catholikes seeing how little effect their connivence at Theodorus name had
Pontificis Imperator excitatus sanctionem edidit Bin. not in eam Epist yea further the Emperour commanded the severall Bishops to shew their judgements in that doctrine of faith decreed at Chalcedon which he did to this end ut omnium calculo confessione Chalcedonense Concilium iterum firmaretur saith Binius m Locis citatiâ— that the Councell of Chalcedon might be confirmed againe by the consent and confession of all those Bishops They did what the Emperour commanded them some alone as Anatolius Sebastianus Lucianus Agapetus and many moe some in Synodal Epistles as the Bishops of Alexandria of Europe all whose letters are adjoyned to the Councell of Chalcedon n Pa. 146. ad pa. 179. concerning all which that is to be noted which Agapetus saith o Pa. 166. Pene omnes occidentalium partium Episcopi confirmaverunt atque consignaverunt almost all the Bishops of the West and so also in the East did confirme by their letters and subscriptions that faith which was explaned at Chalcedon What authority thinke you could the confirmation of one single Bishop as of Agapetus and Sebastianus or of a Synod consisting but of nineteene Bishops as that at Millan p Vt liquet ex eorum epist Synod quae extat post Epist 52. Leonis or but of seven q Vt Epis Syriae post Conc. Chal. pa. 155. b. or sixe r Vt Episc Maesia ibid. a. or five Å¿ Vt Episc secundae Syria Ibid. pa. 157. b. or foure t Vt Episc Osrâ—eviae Ibid. pa. 168. a. as some of the other give to the great and Oecumenicall Councels of Ephesus and Chalcedon approved not onely by the Popes but by the consenting judgement of the whole Christian world as out of the Ephesine Synod we before declared And yet was never one of those confirmations fruitlesse as Pope Leo who was the author of them rightly judged Of the great Nicene Councell Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia and Theognis Bishop of Nice after they had endured exile for not consenting to the Nicene faith in token of their repentance writ u Epistola eorum extat apud Socratem lib. 1. ca. 10. thus unto the Synod Those things which are decreed by your judgement consentientibus animis confirmare decrevimus we are purposed to confirme with consenting mindes Even the consent of two and those exiled and hereticall Bishops is called a confirmation of the great Nicene Councell to which no authority was added therby I will but add one example more and that is of this our fift Councell concerning which in their second Nicene Synod it is thus said x Act. 1. pa. 306 Foure Patriarkes being present approved the same and the most religious Emperour sent the Synodall Acts thereof to Ierusalem where a Synod being assembled all the Bishops of Palestina manibus pedibus ore sententiam Synodi confirmarunt they all confirmed the sentence of this Councell with their hands with their confessions and full consent except onely one Alexander Bishop of Abyles who thought the contrary and therefore was put from his Bishopricke and comming to Constantinople was swallowed up by an earthquake So their Nicene Synod By all which it is now cleare that generall and appoved Oecumenicall Councels or the decrees thereof may bee and de facto have beene usually approved and confirmed not onely by the Pope but by other succeding generall Councels by Provinciall Synods yea by particular Bishops who have beene absent none of all which gave or could give more authority to the Councell or Synodall decree thereof than it had before and some of them are both in authority and dignity not once to bee compared to those Synods which they doe approve or confirme and yet not any one of al these confirmations were needlesse or fruitlesse 36. The reason of all which may be perceived by the divers ends of those two coÌ„firmations These use end of the first confirmation by the Bishops present in the Councell was judicially to determine and define the controversie then proposed and to give unto it the full and perfect authority of a Synodall Oecumenicall decree that is in truth the whole strength and authority which all the Bishops and Churches in the whole world could give unto it The use and end of the second confirmation by those Bishops who were absent was not judicially to define that cause or give any judgment therein for this was done already and in as effectuall a manner as possible it could bee but to preserve the peace of the Church and unity in faith which could by no other meanes be better effected than if Bishops who had been absent and therefore did but implicitè or by others consent to those decrees at the making thereof did afterwards declare their owne explicite and expresse consent to the same Now because the more eminent that any Bishop was either for authority or learning the more likely he was either to make a rent and schisme in the Church if hee should dissent or to procure the tranquility and peace of the Church if hee should consent hence it was that if any Patriarke Patriarchall Primate or other eminent Bishop were absent at the time of the Councell the Church and Councell did the more earnestly labour to have his expresse consent and confirmation to the Synodall decrees This was the cause why both the religious Emperour Theodosius y Sacra Imper. ad Iohan. to 5. Act. Eph. Conc. ca. 3. Cyril Epist 38. ad Dynatum to cod ca. 16. and Cyrill with other orthodoxall Bishops were so earnest to have Iohn Patriarke of Antioch to consent to the holy Ephesine Synod which long before was ended that as he had beene the ringleader to the factious conventicle and those who defended Nestorius with his heresie so his yeelding to the truth and embracing the Ephesine Councell which condemned Nestorius might draw many others to doe the like and so indeed it did This was the principall reason why some of the ancient Councels as that by name of Chalcedon for all did it not sought the Popes confirmation to their Synodall decrees not thinking their sentence in any cause to bee invalid or their Councell no approved Councell if it wanted his approbation or confirmation a fancy not dreamed of in the Church in those daies but wheras the Pope was never personally present in any of those which they account the 8 general Councels the Synod thought it fit to procure if they could his expresse and explicite consent to their decrees that he being the chiefe Patriarch in the Church might by his example move all and by his authoritie draw his owne Patriarchall Diocesse as usually hee did to consent to the same decrees whereas if he should happen to dissent as Vigilius did at the time of the fift Councell hee was likely to cause as Vigilius then did a very grievous rent and schisme in the Church of God 37. There was yet another use and end of
A TREATISE OF THE FIFT GENERAL COVNCEL Held AT CONSTANTINOPLE Anno 553. under IVSTINIAN the Emperor in the time of Pope VIGILIVS The Occasion being those Tria Capitula which for many yeares troubled the whole Church VVHEREIN IS PROVED THAT THE POPES Apostolicall Constitution and definitive Sentence in matter of Faith was condemned as Hereticall by the Synod And the exceeding frauds of Cardinall Baronius and Binius are clearely discovered By RICH CRAKANTHORP Dr. in Divinity and Chapleine in ordinary to his late Majesty King IAMES Opus Posthumum Published and set forth by his Brother GEO CRAKANTHORP according to a perfect Copy found written under the Authours owne hand LONDON Printed for R. M. 1634. And part of the Impression made over to be vented for the Benefit of the Children of IOHN MYNSHEW deceased TO THE RIGHT HONOVRABLE EDVVARD LORD NEWBVRGE Chancellour of the Duchie of Lancaster and one of the Lords of his Majesties most Honourable Privie Counsell RIGHT HONOVRABLE IN all duty and submission I here present unto your Lordship a Treatise concerning the fift generall Councell held at Constantinople the cause being the Controversie of the Three Chapters which for many yeares troubled the whole Church and was at length decided in this Councell held under Iustinian that religious Emperour This Treatise now printed was long agoe penned by one well known unto your Honour your sincere affection to the truth of God and Gods cause gives mee good assurance of your favourable acceptance hereof I confesse indeed that when J call to minde the manifold affaires wherein your Honour is daily imployed the very thought hereof had almost perswaded mee not to interrupt your more serious affaires by drawing your Honour to the reading or view of this Booke but when J call to minde those respects of love and duty in which the Author hereof stood bound unto your Lordship J was againe incouraged in his name to tender it to your Honour And although J my selfe can challenge no interest in your Lordships favour to offer this yet your Lordship may challenge some interest in the fruits of his labours who was so truely as I can truely speake devoted unto your Honour Among many other hee especially acknowledged two assured bonds of love and duty by which hee was obliged unto you and your friends the former arose from that unfained affection which you ever bare him from your first acquaintance in the Colledge that other by which he was further ingaged unto you and your friends was when in a loving respect had unto him in his absence without any meanes made by him or knowledge of his he was called by that much honoured Knight Sir Iohn Levison his Patron your Father in law unto the best a Black Notley in Essex meanes of livelihood he ever enjoyed in the Ministery where spending himselfe in his studies hee ended his dayes during which time your Honour made your affection further knowne unto him by speciall expressions of extraordinary favours Jn regard whereof I perswaded my selfe that I could no where better crave Patronage for this worke than of your Honour that it may bee a further testimony of his love againe who cannot now speake for himselfe And this I intreat leave to doe the rather because J doubt not but hee acquainted your Lordship with his paines and intent in this and other Tractates of the Councels b See his Epistle to the Reader for the defence of Justinian printed Anno 1616. for when after divers yeares study bestowed in this argument of Councels hee was desirous to make some use of his labours his intent was to reduce all those points into foure severall Bookes 1. That the right of calling generall Councels 2. That the right of highest Presidency in them 3. That the right of the last and supreme Confirmation of them is onely Imperiall and not Papall 4. That all the lawfull generall Councels which hitherto have beene held consent with ours and oppugne the doctrines of the present Church of Rome Some of these hee finished the fourth hee could not so much as hope to accomplish and therefore after the examining of some particulars therein he desisted and weaned himselfe from those studies And yet after some yeares discontinuance being by some of his learned friends sollicited to communicate to others at least some one Tract in that argument consenting to their earnest desire after long suspence he resolved on this Treatise as being for weighty and important matters most delightfull unto him That it was not then published let it not seeme strange unto your Honour for having long since finished the Tract of this whole Councell it was his purpose that it should have undergone the publike view and judgement of the Church but when he came as J can truely testifie unto them whose art and ayde is needfull in such a businesse and found an aversenesse in them for that it wholy consisted of controversall matters whereof they feared that this age had taken a satiety he rested in this answer as willing to bury it After this being upon a speciall command from his Majesty King Iames of blessed memory made known unto him by my Lord his Grace of Canterbury to addresse himselfe to c Dâ—fensio Ecclesiae Anglic. cont Archiep. Spal another worke hee then desisted from his former intended purpose and in finishing of that last worke of his he ended his dayes Some few yeares after his death being desirous to take a view of some of his Papers I came to the view and handling of this booke a booke fully perfected for the Presse in his life time the publishing whereof being long expected and of many earnestly desired it was my desire and theirs to whose most grave and judicious censure J willingly submitted it that it might be published for the benefit of Gods Church and the rather that it might give some light in the study of the Councels and animate some of the d Eccles 3.7 threescore valiant men that are about Salomons bed being of the expert and valiant men of Israel unto the attempting and undertaking of the like Now what his desire was in this and other of his labours surely none but the very enemies of God and Gods truth can take it to be any other than to testifie his unfained love unto God and Gods Church and to subdue the pride idolatries and impieties of that Man of sinne and to e Iude Epist v. 5 strive for the maintenance of the true faith Now what allowance so ever it may finde abroad among our adversaries it humbly craves your favourable acceptaÌ„ce at home and as it is published with no other intent than to gaine glory to God and good to his Church so J doubt not but that God who f 2 Cor. 4.6 causeth light to shine out of darknesse will effectually in time bring to passe that not onely their violent oppugning of the truth but their fraudulent dealing also against the same wil
of the whole Church The learned Author then of this ensuing Tractate foyling the Pope consequently foyleth the whole Romane Church though he take onely Vigilius to taske yet in overturning his Chaire hee overthroweth as hath beene shewed all the Romane religion which is fundamentally in the Popes Decree and the whole Romane Church which is vertually as they teach in his person For if Pope Vigilius not as a private man but as Pope in Cathedra not sitting alone but with his Synod may erre not onely in matter of fact but in matter of faith judicially and doctrinally determining heresie and commanding it to bee received for Catholike truth and if this decision and determination of his bee reversed condemned and accursed in a lawfully called sacred and Oecumenicall Synod approved by the Christian world all which are in the following Treatise punctually and uncontroulably proved against all cavils of moderne Papists Ecquis posthac Paparum numen adoret Will any man hereafter not wholly given over to be infatuated with strong delusions adore the Popes Chaire or kisse his foote or pawne his salvation upon his Cathedrall determination By all this discourse thou maist see Christian Reader the maine scope of the Author I shall not need to inlarge upon other questions of lesser moment though now more in vogue which upon the by and occasionally this learned Writer accutely handleth both in this worke and others especially in that imposed upon him by our late Soveraigne of blessed memory in defence of our Church Chap. 35 36 37 38 78. Wherfore sith the Composer of this Treatise is most orthodoxall the argument of great importance the manner of handling very exact and accurate I doubt not but thou wilt give it such entertainment as that thereby others may bee incouraged to tread in his steps and to guide thee in the right way What though the worke be of some bulke and waight who ever found fault with gold for that it was too massie and heavy When Tully d Plut. in vit Cicer. was asked which Oration of Demosthenes he liked best hee answered the longest and questionlesse in bookes of this nature caeteris paribus the largest which meete with all possible or at least probable objections and solidly refutes them give the best satisfaction Is it not a shame to see in many mens studies idle Poems Astreas Guzmans and play-books in folio but divinity books in decimo sexto or slender pāphlets stitcht up in blew coats without any cognizāce glancing at Church or State or trēching upon Controversies better buried alive than to bee revived after they are dead which are cryed up by the common adversary of purpose to foment discords betweene the professors of the Gospell that whilst Pastores odia exercent Lupus intret Ovile the shepheards are at strife the Wolfe may make havocke of the flocke which I speake not for a justitium to any errour or that I wish any way should bee given to those plausible tenents to corrupt reason which one of late fitly compared to flat bottom'd Boates sent from our neighbouring Countries to land Popery in England But first my desire is that all that agree in the love of the same truth may seeke that truth in love and continually e Psal 122. pray for the peace of Ierusalem next I pray that f Phil. 1.9 our love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment that wee may discerne things that differ and so seeke by all good and lawfull meanes to destroy the wrigling tayle of the Adder whose head was smitten off 1200. yeares agoe in a Synod at Palestine that yet our principall care bee to drive out the Romish Basiliske or rather the g Apoc. 9.11 King of the Locusts against whose poyson I commend the ensuing Discourse as a soveraigne antidote Lambeth April 26. Anno Dom. 1631. Thine in the Lord Iesus DANIEL FEATLEY THE CONTENTS OF THE SEVERALL CHAPTERS CONTAINED IN THIS ENSVING TREATISE Cap. 1. THat Iustinian assembled the fift generall Councell at Constantinople to define the doubt of faith which arose about the Three Chapters Pag. 1. Cap. 2. That the fift Generall Councell when Pope Vigilius wilfully refused to come unto it was held without the Popes presence therin either by himselfe or by his Legates pag. 4. Cap. 3. That Pope Vigilius during the time of the fift Councell published his Apostolicall Constitution in defence of the Three Chapters p. 7. Cap. 4. That the holy Generall Councell in their Synodall judgement contradicted the Popes Apostolicall Constitution and definitive sentence in that cause of faith made knowne before unto them Pag. 14. Cap. 5. The first Exception of Baronius pretending that the cause of the Three Chapters was no cause of faith refuted Pag. 36. Cap. 6. That the first reason of Vigil touching the First Chapter why Theodorus of Mopsvestia ought not to be condemned Because none after their death ought Noviter to bee condemned concernes the faith and is hereticall Pag. 47. Cap. 7. That the second reason of Vigilius touching the First Chapter why Theodorus of Mopsvestia ought not to bee condemned because hee dyed in the peace and Communion of the Church is erronious and untrue Pag. 58. Cap. 8. That the third and last reason of Vigilius touching the First Chapter why Theodorus of Mopsvestia ought not to bee condemned because he was not condemned by former Fathers and Councels is erronious and untrue Pag. 67. Cap. 9. That Vigilius besides divers personall held a doctrinall errour in faith in his defence of the Second Chapter which concernes the writings of Theodorus against Cyril Pag. 91. Cap. 10. That Vigilius and Baronius erre in divers personall points or matters of fact concerning the Third Chapter which was the Epistle of Ibas unto Maris Pag. 107. Cap. 11. That Vigilius and Baronius in their former reason for defence of the Epistle of Ibas drawne from the union with Cyrill mentioned in the later part of that Epistle doe defend all the heresies of the Nestorians Pag. 112. Cap. 12. That Vigilius and Baronius in their later reason for defence of the Epistle of Ibas taken from the words of Ibas wherein he confesseth Two natures and One Person to be in Christ doe maintaine all the heresies of the Nestorians Pag. 138. Cap. 13. Two assertions of Baronius about the defenders of the Three Chapters refuted and two other against them confirmed the one That to dissent from the Pope in a cause of faith makes one neither an heretike nor a Schismatike the other That to assent in faith to the Pope or present Church of Rome makes one both an Heretike and a Schismatike Pag. 170. Cap. 14. The second Exception of Baronius excusing Vigilius from heresie For that hee often professeth to hold the Councell of Chalcedon and the faith thereof refuted Pag. 199. Cap. 15. The third Exception of Baronius in excuse of Vigilius taken from his confirming of the fift Councell answered and
this which the Emperor with great prudence piety and zeale performed very many even some of those who bare the names of orthodoxall and Catholike Bishops were so far from consenting to this Imperial Edict and the Catholike truth delivered therein that they openly oppugned his Edict and defended the Three Chapters by him condemned and anathematized by words by writings by all meanes which they could devise publishing libels and bitter invectives against it and the Emperor himselfe also He seeing so generall a disturbance in his Empire and the whole Church to be in a combustion about this cause to end and quiet all used that which is the best and last publick meanes which is left to the Church for deciding any doubt or controversie of faith and of purpose to determine this so weighty a cause whether those Three Chapters were to be condemned or allowed he assembled this fifth and holy generall Councill whereof God assisting us we are now to entreat CAP. II. That the Fift Generall Councill when Pope Vigilius refused to come unto it was held without the Popes presence therein either by himselfe or by his Legates 1. THat this Council was celebrated when Pope Vigilius was at Constantinople that he was once againe often and earnestly invited to the Synod but wilfully refused to be present either personally or by his deputies the Acts of the Councill doe abundantly witnesse The holy Synod said a Coll. 2. pa. 524. a. thus Saepius petivimus We have often entreated the most holy Pope Vigilius to come together with us and make a determination of these matters Againe the holy Synod said b Col. 1. pa. 521. b. Coll. 8 pa. 584. b. The most glorious Iudges and certaine of us saepius adhortati sunt Vigilium have often exhorted Vigilius to come and debate and make an end of this cause touching the Three Chapters Neither did they onely invite exhort and entreat him but in the Emperors name they commanded him to come to the Synod We being present said c Coll. 2. pa. 524. a. the Bishops who were sent unto him Liberius Peter and Patricius proposuerunt Iussionem pijssimi Imperatoris sanctissimo Papae proposed to the most holy Pope Vigilius the command of the most holy Emperor If all this seeme not enough the Emperor himselfe testifieth d Epist Iustin ad Conc. Coll. 1. pa. 520. a. the same Mandavimus illi we have commanded Vigilius both by our Iudges and by certaine of your selves he writ this to the Synod ut una cum omnibus conveniret that he should come together with all the rest in common to debate and determine this cause touching the Three Chapters 2. What Pope Vigilius did after so many invitations entreaties and commands Card. Bellarmine doth declare The Pope saith he e Lib 1. de Conc. ca. 5. § Coacta neque per se neque per legatos interfuit was not present in the Council either by himselfe or by his legats And more clearly in another place The Pope saith he f Lib. eod 19. § Adde was then at Constantinople sed noluit interesse but he would not be present in the Councill Binius testifieth g Notis in Conc. gen 5. § Praesedit the same At the fifth Councill Vigilius was not present either by himselfe or by his deputies And Baronius The Pope saith he h Anno 553. nu 29. noluit interesse would not be present either by himselfe or by any to supply his place And this Cardinall adds i Ibid. nu 31. not without some choler The members assembled without the head nulla Vigilij agrotantis adhuc habita ratione having no regard at all to Pope Vigilius then sick 3. What doth the Card. complaine that they had no regard of him when himselfe a little before professeth noluit interesse he himselfe was not willing to be present Or had they no regard of him when before ever they assembled or sate in the Synod they writ an Epistle k Epist Eutychij ad Vigilium lecta Coll. 1. ideoque missa ante inchoatum Synodū unto him entreating his presence and with their own request signified l Et primo die instantis Maij pervenimus ad Vigilium Diximus Pijssimus Dominus vult te unà cum alijs cōvenire proposucrunt jussionem pijssimi Imperatoris Coll. 2. pa. 523. b. 524. a. Concilium vero coepit 4. dìe Maij. Coll. 1. the Emperors command wil and pleasure to him that he shold come together with the rest when after they were assembled in the Synod they so often so earnestly invited and even entreated him to come together with them when they whom they sent to invite him were no meane no ordinary messengers neither for their number nor dignitie but twenty reverend Bishops all of them Metropolitanes as the Cardinal m Missi sunt qui cum vocarent Episcopi numero viginti ijdemque Metropolitani Bar. an 553. nu 35. both knew and acknowledged the Synodall acts n Coll. 1. 1. nam in utraque missi sunt doe witnesse and of those twenty three were Patriarks Eutychius of Constantinople Apollinarius of Alexandria and Domninus of Antioch Was this a signe that they had no regard of Vigilius when besides all this in token of their most earnest desire of his presence among divers other they proposed two most effectuall reasons to induce him to come The one the promise of Presidencie among them which so far as in them lay they offred unto him saying o Coll. 1. pa. 521. a. Petimus praesidente nobis vestra beatitudine we entreat that your holinesse being present in this Synod the question may be debated and have an end The other which should not onely in equitie but even in common honesty have prevailed with a Pope for that himselfe had promised and that under his owne hand-writing that he would come to the Synod we told him said p Coll. 2. pa. 523. b. the Bishop your holinesse knoweth quod in his quae inter nos in scriptis facta sunt promisistis that in those things which were done in writing betwixt us you have promised to come together with the rest and discusse these three Chapters And againe we entreated his reverence say the whole Synod q Coll. 8. pa. 584. a scriptas suas promissiones adimplere to performe that which in his writing he had promised 4. Had they no regard of sick Vigilius whose infirmity being signified to the Synod at their first session they forthwith concluded that Session saying r Coll. 1. in fine Oportet we must defer the examination of the cause to another day And whereas the Pope s Postero die pollicitus est manifestare quod ei de tali conventu placuerit Coll. 1. promised to give them an answer the next day then because his qualme was overpast he found new excuses for his absence one because t Ille respondit non posse
nobiscum convenire eo quod plurimi quideÌ„ hîc sunt Orientales Episcopi pauci vero cum eo Coll. 2. pa. 523. a. there was but a few westerne Bishops then present with them another because v Dicebat sacere se per semetipsum in scriptis offerre Imperatori ideo enim inducias se postulasse ab ejus serenitate Ibid. he would himself alone declare his judgement in writing and offer it to the Emperor for which cause he had entreated respite for certaine dayes of his highnesse Both which were in truth nothing else but meere preteÌ„ces as the Bishops theÌ„ sent manifestly declared unto him For both the Emperor said they vult te in coÌ„muni convenire will have you to come together with the rest therefore he ought not to have given his senteÌ„ce alone but in common and in the Synod and for his other excuse Baronius x Eam suae absentia causam pratexuisse an 553. nu 36. himselfe doubteth not to call that a pretence for so it was indeed seeing as the Bishops truly told y Nec in sanctis 4. Synodis multitudo Occidentalium Episcoporum inventa est unquam sed duo vel tres Episcopi Col. 2. pa. 523. b. him in none of the former Councils there was any multitude of Westerne Bishops but onely two or three and some Clerkes whereas at that time there were present with the Pope at Constantinople z Nunc vero adsunt multi ex Jtalia Episcopi sunt etiam ex Africa ex Illyrico Ibid. many Italian Bishops others out of Africk others out of Illirium for their number more then had beene in al the foure former Councills whereupon they plainly and truly told a Ibid. Col. 2. the Pope to his face Nihil est quod prohibet vos convenire una nobiscum there is no sufficient or allowable cause to stay you from comming to the Synod together with us not sicknesse not want of Western Bishops Nihil est there is nothing else at all but an unwilling mind So extraordinary respect had they of the Pope at this time and so earnest were they to have him present in the Synod of whom Baronius without any regard of truth shamed not to say that they assembled having no respect at all unto sick Vigilius 5. The true reason which made the Pope so unwilling to be present in the Synod and why Noluit interesse was indeed his hereticall affection and adversnes from the truth in this cause of the Three Chapters He saw the Catholike Bishops then assembled to be bent and forward as their dutie was for condemning those Chapters which himselfe embraced and defended he therefore thought it fit to separate himselfe from them in place from whom in judgement and in the doctrine of saith he was so farre disjoyned and severed This to have beene the onely true cause of his wilfull absence and of his Noluit interesse the sequell of this Treatise will make most evident For this time it is sufficient by all those honorable invitations earnest perswasions and Imperiall commands to have declared that as the holy Synod for their part was most desirous of his presence so he not onely was absent but in meere stomacke wilfulnesse and perversnesse absented himselfe from the Holy Councill at this time CAP. III. That Pope VIGILIVS during the time of the fift Councill published his Apostolicall Constitution in defence of the Three Chapters 1. WHen Pope Vigilius remaining then at Constantinople where the Councill was held by no intreaties perswasions nor Imperiall commands could be brought to the Synod having no other let as before was declared but his owne wilfulnesse the holy Synod resolved a Deo juvante futuro die convenientes quâ— oportet agemus Col. 2. in fine without him to debate and judge the Controversie then referred unto them And in truth what else was to be done in that case The Emperor commanded b Celeriter de â—bis quae interrogavimus vestram manifestate voluntatem Iust ep ad Synod Col. 1. pa. 520. b them not to delay nor protract the time but deliver a speedy yet withall a sound and true judgement in that cause The necessity of the Church required this which was now in a general c Ob tria capitula fideles fuerunt scissi atque schismate separati Bar. an 547. nu 29. tumult and Schisme about those Three Chapters The Nestorians on one side triumphed as if the Councill of Chalcedon had approved the Epistle of Ibas and thereby confirmed their heresies The Acephali on another side rejected that Councill as favoring the Nestorians by approving that impious Epistle The wavering Hesitantes were in a maze not knowing which way to turne themselves whether allow the Councill of Chalcedon with the Nestorians or with the Acephali reject it The Catholikes against all these Sectaries both defended the Councill of Chalcedon and yet rejected that impious Epistle and the two other Chapters In such a generall rent and contention of all sides what delay could the Church endure which the Councill rightly considering d Nec enim justum est vel Jmperatorem vel fideleÌ„ populum ex dilatione scandalizari Co. 2. p. 533. b said That it was not just nor fit by delaying their judgement to suffer either the Emperor or the faithful people any longer to be scandalized And for the absence of Vigilius they knew right well that which Card. Cusanus very truly observeth e Alioqui si expectatus non mitteret vel non veniret vel nollet Concilium congregatum suae necessitati Ecclesiae saluti providera debet lib. 2. de Concord Cath. cap. 1. that if the Pope being invited did not or would not come or send to a Synod but wilfully refused to come in this case the Councill without him must provide for the peace of the Church and safety of the Christian faith They had a very memorable example hereof as yet but fresh before their eyes when the Popes legats being present at Chalcedon were f Regavimus dominos Episcopos de Roma ut communicarent ijs gestis Conc. Chalc. act 16. pa. 134. a. invited and intreated to be present at the Synod there held which was the very next before this at the debating of the right and preeminence of the Sea of Constantinople but wilfully refused to be there saying g Ibid. as Vigilius now did Non sed alia se suscepisse mandata No we will not come we have a contrary command from pope Leo yet that holy Councill of Chalcedon handled and defined that cause in their absence and their determination notwithstanding the Popes absence was not onely declared h Viri illustrissimi Iudices dixerunt quod interlocuti sumus tota Synodus approbavit Ibid. pa. 137. b. by the most glorious Iudges to be just and Synodall but the same was both by that holy Synod and all other ever since held to be the
judgement and definition of the whole generall Councill for in their Synodal relation to the Pope speaking of this very decree they say i Ibid. pa. 140. a. Confirmavimus ante we to wit this whole generall Councill have confirmed the sentence of the 150. Bishops for the prerogative of Constantinople A most cleare and undeniable demonstration and that by the warrant of one of the most famous Councils that ever were that the peevishnes perversnes or wilfull absence of one or a few Bishops yea of the Pope himselfe ought not nor could not hinder a Synod to judge and determine any needful cause much lesse a cause of faith about which there should happen as now there did a general disturbance of the whole Church Vpon these and other like reasons the holy Synod now assembled at Constantinople having done as much as in them lay c Cum nos per omnia quod decet servavimus servamus saepius petivimus Vigilium Col. 2. pa. 524. a. yea k as much in all points as was fit to be done for procuring the presence of Vigilius and having in their first and second Sessions done nothing but waited and expected for his comming seeing now all their invitations and intreaties to be contemned by him and their longer expectance to be but in vaine addresse themselves to the examining of the cause being stird l Pa. eadem b. up by the words of St. m 1 Pet. 3.15 Peter Be ready alwaies to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of your hope which readinesse if it must be in al Christians much n Incongruum auteÌ„ Sacerdotibus esse putanies protrahere dandum à nobis responsum Christianissimo Imperatori pa. eadem more in Bishops and if it must be declared towards all men most of all towards the Emperor who now required their speedy judgement and Synodall resolution in this cause 2. Having in their first and second Sessions declared their long and earnest but vaine expectance of Vigilius In their third Collation so their Sessions are called they set downe as a foundation to all their future acts a most holy confession of their faith consonant in all points to that which the holy Apostles preached which the foure former Councils explained and which the Holy Fathers with uniforme consent maintained 3. In the 4. and 5. Collations they at large and very exactly discusse the first Chapter concerning the person and writings of Theodorus B. of Mopsvestia adding so much also as was needfull touching the second Chapter which concerned the writings of Theodoret against Cyril 4. Now in that fifth Collation as Baronius tells o Vigilij libellus oblatus Synode Bar. an 553. nu 47. us the Constitution of Pope Vigilius touching the Three Chapters was brought unto the Synod The Pope promised p Ibid. that he would send his judgement thereof ad ipsum Imperatorem atque ad Synodum both to the Emperor and to the Synod which he ingenuously performed yea q An. eod nu 48 modo opportunè praestandum putavit he did it opportunely at this very time of the 5. Collation And the Card. is so resolute in this point that he peremptorily affirmeth of the Popes Constitution Cognoscitur r Jbid. it s knowne to pertaine to this very day of their fift Collation and it s Anno eod nu 41. was this day offered to the Councill for which cause he strongly imagining this Constitution t Constitutum hoc ex actis 5. SynodeÌ„ nosâ—itur esse sublatum an eod nu 47. to be stolne out of the Synodall acts now extant is bold to insert v Cum ad hunc ipsum annum et dieth Collationis 5. pertinere cognoscitur Ibid. nu 48. it into the 5. Collation as into his owne due and proper place wherein it was and now ought to be 5. The Card. is too confident about the day when it was sent to the Synod as also in his adding this Constitution to the Acts of the Synod as hereafter in due place will appeare Thus much is certaine and evident by the Synodall acts that this Constitution of Vigilius was made knowne to the Bishops of this holy Councill before their sixt Collation for in that sixt divers things are expressed which have a cleare and undoubted reference to the Popes decree as containing a refutation of the same and herein the Card. saith truly The x An. 553. nu 210. decree of Vigilius was first sent to the Emperor and from him to the Synod as by the sixt Collation may be perceived wherein those things which the Pope had alledged for defence of the Epistle of Ibas are refuted 6. As for the dignity credit and authority of this writing it is neither any ordinary nor private instruction but as the Pope himselfe calleth it a Constitution y Quae praesenti statuimus Constituto Vig Const apud Bar an 553. nu 208. a Statute z Statuimus et decernimus ibid. a Decree a Definition a Post praesentem definitionem ibid. or Definitive sentence and by the name of a Constitution it is subscribed unto both by the Pope b Vigilius Episcopus huic Constituto nostre subscripsi ib. nu 209. and all c Iohannes MarsoÌ„num huic Constituto subscripsi alij similiter ibid. the rest of his Assemblie and for such it is commended by Card. d Ann. 553. nu 47. Baronius and Binius e Vigilij Papae Constitutum Bin. in Fragm 5. Conc. pa. 591. In it the Pope delivereth his Apostolicall sentence Iudgement touching the Three Chapters this being f Hunc ipsum esse scias quem de sua sententia interpellatus pollicitus est se missurum ad Jmperatorem Bar. ann 553. nu 47. that very same answer which Vigilius promised to send to the Emperor and for the advised setting downe whereof he g Const Vigit nu 58. requested of the Emperor the respite of twenty dayes During which time he did insudare and laborare as the Card. saith h Ann. 553. nu 28. with much sweat and toile elaborate this large decree containing no lesse i Apud Bar. nu 553 a nu 50. ad 210. then thirty six columes in folio that it might in every respect and for the exact handling of so weighty a cause be correspondent to the gravity and authority of his infallible Chaire specially seeing he set it forth of purpose that it might be notified k Bar. an 553. nu 47 not onely to the Emperor and the Synod then assembled sed universo orbi Catholico but to the whole Catholike Church as a publike direction in faith for them all in which kinde of teaching nullo casu errare potest saith Card. Bellarmine l Lib. 4. de Pont. Rom. ca. 3. § Sit. the Pope can by no meanes be possibly deceived For this cause also Vigilius at this time and in this businesse
such a milde and mercifull disposition that though they dislike and condemne those assertions of the Popes supremacy of authoritie and infallibility of judgement yet are they so charitably affected to the Defenders of those assertions that they dare not themselves nor can indure that others should call them heretickes or accursed Durus est hic sermo this is too harsh and hard See here the fervour and zeale of this holy Councill They first say Cursed be the defenders of this Epistle or any part thereof As much in effect as if they had said Cursed be Vigilius Baronius Bellarmine and all who defend the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is all that are members of the present Church of Rome Cursed be they all And not contenting themselves herewith they adde Cursed be he who doth not accurse the defenders of that Epistle or of any part thereof As much in effect as if they had said Cursed be every one who doth not accurse Vigilius Baronius Bellarmine and all that defend the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is all that are members of the present Romane Church Cursed be he who doth not accurse them all The holy Council no doubt had an eye k Nos timenâ—es maledictionem quae imminet his qui negligenter opera Domini faciunt Col. 8. pa. 584. a. to the words of the Prophet Ieremy l Ier. 48.10 Cursed be he that doth the worke of the Lord negligently Cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood To spare when God commands and whom he commands to curse or kill is neither pitty nor piety but meere rebellion against the Lord and pulls downe that judgement which God himselfe threatned m 1 King 20.42 to Ahab Because thou hast let goe out of thine hand a man whom I appointed to dye thy life shall goe for his life 23. What then is there no meanes no hope of such that they may be saved God forbid Far be it from my heart once to thinke or my tongue to utter so hard a sentence There is a meanes and that after the Scripture the Councill expresly and often sets downe even were they denounce all those Anathemaes for thus they say n Col. 8. saept They who defend Theodorus the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill the impious Epistle of Ibas or the defenders of them et in his vsque ad mortem permanent and continue in this defence untill they dye let such be accursed Renounce the defence of these Chapters and of the Defenders of them that is forsake and renounce that position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in defining causes of faith renounce the defence of all that defend it that is of the whole present Romane Church Come o Apoc. 18.2.3.4 out of Babylon the habitation of devils the hold of all vncleane spirits which hath made all nations drunke with the wine of her fornication which themselves p Iohannes in Apocalypsi passim Roma vocal Babylonem Bell lib. 2. de poâ—t Rom. cap. 2. § Praterea Babylon quae casura â—radicitur Roma quidem est Râ—ber in cae 14. in Apoc. pa. 377. Et. Roma qualis in fine saeculi futura est ib. pa. 378. Iohannes loquitur de Roma qualo sub fineÌ„ mundi futura est Gretz Def. ca. 13. lib. 3. de Rom. pont pa. 927. Babylon quam esse Romam ait lib 7. pa. 228. sedes et civitas antichristi est Sand. lib. 8. de visib Monar ca. 48. cannot but acknowledge to be meant of Rome This doe and then Come q Isa 55.7 unto the Lord and he will have mercy and to our God for he is very ready to forgive All your former impieties heresies and blasphemies shall not be mentioned unto you but in the righteousnes and Catholike truths which ye then embrace you shall live If this they will not doe we accuse them not we accurse them not they have one who doth both accuse and accurse them even this holy general Council whose just Anathemaes shal as firmely binde them before God in heaven as they were truly denounced by the Synod here on earth for he hath sealed theirs and all like censures with his owne signet who r Matth. 18.18 said Whatsoever ye binde upon earth shall be bound in heaven 24. After all these just Anathemaes denounced as well in generall as in particular by the Councill against the defenders of these Three Chapters or any one of them the holy Synod sets downe in the last place one other point as memorable as any of the former And that is by what authority they decreed all these things of which they thus say s Col. 8. pa. 588. a. we have rightly confessed these things quae tradita sunt nobis tam à divinis scripturis which are delivered unto us both in the divine scriptures and in the doctrines of the holy Fathers and in the definitions of faith made by the foure former Councils So the holy Councill Whence it doth evidently ensue that to teach and affirme that the Pope in his judiciall and cathedrall sentence of faith may erre and define heresie and that Vigilius in his constitution de facto did so is a truth consonant to Scriptures fathers and the foure first general Councils But on the other side to maintaine or affirme as do all who are members of the present Romane Church that the Popes cathedrall sentence in causes of faith is infallible is an hereticall position repugnant to Scriptures Fathers and the 4. first Councils and condemned by them all So at once the Holy Councill judicially defineth both our faith to be truly ancient Apostolical the selfe same which the Holy Fathers generall Councills and the Catholike Church professed for 600 yeares and the doctrine of the present Romane Church even that fundamentall position on which all the rest doe relye to be not onely new but hereticall such as none can maintaine but even thereby he oppugneth and contradicteth both the Scriptures Fathers the foure first general Councils and the Catholike Church for 600 yeares after Christ 25. Further yet because one part of their sentence is the accursing of all who defend the Three Chapters either expresly as did Vigilius or implicitè and by consequent as do all who maintaine the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is al who are members of the present Romane Church and so die it cleerely ensueth from that last clause of the Councill that to condemne and accusse as heretikes all these yea all which doe not accurse these is by the judgement of this whole generall Council warranted by Scriptures by Fathers by the foure first generall Councils and by the Caholike Church for 600 yeares after Christ The judgement of this fifth Council being consonant to them all and warranted by them all 26. Neither is their Decree consonant onely to precedent Fathers and Councils but approved and
confirmed by succeeding generall Councils by Popes and other Bishops in the following ages of the Church By the sixt Councill which professeth t Act. 15. pa. 80. a. of it selfe that in omnibus consonuit it in all points agreeth with the fifth By the second Nicene which they account for the seaventh which reckneth v Act. 6. pa. 357. a this fift for one of the golden Councils which are glorious by the words of the holy Spirit and which all being inlightned by the same spirit decreed those things which are profitable professing that themselves did condemne all whom those Councils and among them whom this fift did condemne By other following Councils in every one of which the 2 Nicene and by consequent this fift Councill is approved as by the acts is cleare and Baronius confesseth x An. 553. nu 229. that this fift in alijs Oecumenicis Synodis postea celebratis cognita est atque probata was acknowledged and approved by the other generall Councils which were held after it 27. It was likewise approved by succeeding Popes and Bishops By Pelagius the second who writ an whole Epistle y Epist 7. Pelag. 2. to perswade the Bishops of Istria to condemne the Three Chapters telling z Pa. 687. them that though Pope Vigilius resisted the condemnation of them yet others his predecessours which followed Vigilius did consent thereunto By Gregory who professing a Lib. 1. Epist 24. to embrace reverence the 4 first Councils as the 4 Euangelists addeth of this fift Quintū quoque cōcilium pariter veneror I do in like manner reverence the fift Councill wherin the impious Epistle of Ibas is rejected the writings of Theodoret with Theodorus his writings And then of them all he saith Cunctas personas whatsoever persons the foresaid five venerable Councils doe condemne those also doe I condemne whom they reverence I embrace because seeing they are decreed by an universall consent whosoever presumeth to loose whom they bind or bind whom they loose se et non illa destruit he destroyeth himselfe but not those Councils and whosoever thinketh otherwise let him be accursed Thus Pope Gregory the great ratifying all the former anathemaes of the Councill and accursing all that labour to unty those bands By Agatho b In Cont. 6. Act. 4. pa. 16. a. by Leo c Epist ad Constan Imp. the second who both call this an holy Synod and not to stay in particulars All d Bar. an 869. nu 58 59. their Popes after the the time of Gregorie were accustomed at their election to make profession of this fift as of the former Councils and that in such solemne and exact manner after the time of Hadrian the second that they professed as their forme it selfe set downe by Anton. Augustinus e In manuscripto codice ex quo eum citat Bar. loco citate doth witnesse to embrace the eight generall Councils whereof this was one to hold them pari honore et veneratione in equal honor and esteeme to keepe them intirely usque ad unum apicem to the least iôta to follow and teach whatsoever they decreed and whatsoever they condemned to condemne both with their mouth and heart A like forme of profession is set downe in the Councill at Constance f Ses 39. pa. 1644. where the Councill having first decreed g Ses 4. pa. 1560. the power and authoritie of the Pope to be inferiour and subject to the Councill and that he ought to be obedient to them both in matters of faith and orders of reformation by this their superior authoritie ordaineth That every Pope at the time of his election shall professe that corde et ore both in words and in his heart hee doth embrace and firmely beleeve the doctrines delivered by the holy Fathers and by the eleven generall Councils this fift being reckned for one and that he will keepe defend and teach the same faith with them usque ad unum apicem even to the least syllable To goe no further Baronius confesseth h An. 553. nu 229. that not onely Gregory and his predecessors unto Vigilius sed successores omnes but all the successors of Gregory are knowne to have received and confirmed this fift Councill 28. Neither onely did the Popes approve it but all orthodoxal Bishops in the world it being a custome as Baronius sheweth i An. 869. nu 58. that they did professe to embrace the seven generall Councills which forme of faith Orthodoxi omnes ex more profiteri deberent all orthodoxall Bishops by custome were bound to professe And this as it seemeth they did in those Literae Formatae or Communicatoriae or Pacificae so they were called k Cum quo totus orbis commercio formatarum concordat Opt. lib. 2. p. 40. Quaerebam utrum epistolas communicatorias quas Formatas dicimus possent quo vellent dare Aug. Epist 163. Sub probatione Epistolij sine Pacificis quae dicuntur Ecclesiastica Conc. Chalc. can 11. which from ancient time they used to give and receive For by that forme of letters they testified their communion in faith and peaceable agreemēt with the whole Catholike Church Such an Vniforme consent there was in approving this fift Council in all succeeding Councills Popes and Bishops almost to these dayes 29. From whence it evidently and unavoidably ensueth that as this fift Synod so all succeeding Councils Popes and Bishops to the time of the Councill of Constance l Celebratum est an 1414. that is for more then fourteene hundred yeares together after Christ doe all with this fift Councill condemne and accurse as hereticall the judiciall and definitive sentence of Pope Vigilius delivered by his Apostolical authority for instruction of the whole Church in this cause of faith therfore they al with an uniforme consent did in heart beleeve and in words professe and teach that the Popes Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith may be and de facto hath been hereticall that is they all did beleeve and teach that doctrine which the reformed Churches maintaine to be truly ancient orthodoxall and catholike such as the whole Church of Christ for more then 14 hundred yeares beleeved and taught but the doctrine even the Fundamentall position whereon all their doctrines doe relie and which is vertually included in them all which the present Church of Rome maintaineth to be new hereticall and accursed such as the whole Church for so many hundred yeares together with one consent beleeved and taught to be accursed and hereticall It hence further ensueth that as this fift Councill did so all the fore-mentioned generall Councils Popes and Bishops doe with it condemne and accurse for heretikes not onely Vigilius but all who either have or doe hereafter defend him and his Constitution even all who either by word or writing have or shall maintaine that the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith is infallible that is
Later fact 19 Decemb. 1517. Paris as being contra fidem Catholicam against the catholike Faith and the authority of holy Councils And even to these dayes the French Church doth not onely distaste that x A Relation of Religion in the West parts published an 1605. pa. 129. Laterane Decree and hold a Generall Councill to be superiour to the Pope but their Councill also of y Gentil Exam. CoÌ„c Trid. Sess 13. Car. Mol. dec Conc. Trid. decret pa. 3. Trent wherein that Laterane Decree is confirmed is by them rejected And what speake I of them Behold while Leo with his Laterane Councill strives to quench this catholike truth it bursts out with farre more glorious and resplendent beauty This stone which was rejected by those builders of Babylon was laid againe in the foundations of Sion by those EZra's Nehemiah's Zorobabel's and holy Servants of the Lord who at the voyce of the Angell came out of Babylon and repaired the ruines of Ierusalem And even as certaine rivers are said to runne z Alpheum fama est huc Elidis amnem Occultas egisse vias subter mare Virg lib. 3. Aeâ—eid under or through the salt Sea and yet to receive no salt or bitter taste from it but at length to burst out send forth their owne sweet and delightfull waters Right so it fell out with this and some other doctrines of Faith This Catholike truth that the Popes judgement and Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith is not infallible borne in the first age of the Church and springing from the Scriptures and Apostles as from the holy mountaines of God for the space of 600 yeares and more passed with a most faire and spatious current like Tygris Euphrates watering on each side the Garden of the Lord or like Pactolus with golden streames inriching and beautifying the Church of God after that time it fell into the corrupted waters of succeeding ages brackish I confesse before their second Nycene Synod but after it and the next unto it extremely salt and unpleasant more bitter then the waters of Mara And although the nearer it came to the streets of Babylon it was still more mingled with the slime or mud of their Babylonish ditches yet for all that dangerous and long mixture continuing about the space of a Tot anni intersunt à Conc. Nic. 2. quod habituus est an 787. ad annum quo Lutherus se primum opposuit IndulgeÌ„tijs papalibus pontifici qui fuit an 1517 Cocl in vita Luther 730. yeares this truth all that time kept her native and primitive sweetnesse by the constant and successive professions of the whole Church throughout all those ages Now after that long passage through all those salt waves like Alpheus or Arethusa it bursts out againe not as they did in Sicily nor neare the Italian shores but as the Cardinall tells b Brevi occupavit Lutheri haeresis multa regna Bel. l. 3. de pontif ca. 23. § Similitudo Et Romanasedes amisit nostris temporibus magnam Germaniae partem Suetiam Gethians Norvegiam Daniam universam bonam Anglia Gallia Helvetia Polonia Bohemia ac Pannonia partem lib. eod ca. 21. § Ac postea us in Germanie in England in Scotland in France in Helvetia in Polonia in Bohemia in Pannonia in Sueveland in Denmarke in Norway in all the Reformed Churches and being by the power and goodnesse of God purified from all that mud and corruption wherewith it was mingled all which is now left in it owne proper that is in the Romane channels it is now preserved in the faire current of those Orthodoxall Churches wherein both it and other holy doctrines of Faith are with no lesse sinceritie professed theÌ„ they were in those ancient times before they were mingled with any bitter or brackish waters 36 You see now the whole judgement of the Fift Generall Councill how in every point it contradicteth the Apostolicall Constitution of Pope Vigilius condemning and accursing both it for hereticall and all who defend it for heretikes which their sentence you see is consonant to the Scriptures and the whole Catholike Church of all ages excepting none but such as adhere to their new Laterane decree and faith An example so ancient so authenticall and so pregnant to demonstrate the truth which wee teach and they oppugne that it may justly cause any Papist in the world to stagger and stand in doubt even of the maine ground and foundation whereon all his faith relyeth For the full clearing of which matter being of so great importance and consequence I have thought it needful to rip up every veine and sinew in this whole cause concerning these Three Chapters and the Constitution of Vigilius in defence of the same and withall examine the weight of every doubt evasion excuse which eyther Cardinall Baronius who is instar omnium or Binius or any other moveth or pretendeth herein not willingly nor with my knowledge omitting any one reason or circumstance which either they urge or which may seeme to advantage or help them to decline the inevitable force of our former Demonstration CAP. V. The first Exception of Baronius pretending that the cause of the Three Chapters was no cause of faith refuted 1 THere is not as I thinke any one cause which Card. Baronius in all the Volumes of his Annalls hath with more art or industry handled then this concerning Pope Vigilius and the Fift Generall Councill In this hee hath strained all his wits moved and removed every stone under which hee imagined any help might be found eyther wholly to excuse or any way lessen the errour of Vigilius All the Cardinalls forces may be ranked into foure severall troupes In the first do march all his Shifts and Evasions which are drawne from the Matter of the Three Chapters In the second those which are drawne from the Popes Constitution In the third those which respect a subsequent Act of Vigilius In the fourth last those which concerne the fift General Councill After all these wherin coÌ„sisteth the whole pith of the Cause the Cardinall brings forth another band of certaine subsidiary but most disorderly souldiers nay not souldiers they never tooke the Military oath nor may they by the Law of armes nor ever were by any worthy Generall admitted into any lawfull fight or so much as to set footing in the field meere theeves and robbers they are whom the Cardinall hath set in an ambush not to fight in the cause but onely like so many Shimei's that they might raile at and revile whomsoever the Cardinall takes a spleene at or with whatsoever hee shall be moved in the heat of his choler At the Emperour Iustinian at Theodora the Empresse at the cause it selfe of the Three Chapters at the Imperiall Edict at Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea at the Synodal acts yea at Pope Vigilius himselfe we wil first encounter the just forces of the Cardinall which onely are his lawfull
declared most evidently that those Three Chapters were condemned in proscriptione fidei Catholicae Apostolicae for the exiling and rooting out of the Catholike and Apostolike faith Facundus himselfe doth not onely affirme this but prove it also even by the judgement of Pope Vigilius Vigilius saith he ſ Lib 4. pro desens trium Capit apud Bar. an 546. nu 57. esteemed the condemning of these Three Chapters to be so hainous a crime that hee thought it fit to be reproved by those words of the Apostle Avoid prophane novelties of words and opposition of science falsely so called which some professing have erred from the faith And hereupon as if he meant purposely to refute this Evasion of Baronius which it seemeth some did use in those dayes he addes Quid adhuc quaeritur utrum contra fidem factum fuerit why doe any as yet doubt whether the condemning of them be against the faith seeing Pope Vigilius calleth it prophane noveltie and opposition of science whereby some have erred from the faith And a little after concluding This saith he t Ibid. nu 58. is not to be thought such a cause as may bee tolerated for the peace of the Church sed qua merito judicatur contra ipsius fidei Catholicae statum commota but it must bee judged such a cause as is moved against the state of the Catholike faith Thus Facundus testifying both his owne and the judgement of the other defenders of those Chapters and by name of Pope Vigilius that they all esteemed and judged this to bee a question and controversie of faith of which Baronius tels us that in it there was moved no question at all concerning the faith and that Pope Vigilius know that it was no question of faith 7. Now whereas the whole Church at that time was divided into u Vniversus fere orbis occidentalis ab orientali Ecclesia divisus erat Bin. not in S. Conc. §. Concilium two parts the Easterne Churches with the holy Councell condemning the Westerne with Pope Vigilius defending those Three Chapters seeing both the one side and the other consent in this point that this was a cause and question of faith what truth or credit thinke you is there in Baronius who saith that All men without any doubt agree herein that this is no cause or question of faith whereas all both the one side and the other agree in the quite contrary Truly the wisdome of the Cardinall is well worthy observing He consenteth to Vigilius in defending the Three Chapters wherein Vigilius was hereticall but dissenteth from Vigilius in holding this to be a cause of faith wherein Vigilius was orthodoxal as if he had made some vow to follow the Pope when the Pope forsakes the truth but to forsake the Pope when the Pope followeth the truth 8. Nor onely was this truth by that age acknowledged but by succeeding approved By Pope Pelagius who to reclame certaine Bishops from defence of those Chapters wherin they were earnest and had writ an apologie for the same useth this as one speciall reason because all those Chapters were repugnant to the Scriptures former Councels Consider saith he x Epist 7. §. Pensate if the writings of Theodorus which deny Christ the Redeemer to bee the Lord the writings of Theodoret quae contra fidem edita which being published against the faith were afterwards by himsefe condemned and the Epistle of Ibas wherein Nestorius the enemy of the Church is defended if these bee consonant to the Propheticall Euangelicall and Apostolicall authority And againe y Ibid. § Sed cur of the Epistle of Ibas he addeth If this Epistle be received as true tota sanctae Ephesinae Synodus fides dissipatur the whole faith of the holy Ephesine Councell is overthrowne Let here some of Baronius friends tell us how that question or cause doth not concerne the faith the defending whereof which Vigilius did is by the judgement of Pope Pelagius repugnant to the Euangelical and Apostolicall doctrines and even anutter totall overthrow of the faith To Pelagius accordeth Pope Gregory who approved z Lib. 2. Ind. 10. Epist 36. this Epistle of Pelagius cōmended it as a direction to others in this cause And what speake I of one or two seeing the Decree of this fift Councell wherein this is declared to be a cause of faith is consonant to all former and confirmed by all succeeding generall Councels Popes and Bishops til that time of Leo the 10. his Laterane Synod as before we a Cap. 4. have shewed was not this thinke you most insolent presumption in Baronius to set himselfe as a Iohannes ad oppositum against them all and oppose his owne fancy to the constant and consenting judgement of the whole Catholike Church for more than 1500 yeares together These all with one voyce professe this to be a cause of faith Baronius against them all maintaineth that it is no cause of faith and to heape up the full measure of his shame addeth a vast untruth for which no colour of excuse can be devised Consentitur ab omnibus that all men without any controversie agree herein that this is no question nor cause of faith 9. Besides all these Card. Bellarmine setteth downe divers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and cleare tokens whereby one may certainly know when a Councell decreeth or proposeth any doctrine tanquam de fide to be received as a doctrine of the Catholike faith This saith he b Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 12. § Quartū is easily knowne by the words of the Councell for either they use to say that they explicate the Catholike faith or else that they who thinke the contrary are to be accounted heretikes or which is most frequent they anathematize those who thinke the cōtrary So he Let us now by these markes examine this cause and it will be most evident not onely by some one of them which yet were sufficient but by them all that the Holy Councell both held this controversie to be of faith and also proposed their decree herein as a Decree of faith 10. For the first the Councell in plaine termes professeth even c Coll. 8. pa. 588. a. in their definitive sentence that in their Decree they explane that same doctrine which the Scriptures the Fathers and the foure former Councels had delivered in their definitions of faith Then undoubtedly by Bellarmines first note their Decree herein is a Decree of faith seeing it is an explication of the Catholike faith 11. For the second the Councel in like sort in plain termes calleth the defēders of those three Chapters heretikes For thus cried al the Synod d Coll. 6. pa. 576. b. He who doth not anathematize this Epistle is an Heretike He who receiveth it is an Heretike This we say all And in their definitive sentence they professe e Coll. 8. pa. that they set down the preaching of the truth Haereticorum
condemnationem and the condemning of Heretikes So by the second marke of Bellarmine it is undoubted that the Councels Decree herein is a Decree of faith 12. The third note is more than demonstrative For the Holy Councell denounceth not once or twice but more I thinke than an hundred times an Anathema to them that teach contrary to their sentence Anathema f Coll. 4. pa. 537. a. Coll. 8. pa. 586. et 587. to Theodorus anathema to him that doth not anathematize Theodorus we all anathematize Theodorus and his writings Anathema g Coll. 8. pa. 587. b. to the impious writing of Theodoret against Cyril Anathema to all that doe not anathematize them we h Coll. 6. pa. 576. b. all anathematize the impious Epistle of Ibas If i Coll. 8. pa. 587. b. any defend this Epistle or any part of it if any doe not anathematize it and the defenders of it let him be an Anathema 13. So by all the notes of Cardinall Bellarmine it is evident not onely that this question about the Three Chapters is a question of faith but which is more that the holy generall Councell proposed their Decree herein tanquam de fide as a Decree of faith Now because every Christian is bound to beleeve certitudine fidei cui falsum subesse non potest with certainty of faith which cannot be deceived every doctrine and position of faith then especially when it is published and declared by a Decree of the Church to bee a doctrine of faith Seeing by this Decree of faith which the Councell now made not onely the Popes Apostolicall sentence in a cause of faith is condemned to bee hereticall but all they also who defend it to be Heretikes and accursed and seeing all defend it who maintaine the Popes cathedrall sentence to be infallible that is all who are members of the present Church of Rome it hence inevitably ensueth that every Christian is bound to beleeve certitudine fidei cui falsum subesse non potest not onely the doctrine even the fundamentall doctrine of the present Church of Rome to be hereticall but all that maintaine it that is all that are members of that Church to be heretikes and accursed unlesse disclaiming that heresie they forsake all communion with that Church Baronius perceiving all those Anathemaes to fall inevitably upon himselfe and their whole Church if this cause of the Three Chapters which Vigilius defended and defined by his Apostolicall Constitution that they must be defended if this I say were admitted to be a cause of faith that hee might shuffle off those Anathemaes which like the leprosie of Gehazi doth cleave unto them thought it the safest as indeed it was the shortest way to deny this to be a cause of faith which not onely by all the precedent witnesses but by the judgement of their owne Cardinall and all the three notes set downe by him is undeniably proved to bee a cause of faith and that the Decree of the Holy Councell concerning it is proposed as a Decree of faith 14. I might further adde their owne Nicholas Sanders who though he saw not much in matters of faith yet he both saw and professed this truth and therefore in plaine termes calleth k Ob easdem haeresâ—s decrevit eos esse alienos à diaconorii honore Lib. 7. de visib Monarch an 537. the defending of the Three Chapters an heresie Now heresie it could not be unlesse it were a cause of faith seeing every heresie is a deviation from the faith But omitting him and some others of his ranke I will now in the last place adde one other witnesse which with the favourites of Baronius is of more weight and worth than all the former and that is Baronius himselfe who as he doth often deny so doth he often and plainly professe this to be a cause of faith Speaking of the Emperours Edict concerning these Three Chapters he bitterly reproveth yea he reproacheth the Emperour for that he would l An. 546. nu 41. arrogate to himselfe edere sanctiones de fide Catholica to make Edicts about the Catholike faith Again the whole Catholike faith saith he would m An. eodeÌ„ nu 43. be in jeopardy if such as Iustinian de fide leges sanciret should make lawes concerning the faith Againe n Ibid. nu 50. Pelagius the Popes Legate sounded an alarum contra ejusdem Imperatoris de fide sancituÌ„ EdictuÌ„ against the Emperors Edict published concerning the faith And yet againe o An. 547. nu 50. Pope Vigilius writ letters against those qui edito ab Imperatore fidei decreto subscripsissent who had subscribed to the Emperours Edict of faith So often so expresly doth Baronius professe this to be a cause of faith which himselfe like the Aesopicall Satyr had so often and so expresly denied to be a cause of faith and that also so confidently that he shamed not to say Consentitur ab omnibus all men agree herein that this is no cause of faith whereas Baronius himselfe dissenteth herein confessing in plaine termes this to be a cause of the Catholike faith 15. The truth is the Cardinals judgement was unsetled and himselfe in a manner infatuated in handling this whole cause touching Vigilius and the fift generall Councell For having once resolved to deny this one truth that Vigilius by his Apostolicall sentence maintained and defined heresie and decreed that all other should maintaine it which one truth like a Thesean threed would easily and certainly have directed him in all the rest of his Treatise now he wandreth up and down as in a Labyrinth toiling himselfe in uncertainties and contradictions saying and gainsaying whatsoever either the present occasioÌ„ which he hath in hand or the partialitie of his corrupted judgement like a violent tempest doth drive him unto when the Emperour or his Edict to both which he beares an implacable hatred comes in his way then this question about the Three Chapters must bee a cause of faith for so the Cardinall may have a spacious field to declame against the Emperour for presuming to intermeddle and make lawes in a cause of faith But when Pope Vigilius or his Constitution with which the Cardinall is most partially blinded meet him then the ease is quite altered the question about the Three Chapters must then bee no more a question or cause of faith for that is an easie way to excuse Vigilius and the infallibilitie of his Chaire he erred onely in some personall matters in such the Pope may erre he erred not in any doctrinall point nor in a cause of faith in such is hee and his Chaire infallible 16. There remaineth one doubt arising out of the words of Gregory by the wilfull mistaking whereof p An. 547. nu 30. an 553. nu 231. Baronius was misse-led He seemeth to teach the same with the Cardinall where speaking of this fift Synod hee saith q Lib. 3. Epist 37. In eâ de
was done contrary to the faith as the malignant slanderers of this Councell pretended nothing was done de novo to condemne any new heresie nothing was done absolutely or without reference to these Three Chapters all this Gregory truly intendeth when he saith nothing was done therein concerning the faith but seeing all that was done in the Councell was done to explane confirme corroborate the faith decreed at Chalcedon Ephesus as Gregory himselfe professeth it undoubtedly followeth that even for this cause and by Gregories owne testimonie the question here defined was a cause and question of faith Vpon Gregories words the Cardinall might well have collected that Vigilius in defending the Three Chapters erred not in any new heresie or new question of faith such as was not before condemned but that he erred not at all in a cause of faith is so farre from the intent of Gregory that out of his expresse words the quite contrary is certainly to be collected For how can the Pope be said not at all to erre in the faith when by his Apostolicall Constitution he defendeth that cause of the Three Chapters the defending whereof contradicteth a former definition of faith and utterly overthroweth the holy Councell of Ephesus and Chalcedon yea the whole Catholike faith 21. Neither must this seeme strange to any that the fift generall Councell did onely explane and confirme a former definition of faith and made no decree to condemne any new heresie repugnant to the faith The like hereof in some other Councels may be obserued The Councell of Sardica was a generall holy Councel as beside b Socr. lib. 2. ca. 16. Ex pluribus quam 35 provincijs collecta Athan. Epist ad solit vitam agent pa. 225. others the Emperor Iustinian in that his c Ab universali Sardicensi Synodo Iust Edict § Quod autem Edict witnesseth and yet in it d Bin. Not. in Conc. Sard. § Cum igitur Bell. lib. 2. de Rom. Pont. chap. 25 § Tertia nihil novi quoad fidem definitū est no new doctrine of faith was there defined nor any new heresie condemned but onely the faith decreed at Nice was corroborated and confirmed And the cause why the Sardican Councell is not reckoned in the order of generall Councels was not that which e Locis citat Bellarmine and Binius fancie because the Sardican and Nicene were held to be one and the same Councell for neither were they so indeed being called by different Emperours to different places at different times and upon different occasions neither were they ever by the ancient or any of sound judgement held for one Synod but the true reason thereof was this because the Sardicane though in dignity authority it was equall to the Nicene yet onely confirmed the Decree of faith formerly made at Nice and made no new or Introductive decree to condemne any heresie as did the other at Nice And truly for the selfe same reason the Church might if they had pleased have done the like to this fift Councell and not have accounted it no more than they did the Sardicane in a distinct number but onely esteemed it a Councell corroborative of the Councell at Chalcedon as that at Sardica was of the Nicene Councell which some Churches also did as by the 14. Councell at f Can. 6. 7. Toledo held a little after the sixt generall appeareth wherein this fift being for that cause omitted the sixt held under Constantinus Pogonatus is reckoned as the fift or next Councell to that at Chalcedō But for as much as this cause about the Three Chapters had bred so long and so exceeding great trouble in the Church and because the explanation of the faith made in this fift Councell upon occasion of those Chapters was so exact that it did in a manner equal any former decree of faith and benefit the whole Church as much as any had done it pleased the Church for these reasons with one consent declared first in the sixt g Act. 15. pa. 80. Sāctas universales quinque Synodos super has quintae Synodi Councell and then in the 2. h Can. 1. Nicene and divers other after it to account this for the fift and ranke it as it well deserveth in the number of holy and golden generall Councels 22. It now I hope clearely appeareth how unjustly the Cardinall pretends the words of Pope Gregory as denying this to be at all any cause of faith whereas not onely by the Emperour by the fift Councell by the defenders as well as the condemners of these Chapters by succeding generall Councels by Popes even Pope Gregory among the rest by the Catholike Church and consent thereof untill their Laterane Synod but even by their owne writers Cardinall Bellarmine Sanders yea by Baronius himselfe it is evidently proved so nearely to concerne the faith that to defend these Chapters which Vigilius did is to enervate and overthrow and to condemne them which the Councell did is to uphold and confirme the Holy Catholike faith And although this alone if I should say no more were sufficient to oppose to this first Evasion of Baronius yet that both the truth hereof may more fully and further appeare and that the most vile and shamelesse dealing of Baronius in this cause such as I thinke few heretikes have ever parallel'd may be palpable unto all To that which hitherto we have spoken in generall concerning all these Three Chapters I purpose now to adde a particular consideration of each of them by it selfe whereby it will be evident that every one of these Chapters doth so directly concerne the faith that the defence of any one of them but especially of the two last is an oppugnation yea an abnegation of the whole Christian faith CAP. VI. That the first reason of Vigilius touching the first Chapter why Theodorus of Mopsvestia ought not to bee condemned because none after their death ought noviter to be condemned concernes the faith and is hereticall 1. IN the first Chapter wherein Vigilius defēdeth that Theodorus of Mopsvestia being long before dead ought not to bee condemned for an heretike the Popes sentence relyeth on three reasons the examination whereof wil both open the whole cause concerning this Chapter and manifest the foule errors of Vigilius as well doctrinall as personall as well concerning the faith as the fact 2. His first reason is drawne from a generall position which Vigilius taketh as a Maxime or doctrinall principle in divinitie Nulli a Const Vigil ap Bar. an 55◠nu 179. licere noviter aliquid de mortuorum judicare personis It is lawfull to condemne none after their death who were not in their life time condemned and therefore not Theodorus That Theodorus in his life time was not condemned Vigilius proveth not but presupposeth nor doe I in that dissent from him for although that testimony of Leontius b Leon. lib. de
dead also Of their binding the nocent wee have alleaged before abundance of examples for their loosing the innocent that one of Flavianus is sufficient The Ephesine l Act. conciliab Ephes citata in actis Conc. Chalc. Act. 1. pa. 57. b. latrocinie adjudged and condemned Flavianus a most holy and Catholike Bishop for an Hereticke under the censure of that generall Councel Flavianus died nay was martyred m Caesus Flavianus dolore plagarum migravit ad Dominum lib ca. 12. by them The holy Councell at Chalcedon after the death of Flavianus loosed that band wherwith the latrocinious conspirators at Ephesus thought they had fast tyed him but because their key did erre they did not in truth They honored and proclamed Flavianus for a Saint and Martyr n Quae Synodus Chalc. Flaviano palmam mortis tribuit gloriosae Edict Valen. Mart. in Chalced. Conc. Act. 4. pa. 86. a. Flavianus injuste quidem in vita condemnatus juste post mortem revocatus est a B. Leone et sancta Synodo Chalcedonensi Iust edict §. Invenimus whom the faction of Dioscorus had murdered for an heretike the holy Councell feared not to loose him because he was dead their power to binde or loose was onely towards those that are upon the earth or living By which example and warrantie of that holy Councell our Church of latter time imitating the religious pietie of those ancient Bishops restored to their pristine o Hist combustionis Bucâ—ri et Fagij et restitutionis eorum dignitie and honor those reverend Martyrs two Flaviani in their age Bucer and Fagius after their death when a worse then that Ephesine conspiracy had not onely with an erring key bound but even burned them to ashes Now it is rightly observed by Iustinian p Si non oporteret anathematizari post mortem eos qui insua impietate mortuisunt oportebat nec eos qui injuste condemnati sunt patres post mortem revocari Lust edict prope finem that if the Church may after their death restore such as being unjustly condemned and falsly supposed to be bound died in their innocency and sincerity of faith it may also by the very same reason condemne and anathematize such after their death who died in their impiety or heresie being charitably perhaps but falsly supposed to have died in the communion of the Catholike Church 18. And truely whether soever of these censures either of binding or loosing the Church useth towards the dead as they both are warranted by the words of Christ and judgement of the Church so in doing either of both they performe an acceptable service to God and an holy duty to the Church of God For as wee professe in our Creed to beleeve the Communion of Saints which in part consisteth in loving praising and imitating all such as we know either now to live or heretofore to have dyed in the faith or for the faith of Christ so doe wee by the same Article of our Creed renounce all communion with whatsoever heretickes either dead or alive and therefore though in their life time they had never beene condemned for such but honored as the servants of God under whose livery they hide their heresies and impieties yet so soone as ever they shall bee manifested to have beene indeed and to have died heretikes we ought forthwith to forsake all communion with them not love them nor speake well of them much lesse imitate them but as Saint Austen saith he would doe of Caecilianus even after their death corde carne anathematizare not making them accursed For that the Church cannot do and themselves have done that already but declaring them to be accursed in truth excluded from the society of God Gods Church and to be such though dead as with whom we can have no more coÌ„munion then hath light with darknesse faith with heresie God and Beliall nay we should wish that if it were possible there might be such an antipathie and disunion betwixt us and them as is said to have been betwixt Eteocles q Impositis eorum cadaveribus eidem rogo flammam se divisisse traditur vid. Stat. in Theb. and Polinices that even our dead bones and ashes might leape from theirs nor sleepe in one Church nor one earth with them from whom one day they shall be eternally severed by a wall of immortality and immortall glory 19. Vigilius his second reason is taken from the rules decrees and Constitutions r Idem regulariter Apostolicae sedis definiunt constituta Vigil loc citat nu 179. of their Apostolicke See by name of Pope Leo Gelasius both whoÌ„ Vigilius saith to have defined this that a dead man might not noviter be condemned was it not enough for Vigilius that himselfe was hereticall herein unlesse he drew his predecessors also into the same crime of defending yea defining heresies How much better had it beseemed him to have covered such hereticall blemishes of their Apostolike See and of so famous Bishops as Leo and Gelasius were it not with a lappe of his robe as the good Emperour would yet at least with silence and oblivion 20. And yet for all this if Vigilius and the defenders of his infallibility will give me leave I am for my owne part willing to thinke better and more favourably of Leo and Gelasius in this matter specially of Leo whose authority when some defenders of the three Chapters objected Å¿ Praemisislis dicentes doctrina vestrae reverendae sedis est per B. Leonem successoresque ejus mortuum ab hominibus damnari nullatenus opertere Pelag. 2. Epist 7. §. In his to Pope Pelagius as according with them Pelagius replyed not onely that hee could no where remember any such thing in the bookes of Leo but that Leo indeed taught the quite contrary as consenting t Quis nescit quod ejusdem Leonis B. Augustini praedicatio contradicat ibid wholly with Saint Austen who professed that he would anathematize Caecilianus after his death if it could appeare that he were guilty of those crimes Which testimony of Pelagius as it fully cleareth Leo of this heresie so doth it manifest how unjustly Vigilius pretendeth his consent with him in this cause yea and the words of Leo which hee citeth doe declare no lesse In that Epistle u Leo Epist 91. Leo intreating of those who by the just censure of the Church were excommunicated or who did not performe the acts required in repentance saith If any of them die before hee obtaine remission quod manens in corpore non receperit consequi exutus carne non poterit hee cannot obtaine that to wit remission of his fault being dead which before his death he had not received And upon these follow the words cited by Vigilius Neither is it needfull that we shold sift the merits or acts of them qui sic obierunt who so die seeing our Lord hath reserved to his justice what
the priestly ministerie could not performe to wit the loosing of that band of censure or of sinne under which they dyed Thus Leo who denieth not that men after their death may be condemned but that any who in his life time is not may after his death bee pardoned Hee speakes not of such as have not beene in their life time condemned of which onely Vigilius entreateth but of such who being unpenitent or condemned by the Church die in their sin or under that just censure therefore in the state of condemnation So neither doe the words of Leo signifie any such thing as Vigilius by them intended to prove and Pope Pelagius assureth us that Leo taught the quite contrary to that which out of Leo Vigilius in vaine laboureth to prove 21. The very like construction is to bee given of the words of Gelasius in both the places cited out of him by Vigilius In the former x Gelas Epist 11. entreating of Acatius he thus saith Let no man perswade you that Acatius is freed from the crime of his prevarication for after he had falne into that wickednesse and deserved to be excluded and that jure by right from the Apostolike communion in hac eâdem persistens damnatione defunctus est hee persisting in this condemnation dyed Absolution cannot bee now granted unto him being dead which he neither desired nor deserved while he lived for it was said to the Apostles Whatsoever yee binde on earth But of him these are the words cited by Vigilius who is now under Gods iudgement that is who is dead in this sort it is not lawfull for us to decree ought else but that in quo eum supremus dies invenit wherein hee was found at the time of his death So Gelasius In which words it is evident that hee speakes not as Vigilius doth of such as in their life time were not condemned nor denieth hee that such may after their death when their heresie is discovered be condemned but of such as being in their life time justly condemned dye impenitent in that estate and of such he denyeth that after their death they can be absolved A truth so cleare that Binius sets this marginall note upon it Qui impoenitens mortuus est excommunicatus post mortem non potest absolvi He who dieth impenitent under the censure of excommunication cannot after his death bee absolved And Gelasius himselfe often repeateth the same most clearly in his Commonitorium to Faustus We reade saith he y Gelas Epist 4. that Christ raised up some from the dead but we never reade that he forgave or absolved any who were impenitent when they dyed and this power he gave to Peter Whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth on earth saith he nam in hac ligatione defunctum nusquam dixit absolvi For Christ never said that any who dyed being so bound should be loosed 22. The same is his meaning also in the other place z Epist Synodalis Gelas ij Synod Rom. 2. p. 268. b. alleaged by Vigilius In it he intreateth of Vitalis and Misenus who being the Popes Legates had communicated with Acatius and other hereticall sectaries and were for that cause both of them excommunicated by Pope Felix the next predecessor of Gelasius Misenus repenting was received into the communion of the Church Vitalis remaining impenitent died under that just censure when some of Vitalis friends desired the like absolution for Vitalis being dead a Nos etiam mortuis veniam praestare deposcunt ibid. Gelasius utterly refused to grant it and calling a Romane Synode it was declared in it That Misenus ought in right to be loosed but not Vitalis whom as they professed they gladly would but by reason of his owne impenitency wherein he dyed they could not helpe nor absolve but must leave him which are the words on which Vigilius relyeth to the judgement of God it being impossible for them to absolve him being dead seeing it is said Whatsoever ye shall binde upon earth such then as are not upon earth God hath reserved them not to mans but to his owne judgement Nor dare the Church challenge this unto it So Gelasius and the whole Romane Synode who doe not herein generally deny that any without exception may bee judged being dead for then they should condemne besides many other the holy Councell of Chalcedon which absolved Flavianus and bound or condemned Domnus and both after their deaths but limiting their speach to the present matter which they handled they teach that none who are dead to wit in such state as Vitalis dyed excommunicated and impenitent no such can after their death be judged to wit in such sort as the favourers of Vitalis would have had him adjudged that is absolved or loosed after his death from that censure and that the words of our Saviour doe forcibly conclude seeing whatsoever is bound upon earth is also bound in heaven and seeing such as die in that just bond of the Church are indeed reserved to the onely judgement of God the Church can pronounce no other nor milder sentence then it hath already passed of them That none at all after their death may be condemned by the Church Gelasius saith not and that is the hereticall position which Vigilius should out of Gelasius but doth not prove That none who at their death are justly bound by the Church and dye impenitent therein can after their death be loosed by the Church is a catholike truth which Gelasius teacheth and we all professe this Vigilius firmly by Gelasius doth but should not prove 23. So willing am I to quit Pope Leo and Gelasius from that hereticall doctrine wherewith Vigilius by his Apostolicall decree hath not onely himselfe eternally blemished the Romane See but laboureth also to fallen that heresie as an ancient and hereditarie doctrine from the time of Leo unto their See If this my indeavour for the honor of Leo and Gelasius be not accepted by them I must returne a conditionall and shorter but more unpleasing answer to this second reason of Vigilius relying on their authority and that is this If Leo and Gelasius truely and indeed taught the same with Vigilius that none after their death may noviter be condemned then were they also as Vigilius by the consenting judgement of the catholike Church hereticall If they did not indeed teach this doctrine then is Vigilius not only erroneous in faith both decreeing himselfe and judging them to have decreed heresie but slanderous also falsly imputing so great a crime as is heresie to so ancient famous Popes as were Gelasius and Leo And so whether they taught this doctrine or taught it not this second reason of Vigilius is of no worth at all proving nothing else but either them to be hereticall if Vigilius say true or himselfe to be a slanderer if he say untrue 24. Now after the reasons of Vigilius fully refuted in stead of a conclusion I will adde one short
consideration to all that hath beene said That this position decreed by Vigilius is such as doth not onely condemne the catholike church that is all the oppugners of it but even Vigilius himselfe and all who defend it Say you that a dead man may not noviter be condemned In saying so you condemne the holy Councell at Sardica of Constantinople of Ephesus of Chalcedon for they all did noviter condemne such persons being dead as in their lives time had not beene condemned Now the holy Fathers of those Councels having thus condemned the dead dyed themselves in the Lord and were in peace gathered to the Lord. If you say they should not have condemned the dead even in saying so you doe noviter condemne all those Fathers being now dead and so you doe that same thing which you say must not bee done and even by defending your position you overthrow your owne position for you doe noviter condemne all those holy Fathers being dead and yet you say that no man may noviter condemne the dead Nay you condemne not them only but even your own selfe also herein for you condemne those who condemne the dead and yet your selfe condemnes all those holy Fathers being now dead and you condemne them for doing that which your selfe now doe even for condemning the dead Such a strange discord there is in this hereticall position of Vigilius that it not only sights against the truth and the opposites unto it but viper-like even against it selfe and against the favourers and defenders of it CAP. VII That the second reason of Vigilius touching the first Chapter why Theodorus of Mopsvestia ought not to be condemned because he dyed in the peace and communion of the Church is erronious and untrue 1. THE second reason of Vigilius why Theodorus of Mopsvestia should not bee condemned is for that as he supposeth Theodorus dyed in the peace and communion of the Church to this purpose he saith that a Vigil Const apud Bar. an 553. nu 179. the rules of his predecessors which he applyeth to Theodorus did keepe inviolate the persons of Bishops in pace Ecclesiastica defunctorū who dyed in the peace of the Church And again We b Ibid. nu 184. doe especially provide by this our present Constitution lest by occasion of perverse doctrine any thing be derogated from the persons of them who as wee have said in pace communione universalis Ecclesiae quieverunt have dyed in the peace and communion of the Catholike Church and that no contumelie be done to those Bishops qui in pace Catholicae Ecclesiae sunt defuncti who have dyed in the peace of the Catholike Church Now that Theodorus so dyed Vigilius proveth not but takes as consequent upon the former point which as we have c Sup. ca. 6. shewed was knowne and confessed because d Perspenimus si quid de his qui defuncti sum nunime reperiuntur in vita damnati Vig. loc cit nu 176. Quos vocat In pace Ecclesiae defunctos Ibid nu 179. 184. he was not in his life time condemned by the Church Nor was Vigilius the first founder of this reason he borrowed it of other Nestorians with whom in this cause he was joyned both in hand and heart They to wit the followers of Theodorus and Nestorius flee unto another vaine excuse saith e Iust Edict § Quod autem Iustinian affirming that Theodorus ought not to be condemned eò quod in communione Ecclesiarum mortuus est because he dyed in the communion of the Churches 2. I shall not need to stay long in refuting this reason of Vigilius The Emperour hath done it most soundly and that before ever Vigilius writ his Constitution Oportebat f Iust ibid. eas scire those men who plead thus for Theodorus should know that they dye in the communion of the Church who unto their very death doe hold that common doctrine of piety which if received in the whole Church Iste autem usque ad mortem in sua permanens impietate ab omni Ecclesia ejectus est but this Theodorus continuing in his impiety to his death was rejected by the whole Church Thus Iustinian To whose true testimonie Binius ascribeth so much as well hee might that whereas some reported of Theodorus that he recalled his heresie this saith he might g Bin. Notis in Conc. 5. verbo Theodorus be beleeved nisi Iustinianus unlesse the Emperor had testified that he dyed in his heresie 3. The same is clearly witnessed also in the fift h Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 552. a. Councell where as it were of purpose this reason of Vigilius is refuted in this manner Whereas it is said of some and one of those is Vigilius that Theodorus died in the peace and communion of the Church mendacium est calumnia magis adversus Ecclesiam this is a lie and slander and that especially to the Church For he is said to die in the communion and peace of the Church qui usque ad mortem rectae Ecclesiae dogmata servavit who hath kept and held the true doctrines of faith even till his death But that Theodorus did not keepe those doctrines certum est it is certaine by his blasphemies and Gregory Nissen witnesseth the same And after the words of Gregory recited they adde this quomodo conantur dicere how doe any say that such an impious and blasphemous person as Theodorus was dyed in the communion of the Church Thus testifieth the Councell 4. Can ought be wished more pregnant to manifest the foule errours of Vigilius in this part of his decree Vigilius affirmeth that Theodorus dyed in the peace and communion of the Catholike Church The Emperour and Councell not onely testifie the contrary but for this very cause the Councell impatient at such indignitie offered to Gods Church cals him in plaine termes a lyar and a slanderer yea a slanderer of the whole Catholike Church in so saying Vigilius from the not condemning of Theodorus in his life time collecteth that hee dyed in the peace and communion of the Church both the Emperour and Councell witnesse his doctrinall errour herein truly teaching that though an heretike live all his life time not onely uncondemned by the Church but in all outward pompe honour and applause of the Church either himselfe cunningly cloaking or the Church not curiously and warily observing his heresie while hee liveth yet such a man neither lives nor dyes in the intire peace and communion of the Church The Church hath such peace with none who have not peace with God nor communion with any who have not union with Christ It condemned him not because as it teacheth others so it selfe judgeth most charitably of all It judged him to be such as hee seemed and professed himselfe to bee It was not his person but his profession with which the Church in his life time had communion and peace As soone as ever it seeth
charity covereth a multitude of sinnes The latter are so unlike to these that with their errour and even by it they have made an eternall breach and separation of themselves from the Catholike Church even from all who consent unto or approve this fift generall Councell for having by their Laterane decree erected and set up in the Romane Capitol this pontificall supremacy and infallibilitie they now account all but Schismatickes c Nemo potest subesse Christo communicare eli Ecclesia qui non subest Pontisici Rom. Bell. lib. de Eccl. milit ca. 5. Schisma est quando unum membrum nō vult esse subillo capite quare tollit unitatem essentialem atque Ecclesiā ipsam Schismaticus igitur non est de Ecclesia Ibid. similia habent alij who consent not with them they will have no peace no cōmunion with any who will not adore this Romish Calfe of the supreme infallible authoritie of their vice-god So the former notwithstāding their error died in the peace of that Church to which by most ardent affection they were conjoyned The latter dying in this their errour whereby they cut off and quite dis-joyne themselves from the union of all who approve the decree of the fift Councell and those are the whole catholike Church of all ages though they dye in the very armes and bosome of the Queene of Babylon cannot chuse but die out of the blessed peace and holy communion of the whole catholike Church which they have wilfully insolently and most disdainfully rejected 12. The fourth and last difference which I now observe ariseth from the judgement of the Church concerning them both The former she is so farre from once thinking to have dyed in heresie or heretikes that shee most gladly testifieth her selfe not onely to hold them in her communion but to esteeme and honour them as glorious Saints of the Church Papias d Natalis beati Papiae Martyr Rom. Feb. 22. the author of that opinion a Saint Irene e Passio Irenei Episcopi Martyris Mart. in martij 24 Menol. Graec. in Aug. 23. Iustine and Cyprian both Saints and Martyrs On the parties which hold the latter error she hath passed a contrary doome for by decreeing the Cathedrall sentence of Vigilius to be hereticall and accursing all who defend it she hath clearely judged and declared all who defend the Popes infallibilitie in defining causes of faith to bee heretikes dying so to die heretikes yea convicted heretikes anathematized by the judgement of the catholike Church and so pronounced to die out of the peace and communion of the catholike Church 13. I have stayed the longer in dissolving this doubt partly for that it is very obvious in this cause and yet as to me it seemed not very easie but specially that hereby I might open another errour in the Constitution of Vigilius who from the example of those Millenarie Fathers one of which to wit Nepos he expresly mentioneth f Vig. Const loc cit nu 178. would conclude That none at all though dying in heresie may after their death be condemned seeing Dionysius Bishop of Alexandria though he condemned the bookes and errour of Nepos yet Nepos himselfe hee did not injure nor condemne propter hoc maxime quia jam defunctus fuerat for this reason especially because Nepos was dead But by that which now at large I have declared it appeareth that Vigilius was twice mistaken in this matter for neither did Nepos die in a formall heresie but in an errour onely at that time to which he did not pertinaciously adhere though Prateolus g Prateolum Nepotem recenset inter haereticos tum in Indice tum in libro ipso in suo Elench verbo Nepos Et ait cum suisse authorē Epicurcae illius opinionis in verbo Chiliastae and after him the Cardinall h Mittimus Tertullianum Nepotem extra classem haereticorum vagantes Bar. Not. in Martyr Feb. 22. upon what reason I know not but sure none that is good reckons Nepos with Tertullian as one excluded from the ranke and order of catholikes neither did Dionysius or the Church for that reason at all which Vigilius fancieth much lesse for that especially forbeare to condemne Nepos because he was dead for then they would not have condemned Valentinus Basilides Cerinthus who also were dead i Iustin in Edicto § Quod autem when the Church condemned them but because they judged Nepos as well as Irene Iustine and the rest to have dyed though in an error yet in the unity peace and communion of the Church And this the words of Dionysius k Apud Euseb lib. 7. Eccl. hist ca. 19. not rightly alleaged by Vigilius and no better translated by Christopherson doe import For Dionysius said not that hee therefore reverenced Nepos quia jam defunctus fuerat as the one l Vigilius nor quia ex hac vita migravit as the other m Christopher in sua translatione readeth them that is because he was dead for upon that reason the holy Bishops should have reverenced also Simon Magus Cerinthus and other heretickes who were then dead but because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Musculus very rightly translateth thus I much reverence him as one qui jam ad quietem praecessit who is gone before mee unto rest that is because hee so dyed that his death was a passage to rest even to that rest of which the scripture n Apoc. 14.13 saith using the same words they rest from their labour to that rest unto which himselfe hoped to follow Nepos for that Nepos is gone before to this rest therefore did Dionysius reverence him So both the assertion of Vigilius which from Dionysius he would prove is untrue that none who are dead may bee condemned and yet the saying of Dionysius is true that such as goe to rest or dye in the peace of the Church ought not to bee condemned 14. After this which the Cardinall hath said in generall concerning such as dye in the peace of the Church hee addeth one thing in particular concerning Theodorus of Mopsvestia by way of application of that generall position unto him saying o Bar. an 553. nu 49. that Vigilius was therefore very slacke to condemne him because hee would not condemne those quos scisset in catholica communione defunctos whom he knew to have died in the catholike communion of the Church So the cardinall tells us that Vigilius knew and therefore that it is not onely true but certaine that Theodorus dyed in the catholike communion 15. What thinke you doth the cardinall gaine by pleading thus for Theodorus a condemned heretike Truly for his paines herein the holy Councell payes him soundly for first in plaine termes it calls him a lyar and a slanderer yea a slanderer of the whole Church and if this be not enough it denounceth an Anathema unto him for so saying Cursed bee
infallible Chaire they two by the new found art of Transubstantiating wherein that sect excelleth Iannes and Iambres and all the inchanters in the world they by one spell or charme of a few words pronounced out of that holy chaire can turne a serpent into a staffe bread into a living bodie darkenesse into light an hereticke into a Catholike yea the very venome and poyson of all Nestorianisme into most wholsome doctrines of the Catholike faith such as that none may write speake or thinke ought to the contrarie 21. See ye not now as I foretold that you should both the Pope and the Cardinall marching under the banner of Nestorius and like two worthy Generalls holding up a standard to the Nestorians and building in the Romane Church but very cunningly and artificially a Capitoll for Nestorianisme They forsooth will not in plaine tearmes say that Nestorianisme is the Catholike faith that Christ is not God that the Sonne of Mary is not the Sonne of God that Cyrill is an hereticke and the holy Ephesine Councell hereticall Fie these are too Beoticall and blunt they could never have gotten any one to tast of that cup of Nestorianisme had they dealt so plainely or simply rather Rome and Italy are Schooles of better manners and of more civilitie and subtiltie you must learne there to speake heresie in the Atticke Dialect in smooth plausible sweet and sugred tearmes you must say the union which Ibas in his Epistle embraceth is the Catholike union that Ibas by embracing that union was a Catholike and ought to bee judged a Catholike that whosoever embraceth not this union which the Pope hath defined to be the Catholike communion cannot be a Catholike or if you speake more briefly and Laconically you may say the Popes decrees and Cathedrall judgements in causes of faith are infallible Say but either of these you say as much as either Theodorus or Nestorius did you deny Christ to bee God You condemne the Ephesine Councell you speake true Nestorianisme but you speake it not after the rude and rusticke fashion but in that purest Ciceronian phrase which is now the refined language of the Romane Church By approving this union or the Popes decree in this cause of Ibas you drinke up at once all the blasphemies and heresies of Nestorius even the very dregs of Nestorianisme yet your comfort is though it be ranke poison you shall now take it as an antidote and soveraigne potion so cunningly tempered by Pope Vigilius and with such a grace and gravity commended reached and brought even in the golden cup of Babylon by the hands of Cardinall Baronius unto you that it killeth not onely without any sense of paine but with a sweet delight also even in a pleasing slumber and dreame of life bringing you as on a bed of downe unto the pit of death 22. See here again their Synoniā art Oh how nice scrupulous is Baronius in approving or allowing Vigilius to approve the former part of this Epistle of Ibas The Epistle o Bar. an 553. nu 192. was in no other part but onely in the last concerning the union approved Why there is nothing at all in the former no heresie or impiety set downe in it which doth not certainly and unavoydably ensue upon the approving of that union in Nestorianisme which Ibas embraceth in the latter part Why then must the latter and not the former be approved Forsooth in the former part p Vid. Epist Jba loc cit the blasphemies of the Nestorians are in too plaine and blunt a manner expressed Cyrill is an Apollinarian The twelve Chapters of Cirill omni impietate plena sunt are full of all impietie The Ephesine Councell unjustly deposed Nestorius and approved the twelve Chapters of Cyrill which are contraria verae fidei and such like It is not for a Pope or a Cardinall to approve such plaine and perspicuous heresies they might as well say We are heretikes wee are Nestorians which kinde of Beoticisme is farre from the civility of the Romane Court But in the latter part the heresies of Nestorius and all his blasphemies are offered in the shew of union with Cyrill and communion with the Church and comming under the vaunt of that union as in the wombe of the Trojane horse the Pope and the Cardinall may now with honour receive them the union and with or in it all Nestorianisme must be brought into the City the Pope and the Cardinall will themselves put their hands to this holy worke pedibusque rotarum subijciunt lapsus stupea vincula collo intendunt themselves will drag and hale it with their owne shoulders to within the wals nor is that enough it must be placed in the very Romane Capitoll in the holy temple and consecrated to God and that the Pope himselfe will doe by an Apostolicall and infallible constitution by that immutable decree is this union set up as the Catholike union Et monstrum infoelix sacrata sistitur arce this unholy and unhappy union is now embraced by which all the gates of the City of God are set wide open for all heresies to rush in at their pleasure and make havocke of the Catholike saith 23. Now it is not unworthy our labour to consider whether Vigilius and Baronius did in meere ignorance or wittingly embrace this union mentioned by Ibas that is in truth all Nestorianisme And for Vigilius if any will be so favourable as to interpret all this to have proceeded of ignorance I will not greatly contend with him It is as great a crime for their Romane Apollo and as foule a disgrace to their infallible Chaire upon ignorance to decree an heresie as to do it upon wilfull obstinacy yet to cōfesse the truth I am more than of opinion that Vigilius not upon ignorance but out of a setled judgment affection which he bare to Nestorianisme decreed this union and with it the doctrines of Nestorius to be embraced And that which induceth mee so to judge is the great diligence care and circumspection which Vigilius used to enforme both himselfe and others in this matter for besides that this cause was debated and continually discussed in the Church for the space of six yeares and more before the Pope published this his Apostolicall Constitution all which time Vigilius was a chiefe party in this cause himselfe in his decree witnesseth concerning this third Chapter or Epistle of Ibas that he examined it diligenti p Vig. Const nu 186. investigatione by a diligent inquisition yea that he perused his bookes most q Gesta Concilij Chalc. diligentissime perquirentes Jbid. diligently for this point and concludeth both of it and the rest that hee decreed these things cum r Ibid. nu 208. omni undique cautela atque diligentia with all possible care and diligence that could be used And because plus vident oculi quam oculus hee added to his owne the judgement of an whole Synod of Bishops
admitted for true and then it unavoydably followeth that by the Cardinals divinity and in his judgment Nestorianisme is the Catholike faith which aptly and easily will accord both his sayings for so the author of this Epistle by approving this union shall be a perfect Nestorian as in the one place is affirmed and by approving this union shall be withall a perfect Catholike as in the other place is avouched 28. Besides this confession of Baronius which is cleare enough there is yet another meanes to demonstrate that the Cardinall by defending this latter part of the Epistle touching the union did wittingly and wilfully maintaine the condemned heresie of Nestorius for the fift generall Councell approved as wee have shewed by the judgment of the whole Catholike Church hath adjudged this very part k Posteriora enim inserta Epistolae majori impietate plena sunt Cyrillum et similia ei sapientes injuriantia et omnino impiam sectam Nestorij vindicantia Conc. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 564. a. Scimus et nos haec ita subse quuta est c. Ibid. of the Epistle the defence whereof Baronius hath undertaken not onely to bee hereticall but to bee more full of blasphemies than any of the rest it hath l Qui dicit eam rectam esse vel partem ejus Coll. 8. pa. 587. b. further judicially defined al that defend either this or any part of that Epistle to be heretikes and for such it hath anathematized them yea all that write m Eos qui scripserunt velscribunt pro ea Ibid. eirher for it or for them Now the Cardinall had read the whole fift Councell as appeareth by that summary collection n Extat in Annal. Bar an 553. a. nu 33. ad 217. which he hath made of the Acts and of every Collation thereof nay hee had not onely read these Acts but pried earnestly with a jealous and carping eie into every corner and sentence thereof as you shall perceive hereafter and therefore it is doubtlesse that hee knew the judgement of this fift Councell concerning all that defend any part of this Epistle and specially the latter part which concernes the union Neither onely did he know that to be the judgement of this fift Councell but as himselfe o An. 553. nu 229. expresly witnesseth of all both Popes and generall Councels which followed it all of them approving this fift Councell and the judgement thereof whence it is cleare that Baronius knew certainly himselfe by defending this part of the Epistle touching the union to defend that which by the judgment of the fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church ever since hath beene condemned for hereticall and the defenders of it anathematized as heretikes yet such was the Cardinals zeale and ardent affection to Nestorianisme that against the judgement of the whole Church knowne unto him yea knowne for this very cause to anathematize him yet he defends the union there mentioned and the latter part of that Epistle wherein it is mentioned that is in truth all the blasphemies of Nestorius chosing rather by adhering to Vigilius and his hereticall decree to be condemned and anathematized by the whole Catholike Church for a Nestorian heretike than by forsaking the defence of Vigilius and his decree to condemne this latter part of the Epistle of Ibas touching the union which containeth in it the very quintessence of all Nestorianisme 29. I think it is now sufficiently apparent by that which wee have already said that the union which Ibas in his Epistle mentioneth and embraceth and which Vigilius first and after him Baronius approveth is not that true union in the Catholike faith which Cyrill made with Iohn and other Easterne Bishops but onely an union in Nestorianisme and in denying the Catholike faith to which the Nestorians falsly reported and slandered Cyrill with the other Catholikes to have consented and thereby to have condemned and anathematized that truth which the yeare before they had decreed at Ephesus Yet for the full satisfaction of all and clearing of all doubts which may arise I will adde one thing further which will much more manifest both the calumnie of the Nestorians and the constancy of Saint Cyrill and that is upon what colour or pretence the Nestorians raised this slanderous report which I am the more desirous to explane because the narration of this matter is extreamly confounded and entangled by Baronius and Binius and that as may be feared even of set purpose that they might either quite discourage others as almost they had done my selfe in the search of this truth or at least misleade them into such by-paths that they should not finde the truth in this matter 30. When Theodosius the religious Emperour had written by Aristolaus that earnest letter to Iohn and the other Easterne Bishops perswading yea commanding them to consent with Cyrill and embrace the Catholike communion they upon the Emperors motion sought indeed to make an union with Cyrill but they laboured to effect it by drawing Cyrill unto their bent and to consent unto their heresies This they first attempted by a letter of Acatius Bishop of Berea willing p Apud Acatium Bercensem Episcopâ—â— congressi scribi ad me curarunt pacem concordiamque nisi eo modo quem praescriberent fieri non debere Epist Cyrilli ad Acatium quae est 29. ext tom 5. Act. Ephes ca. 7. idem habetur in Epist Cyrilli ad Dynatum tom eod ca. 16. him to write in all their names unto Cyrill that no unity or concord could be made but according to those conditions which themselves should prescribe And the condition prescribed by them was that Cyrill should q Vrgebat ut omnibus quae adversus Nestorium scripsimus abolitis velut inutilibus rejectis c. Epist ad Dynat similia habentur in Epist Cyrill ad Acat locis cit abolish and condemne all that ever hee had written against Nestorianisme and so both his twelve Chapters and the Ephesine decree and all the like Cyrill answered r Cyrill Epistola ad Dynat ad Acat with great confidence rem eos postulare quae fieri plane non posset that they required a matter utterly impossible because what hee had written touching that matter was rightly written and in defence of the true faith and therefore that he could not either condemne or deny what he had written 31. When it succeeded not this first way they next attempted to effect the union by Paulus Å¿ Miserunt Alexandriam Paulum Episcopum EmisenoruÌ„ c. ibid. Bishop of Emisa whom they sent to Alexandria to negotiate for them both by words and by a second letter which they sent by him And although they were not in this second so violent as in the former of Acatius yet they writ t At tulit quaedam parum decore commode proposita ibid. some things therein also not sitting nor allowable for they
very heresie condemned in Nestorius It doth hence clearly and unavoidably ensue not onely that this third Chapter touching the approving of the Epistle of Ibas doth concerne the faith and is a question and cause of faith but that Vigilius first and next Baronius and then all who by word or writing doe defend either Vigilius or Baronius or the Popes judgment in causes of faith to be infallible that they all by defending this Epistle as orthodoxall or that Ibas by it ought to bee judged a Catholike doe thereby maintaine the condemned heresie of Nestorius to be the onely Catholike faith CHAP. XIII Two assertions of Baronius about the defenders of the Three Chapters refuted and two other against them confirmed the one That to dissent from the Pope in a cause of faith makes one neither an Heretike nor a Schismatike the other That to assent absolutely in faith to the Pope or present Church of Rome makes one both an Heretike and a Schismatike 1. HAving now demonstratively refuted the first evasion of Baronius I would proceed to the second but that Baronius doth enforce me to stay a little in the examining of two Positions which he collects and sets downe touching this cause the former concerning heresie the later concerning schisme 2. His former is this That a An. 547. nu 36. both the defenders and the condemners of these three Chapters were Catholikes neither of both were Heretikes Negatio vel assertio non constituebat quemquam haereticum neither the condemning of these Chapters nor the defending of them made one an heretike unlesse there were some other error joyned with it Againe in b An. 553. nu 23. these disputations about the three Chapters the question was not such ut alter ab altero aliter sentiens dici posset haereticus that one dissenting from another herein might be called an heretike So Baronius who to free Vigilius from heresie acquits all that deale either pro or contra in this cause neither one side nor the other are heretikes 3. See how heresie makes a man to dote That this question about the three Chapters is a cause of faith wee have cleerly and unanswerably confirmed and Baronius himselfe hath confessed That the defenders of them and condemners were in a manifest contradiction in this cause the former by an evident consequent and cunningly defending the other condemning the heresies of Nestorius is most evident and yet both of them in the Cardinals judgement are good Catholikes neither the one who with the Nestorians deny Christ to be God nor the other who affirme him to be God may be called heretikes This truly is either the same heresie which the Rhetorians maintained who as Philastrius saith c Haeres 43. Prateol lib. 17. Haeres 3. praised all sects and opinions and said they all went the right way or else it is an heresie peculiar to Baronius such as none before him ever dreamed of That two contradictories in a cause of faith may be held and yet neither of them be an heresie nor the pertinacious defenders of either of them both be heretikes Baronius would be famous for a peece of new found learning and an hereticall quirke above all that ever went before him such as by which he hath ex condigno merited an applause of all heretiks which either have beene or shall arise hereafter For seeing in this cause of faith two contradictories may be held without heresie the like may be in every other point of faith and so with Vigilius the Arians Eutycheans and all heretikes shall have their quietus est say what they will in any cause of faith none may call them heretikes I commend the Cardinall for his wit This makes all cocke sure it is an unexpugnable bulwarke to defend the Constitution of Pope Vigilius 4. Say you neither the defenders nor the condemners of these Chapters may for that cause bee called heretikes For the condemners of them trouble not your wit they are and shall be ever acknowledged for Catholikes But for the defenders of them who are the onely men that the Cardinall would gratifie by this assertion I may boldly say with the Prophet d Ier. 2.22 Though thou wash them with nitre and much sope yet is their iniquity marked out All the water in Tyber and Euphrates cannot wash away their heresie for as we have before fully declared the defending of any one much more of all these three Chapters is the defending of Nestorianisme and all the blasphemies thereof the condemning of the holy Councels of Ephesus and Chalcedon and of all that approve them that is of the whole catholike Church and of the whole Catholike Faith All these must be hereticall if the defenders of those three Chapters be not heretikes 5. Now against this assertion of Baronius whereby he would acquit Vigilius and all that defend him from heresie I will oppose another and true assertion ensuing of that which wee have clearly proved and this it is That one or moe either men or Churches may dissent from the Popes Cathedrall and definitive sentence in a cause of faith made knowne unto them and yet be no heretikes For to omit other instances no lesse effectuall this one concerning Vigilius doth make this most evident The cause was a cause of faith as Baronius himselfe often professeth e Vid. sup ca. 5. nu 14. The Popes definitive and Apostolicall sentence in that cause of faith made for defence of those three Chapters was published and made knowne to the fift generall Councell and to the whole Church this also Baronius confesseth f An. 553. nu 47. vid. sup ca. 3. nu 6. and yet they who contradicted the Popes Apostolicall sentence in this cause of faith made knowne unto them were not heretikes this also is the confession of Baronius whose assertion as you have seene is that neither the condemners of these Chapters nor the defenders of them were heretiks So by the Cardinalls owne assertions one may contradict and oppugne the Popes knowne Cathedral and Apostolicall sentēce in cause of faith and yet bee no heretike But what speake I of Baronius the evidence and force of reason doth unresistably confirme this For the whole fift generall Councell contradicted yea condemned and accursed the Popes Cathedrall and definitive sentence in this cause of faith made knowne unto them The whole Catholike Church ever since hath approved the fift Councell and the decree thereof and therefore hath contradicted condemned and accursed the Popes sentence as the Councell had done And none I hope will be so impudently hereticall as to call not onely the fift generall and holy Councell but the whole Catholike Church of God heretikes who yet must all be heretikes or else the dissenting from yea the detesting and accursing the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith cannot make one an heretike 6. I say more and adde this as a further consequent on that which hath been declared That none can now
assent to their Popes or to their Cathedrall definitions and doctrines maintained by the present Romane Church but co nomine even for that very cause they are convicted condemned and accursed heretikes For the manifesting of which conclusion I will begin with that their fundamentall position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in defining causes of faith whereof before I have so often made mention And to prove the present Romane Church to bee hereticall herein two things are to be declared the one that this is indeed the position or doctrine of their Church the other that this doctrine is hereticall and for such condemned by the Catholike Church 7. For the former that the assertion of Popes infallibility in defining causes of faith is the doctrine of the present Romane Church I thinke none conversant in their writings will make doubt Give mee leave to propose some testimonies of their owne The Pope saith Bellarmine g Lib. 4. de pont ca. 3. §. Sic. when hee teacheth the whole Church those things which belong to faith nullo casu errare potest hee can by no possible meanes then erre And this as he saith is certissimum a most certaine truth and in the end hee addeth this is a signe Ecclesiam totam sentire that the whole Church doth beleeve the Pope to be in such causes infallible So he testifying this to be the judgement and doctrine of their whole Church The Iesuite Coster for himselfe and their whole Church saith We h Ench. tit de summo pont §. Fatemur doe constantly deny the Popes vel haeresim docere posse vel errorem proponere to be able either to teach an heresie or to propose an errour to be beleeved When the Pope saith Bozius i Th. Boz lib 18. de Sig. Eccl. ca. 6. §. Sequitur teacheth the Church or sets forth a decree of faith Divinitùs illi praeclusa est omnis via God then stoppeth every way unto him which might bring him into errour Againe k Idem lib. 16. ca. 8. §. Rursus in making such decrees nunquam valuit aut valebit facere contra fidem he never was he never shall be able to doe ought against the faith We beleeve saith Gretzer l Def. ca. 3. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. §. Terius the judgement of him who succeeds Peter in the Chaire non secus ac olim Petri infallibile to be no otherwise infallible then the judgement of Peter was And the m Idem def ca. 28. lib. 1. de pontif §. Quocirca gates of hell shall never be able to drive Peters successours ut errorem quempiam ex cathedra definiant that they shall define any errour out of the Chaire This is saith Stapleton n Relect. Cont. 3. qu. 4. §. Circa a certaine and received truth among Catholikes That the Pope when he decreeth ought out of his pontificall office hath never yet taught any hereticall doctrine nec tradere potest nor can he deliver any error yea if it bee a judgement o Rel. Conc. 6. q. 3. Art 5. §. Respondeo of faith it is not onely false but hereticall to say that the Pope can erre therein They saith Canus p Loc. Theol. lib. 6. ca. 7. §. Quid. who reject the Popes judgement in a cause of faith are heretickes To this accordeth Bellarmine q Lib. 3. de verb. Dei ca. 8. §. Excutimus It is lawfull to hold either part in a doubtfull matter without note of heresie before the Popes definition be given but after the Popes sentence he who then dissenteth from him is an hereticke To these may be added as Bellarmine testifieth r Lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 2. § Quarto St. Thomas Thomas Waldensis Cardinall Turrecremata Cardinall Cajetane Cardinall Hosius Driedo Eccius Iohannes a Lovanio and Peter Soto all these teach it to be impossible that the Pope should define any hereticall doctrine And after them all the saying of Gregory de Valentia is most remarkable to this purpose It now appeareth saith he ſ In 2. 2. disp 1. q. 1. punct 1 part 30. that Saint Thomas did truly and orthodoxally teach that the proposall or explication of our Creed that is of those things which are to be beleeved doth belong unto the Pope which truth containes so clearely the summe and chiefe point of Catholike religion ut nemo Catholicus esse possit qui illam non amplectatur that none can be a Catholike unlesse hee hold and embrace this So he professing that none are to be held with them for Catholikes but such as maintaine the Popes infallibilitie in proposing or defining causes of faith 8. They have yet another more plausible manner of teaching the Popes Infallibilitie in such causes and that is by commending the judgement of the Church and of generall Councels to be infallible All Catholikes saith Bellarmine t Lib 2. de Conc. ca. 2 §. Ac ut doe constantly teach that generall Councels confirmed by the Pope cannot possibly erre in delivering doctrines of faith or good life And this he saith is so certaine that fide catholica tenendum est it is to be embraced by the Catholike faith and so all Catholikes are bound to beleeve it Likewise concerning the Church he thus writeth u Lib. de Eccles milit ca. 14. §. Nostra Nostra sententia est it is our sentence that the Church cannot absolutely erre in proposing things which are to bee beleeved The same is taught by the rest of their present Church Now when they have said all and set it out with great pompe and ostentation of words for the infallibility of the Church and Councell it is all but a meere collusion a very maske under which they cover and convaie the Popes Infallibilitie into the hearts of the simple Try them seriously who list sound the depth of their meaning and it will appeare that when they say The Church is infallible Generall Councels are infallible The Pope is infallible they never meane to make three distinct infallible Iudges in matters of faith but one onely infallible and that one is the Pope 9. This to be their meaning sometimes they will not let to professe When we teach saith Gretzer x Def. ca. 10. lib. 3. de verb. Dei §. Iam. pa. 1450. that the Church is the infallible Iudge in causes of faith per Ecclesiā intelligimus Pontificem Romanum we by the Church doe meane the Pope for the time being or him with a Councell Againe y Ibid. §. An. pd 1451. They object unto us that by the Church we understand the Pope Non abnuo I confesse wee meane so in deed This is plaine dealing by the Church they meane the Pope So Gregorie de Valentia z In 2. 2. disp 1. q. 1. By the name of the Church we understand the head of Church that is the Pope So Bozius a Lib. 2. de sig eccl ca. 21. §. His. lib.
Church and generall Councels to be infallible seeing their infallibility is none but onely by adhering and consenting to the Pope it necessarily ensueth that they all à fortiori doe beleeve and must professe the Pope to be infallible seeing on his the infallibility of both the other doth wholly and solely depend 12. Let me adde but one other proofe hereof taken from Supremacy of authoritie and judgement It is a ruled case in their learning Si o Bell. lib. 3. de verb. Dei ca. 5. § Quintū et lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 1. § Denique et lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 11. § De tertio errare non potest debet esse summus judex He who is infallible must be the highest and last Iudge and Vice versa He p Affirmant ejus judicium esse ultimū Hinc autem aperte sequitur non errare Bell. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 3 § Accedat who is the last and highest judge must be infallible Supremacy and infallibility of judgement are inseparably linked To whomsoever Supremacy is given even for that cause infallibility of judgement is granted unto him also for seeing from the last or supreme Iudge there can be no appeale it were most unjust to binde Christians to beleeve his sentence who might be deceived most unjust to binde them from appealing from a judge that were fallible or from an erronious judgement Consider now to whom Supremacy of judgement in causes of faith belongeth To whom else but to the Pope whereas some dare affirme saith the Canonist q Cupers com ad cap. oporteb pa. 4. nu 33. that a Councell is above the Pope Falsissimum est This is most false The Successor of Peter saith Stapleton r Rel Cont. 6. q. 3. art 5. opin 10. supra omnes est is above all Bishops Church generall Councels above all The Pope saith Bellarmine ſ Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 17. is simply and absolutely above the whole Church and above a generall Councell t Lib. eod ca. 14. § Vltimae Hee further tels us that this assertion That the Pope is above a generall Councell is not only the judgment of all the ancient Schoole Divines the cōmon sentence of their Writers of whom he reckoneth thirteene and if it were fit three times thirtie might bee scored up with them but that it is the publike doctrine of their Church decreed in their Laterane Synod under Leo the tenth There the Councell saith he u Lib. eod ca. 17. § Denique disertè ex professo docuit did plainly and of set purpose teach the Pope to bee above all Councels yea expressissimè x Lib. eod ca. 13. § Deinde rem definivit that Laterane Councell did most expresly define this and their definition hereof is Decretum de fide a Decree of faith for which cause in his Apology bearing the name of Schulkenius hee professeth y Ca. 6. § Probo pa. 227. that this is Articulus fidei an Article of faith such as every Christian is bound to beleeve that the Pope is Summus in terris totius Ecclesiae Iudex the Supreme last and highest Iudge of the whole Church here upon earth which he proves besides many other authorities by this very Laterane z Cap. eodem § Lateran pa. 249. decree and by their Trent Councell The words themselves of those Councels make the matter plaine in that at the Laterane Councell they thus decree Solum a Sess 11. pa. 639. b. Romanum Pontificem supra omnia Concilia authoritatem habere that the Pope alone hath authority above all Councels and this they say is taught not b Nedum ex Scripturae sacrae testimonio dictis sanctorum patrum c. Ibid. onely by Fathers and Councels but by the holy Scriptures thereby shewing that in this decree they explicate declare the Catholike faith which is one of the Cardinals notes to know when a decree is published by a Councell tanquam de fide as a decree of faith and they threaten the c Ibid. pa. 340. indignation of God and the blessed Apostles to the gainsayers of their decree A censure as heavy as any Anathema the denouncing whereof is another of the Cardinals notes that they proposed this decree as a decree of faith In the other at Trent the Councell teacheth d Sess 14. ca. 7. that unto the Pope is given Suprema potestas in universa Ecclesia the Supreme power in the whole Church And this Supremacy is such that from all Councels all other Iudges you may appeale to him and hee may reverse e Pontifex ut Princeps Ecclesiae summus potest retractare illud judicium Concilij Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 18. § Dico Potest approbare vel reprobare Idē lib. 2. ca. 11. § De tertio adnull or repeale their judgement but from him as being the last and highest Iudge as having supreme power qua f Bell. lib. eodem 2. ca. 18. § Praeterea nulla est major cui nulla est aequalis then which none is greater and to which none is equall you may appeale to none no not as some g Aug. Triump de potest Eccl. q. 6. ar 8. of them teach unto God himselfe The reason whereof is plaine for seeing the Popes sentence in such causes is the h Sententia Concilij cui praest Petrus est sententia Spiritus sancti Bell. lib. 3 de verb. Dei ca. 5. § Sextum Idem asserere possunt caetera legitima Concilia Bell. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 2. § Tertius sentence of God uttered indeed by man but assistente i Bell. lib. 3. de verb. Dei ca. 10. § Decimum gubernante Spiritu Gods Spirit assisting guiding him therein if you appeale from him or his sentence you appeale even from God himselfe and Gods sentence Such soveraignty they give unto the Pope in his Cathedrall judgement Now because Infallibility is essentially and inseperably annexed to supremacie of judgement it hence evidently ensueth that as their Laterane and Trent Councels and with them all who hold their doctrine that is all who are members of their present Romane Church doe give supremacy of authority and judgement unto the Pope so with it they give also infallibility of judgement unto him their best Writers professing their generall Councels desining and decreeing their whole Church maintaining him and his Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to bee infallible which was the former point that I undertooke to declare 13. Suffer mee to goe yet one step further This assertion of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith is not onely a position of their Church which hitherto wee have declared but it is the very maine ground and fundamentall position on which all the faith doctrines and religion of the present Romane Church and of every member thereof doth relie For the manifesting whereof that must
diligently be remembred which we before have shewed that as when they commend the infallibility of the Church or Councell they meane nothing else then the Popes infallibility by consenting to whom the Church and Councell is infallible even so to the point that now I undertake to shew it is all one to declare them to teach that the Church or generall Councell is the foundation of faith as to say the Pope is the foundation thereof seeing neither the Church or Councell is such a foundation but onely by their consenting with and adhering to the Pope who is that foundation 14. This sometimes they will not let in plaine termes to professe Peter saith Bellarmine k Lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 3. § Secundo and every one of his successors est petra fundamentum Ecclesiae is the rocke and foundation of the Church In another place l Praef. in lib de Pont. § Quae. he calleth the Pope that very foundation of which God prophesied in Isaiah I m Isa 28.16 1 Pet. 2.8 lay in the foundations of Sion a stone a tried stone a precious corner stone a sure foundation Ecce vobis lapidem in fundamentis Sion saith Bellarmine pointing at the Pope behold the Pope is this stone laid in the foundations of Sion And in his Apology under the name of Schulkenius n Ca. 6. pa. 255. he cals these positioÌ„s of the Popes supremacy CardineÌ„ fundamentuÌ„ summaÌ„ fidei Christianae the Hinge the foundation the very summe of the Christian faith To the like purpose Pighius cals o Lib. 4 Hier. ca. 6. § Habes the Popes judgement Principium indubiae veritatis a principle of undoubted verity and that he meaneth the last and highest principle his whole Treatise doth delare Coster observes p Euch ca. de sum Pont § Nequc that the Pope is not onely the foundation but which is more the Rock other Apostles were foundations other Bishops are pillars of the Church but Peter and his Successor is that solid Rocke quae fundamenta ipsa continet which supporteth all other pillers and foundations To this purpose tends that assertion which is so frequent in their mouthes and writings q Bell. li. 4. de Pont. ca. 1. et l. 2. de Conc. ca. 14. § Vltima et Gretz def ca. 1. lib. 1. de verbo Dèi pa. 16. that in causes of faith ultimum judicium est summi Pontificis the last judgement belongs to the Pope Now if it bee the last in such causes then upon it as on the last and lowest foundation must every doctrine of their Church relie into his judgement it must last of all be resolved but it because it is the last into any higher judgement or lower foundation cannot possibly bee resolved 15. But their most ordinary and also most plausible way to expresse this is under the name of the Church teaching men to rest and stay their faith on it although in very truth as wee have shewed before all which they herein say of the Church doth in right and properly belong to the Pope onely and to the Church but onely by reason of him who is the head thereof The r Lib. de Eccl. milit ca. 10 § Ad haec tradition of the Scriptures and all doctrines of faith whatsoever doe depend of the testimony of the Church saith Bellarmine Againe The Å¿ Lib. de effect Sacr. ca. 25 § Tertium certainty of all ancient Councels and of all doctrines doth depend on the authority of the present Church And yet more fully t Lib. 6. de grat et lib. arb ca. 3. § At Catholici The faith which Catholikes have is altogether certaine and infallible for what they beleeve they doe therefore beleeve it because God hath revealed it and they beleeve God to have revealed it quoniam Ecclâ—siam ita dicentem vel declarantem audiunt because they heare the Church telling them that God revealed it So Bellarmine who plainly professeth the testimony of the present Church that is of the Pope to bee the last reason why they beleeve any doctrine and so the very last and lowest foundatioÌ„ on which their faith doth relie None more plentifull in this point than StapletoÌ„ The externall testimony of the Church saith he u Tripl cont Whit. ca. 11. § Venies Fundamentum quoddam fidei nostrae verè propriè est is truly and properly a foundation of our faith Againe x Dupl cont Whit. ca. 16. sect 4. the voyce of the Church est regula omnium quae creduntur the rule and measure of all things which are beleeved Againe y Tripl ca. 16. § At qui. whatsoever is beleeved by the Catholike faith wee Catholikes beleeve that propter Ecclesiae authoritatem by reason of the Churches authority we z Relect. Cont. 4 q. 1 art 3. ad 8. beleeve the Church tanquam Medium credendi omnia as the Medium or reason why we beleeve all other things And yet more fully in his doctrinall principles a Doct. Prin. lib. 8. ca. 21 § Hic when we professe in our Creed to beleeve the Catholike Church the sense hereof though perhaps not Grammaticall for the Pope and his divinity is not subject to Grammer rules yet certainly the Theologicall sense is this Credo illa omnia quae Deus per Ecclesiam me docuit I beleeve all those things which God hath revealed and taught mee by the Church But how know you or why beleeve you this Deum per Ecclesiam revelare that all those things which the Church teacheth are revealed and taught of GOD What say you to this which is one peece of your Creede To this Stapleton both in that place b Ca. Eod. § Adsecundam and againe in his Relections c Reâ— Cont 4. q. 3. art 2. ad 8. gives a most remarkeable answer This that God revealeth those things by the Church is no distinct Article of faith sed est quoddam transcendens fidei Axioma atque principium ex quo hic alij omnes Articuli deducuntur but this is a transcendent Maxime and principle of faith upon which both this it owne selfe note this especially and all other Articles of faith doe depend upon this all Articles of faith doe hang hoc unum praesupponunt they all praesuppose this and take it for granted This and much more hath Stapleton 16. But what speake I of Bellarmine or Stapleton though the latter hath most diligently sifted this cause This position that the Church is the last Iudge and so the lowest foundation of their faith is the decreed doctrine of their Trent Councell and therefore the consenting voyce of their whole Church and of every member thereof For in that Councell d Sess 4. § Praeterea the Church is defined to bee the Iudge of the sense and interpretation of the Scriptures and by the like reason it is to judge of traditions and of the
sense of them Now because all doubts and controversies of faith depend on the one of these it clearly followeth upon that decree that the very last stay in all doubts of faith is the Churches judgement but that upon no other nor higher stay doth or can relie for whatsoever you take besides this the truth the waight and validity of all must be tried in the Church at her judgement it must stand or fall yea if you make a doubt of the Churches judgement it selfe even that as all other must be ended by the judgement of the Church it is the last Iudge of all This to bee the true meaning of the Trent Councel Bellarmine both saw and professeth when hee saith e Lib. 3. de verbo Dei ca. 3. § Tota The Church that is the Pope with a Councell is Iudge of the sense of the Scripture omnium controversiarum and of all controversies of faith and in this all Catholikes do agree and it is expresly set downe in the Trent Councell So Bellarmine testifying this to be both the decreed doctrine of their generall and approved Councell and the consenting judgment of all that are Romane Catholikes 17. Now all this which they have said of the Church if you will have it in plaine termes and without circumloquution belongs onely to the Pope who is vertually both Church and Councell As the Church or Councell is called infallible no otherwise but by a Synechdoche because the Pope who is the head both of Church and Councell is infallible So is the Church or Councell called the foundation of faith or last principle on which their faith must relie by the same figure Synechdoche because the Pope who is the head of them both is the foundation of faith And whosoever is a true Romane Catholike or member of their present Church hee beleeveth all other doctrines because the Church that is the Pope doth teach them and the Pope to teach them infallibly he beleeveth for it selfe because the Pope saith hee is in such teaching infallible This infallibility of the Pope is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very corner stone the foundation on stone the rocke and fundamentall position of their whole faith and religion which was the point that I purposed to declare 18. I have hitherto declared and I feare too abundantly that the assertion of the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie in causes of faith is not onely a position but the very fundamentall position of all the doctrines of the present Romane Church In the next place we are to prove that this position is hereticall and that for such it was adjudged and condemned by the Catholike Church In the proofe whereof I shall not need to stay long This whole treatise and even that which hath already beene declared touching the Constitution of Pope Vigilius doth evidently confirme the same For seeing the defending of the Three Chapters hath been proved f Ca. 3. 4. to be hereticall the Constitution of Vigilius made in defence of those Chapters must of necessity be confessed to be hereticall Nay if you well consider you shall see that this very position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie is adjudged to bee hereticall For the fift generall Councell knew this cause of the Three Chapters to bee a cause of faith They knew further that Pope Vigilius by his Apostolicall decree and Cathedrall Constitution had defined that those Three Chapters ought to bee defended Now seeing they knew both these and yet judicially defined the defence of those Three Chapters to be hereticall and for such accursed it even in doing this they define the Cathedrall judgement of Vigilius in this cause of Faith to be hereticall and therefore most certainly and à fortiori define this position That the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith is infallible to bee hereticall and for such they anathematize both it and all that defend it And because the judgement and definitive sentence of the fift Councell is consonant to all former and confirmed by all subsequent Councels till the Laterane Synod under Leo the tenth it unavoydably hence ensueth that the same position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith is by the judgement of all generall Councells untill that time that is by the constant and uniforme consent of the whole Catholike Church adjudged condemned and accursed for hereticall and all who defend it for heretikes And seeing we have cleerly proved the whole present Romane Church and all that are members therof to defend this position yea to defend it as the maine foundation of their whole faith the evidence of that assertion which I proposed g Sup. hoc cap. nu 6. doth now manifestly appeare That none can now assent to the Pope or to the doctrines of the present Church of Rome but he is eo nomine even for that very cause adjudged and condemned for hereticall and that even in the very ground and foundation of his faith 19. From the foundation let us proceed to the walls and roofe of their religion Thinke you the foundation thereof is onely hereticall and the doctrines which they build thereon orthodoxall Nothing lesse They are both sutable both hereticall That one fundamentall position is like the Trojan horse in the wombe of it are hid many troopes of heresies If Liberius confirme Arianisme Honorius Monothelitisme Vigilius Nestorianisme these all by vertue of that one assertion must passe currant for Catholike truths Nay who can comprehend I say not in words or writing but in his thought and imagination all the blasphemous and hereticall doctrines which by all their Popes have beene or if as yet they have not which hereafter may be by succeeding Popes defined to bee doctrines of faith Seeing Stapleton h Lib. 9. doct prin ca. 14. §. Manet assures us That the Church of this or any succeeding age may put into the Canon and number of sacred and undoubtedly Canonicall bookes the booke of Hermas called Pastor and the Constitutions of Clement the former being as their owne notes censure it i Notae in lib. Hermae to 5. Bibl. S. patr haeresibus fabulis oppletus full of heresies and fables rejected by Pope Gelasius k Concil Rom. primū sub Gelasio with his Romane Synod the later being stuffed also with many impious doctrines condemning m Const Clem. lib. 3. ca. 2. lawfull mariage as fornication and allowing n Idem lib. 8. ca. 32. fornication as lawfull with many the like impieties which in Possevine o Bibl. in verbo Clemens Rom. are to bee seene together for which cause they are worthily rejected in the Canons p Can. 2. of the sixt Councell seeing the Pope may canonize these what blasphemies what heresies what lies may not with them be canonized why may not their very Legend in the next Session bee declared to be Canonicall And yet by that fundamentall position they are bound and now doe implicitè beleeve whatsoever
second Antichrist crescent In the third Antichrist regnant but in this fourth he is made Lord of the Catholike faith and Antichrist triumphant set up as God in the Church of God ruling nay tyrannizing not onely in the externall and temporall estates but even in the faith and Consciences of all men so that they may beleeve neither more nor lesse nor otherwise then he prescribeth nay that they may not beleeve the very Scriptures themselves and word of God or that there are any Scriptures at all or that there is a God but for this reason ipse dixit because he saith so and his saying being a TransceÌ„dent principle of faith they must beleeve for it selfe quia ipse dixit because he saith so In the first and second hee usurped the authority and place but of Bishops in the third but of Kings but in making himselfe the Rocke and Foundation of faith he intrudes himselfe into the most proper office and prerogative of Iesus Christ For t 1 Cor. 3.11 other foundation can no man lay then that which is laid Iesus Christ 25. Here was now quite a new face of the Romane Church yea it was now made a new Church of it selfe in the very essence thereof distinct from the other part of the Church and from that which it was before For although most of the Materialls as Adoration of Images Transubstantiation and the rest were the same yet the Formalitie and foundation of their faith and Church was quite altered Before they beleeved the Pope to doe rightly in decreeing Transubstantiation because they beleeued the Scriptures and word of God to teach and warrant that doctrine but now vice versa they beleeve the Scriptures and word of God to teach Transubstantiation because the Pope hath decreed and warranted the same Till then one might be a good Catholike and member of their Church such as were the Bishops in the generall Councels of Constance and Basill and those of the fift sixt seventh and succeding Councels and yet hold the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to bee not onely fallible but hereticall and accursed as all those Councels did But since Supremacie and with it Infallibilitie of judgement is by their Laterane decree transferred to the Pope he who now gainsayeth the Popes sentence in a cause of faith is none of their Church as out of Gregory de Valentia he is an heretike as out of Stapleton Canus and Bellarmine was u Sup. hoc cap. nu 7 declared He may as well deny all the Articles of his Creed and every text in the whole Bible as deny this one point for in denying it he doth eo ipso by their doctrine implicitè and in effect deny them all seeing he rejects that formall reason for which and that foundation upon which they are all to be beleeved and without beleefe of which not one of them all can be now beleeved 26. These then of this third sort are truly to he counted members of their present Romane Church these who lay this new Laterane foundatioÌ„ for the ground of their faith whether explicitè as do the learned or implicitè as do the simpler sort in their Church who wilfully blind-folding themselves and gladly persisting in their affectate and supine ignorance either will not use the meanes to see or seeing will not embrace the truth but content themselves with the Colliars x Hos de author sac Script lib. 3. § Quaerit Catechisme and wrap up their owne in the Churches faith saying I beleeve as the Church beleeveth and the Church beleeveth what the Pope teacheth All these and onely these are members of their present Church unto whom of all names as that of Catholikes is most unsutable and most unjustly arrogated by themselves so the name of Papists or which is equivalent Antichristians doth most fitly truly and in propriety of speech belong unto them For seeing forma dat nomen esse whence rather should they have their essentiall appellation then from him who giveth life formality and essence to their faith on whom as on the Rocke and corner-stone their whole faith dependeth The saying of Cassander to this purpose is worthy remembring There are some saith hee y Lib. de offic viri â—ij § Sunt alij who will not permit the present state of the Church though it be corrupted to be changed or reformed and who Pontificem Romanum quem Papam dicimus tantùm non deum faciunt make the Bishop of Rome whom we call the Pope almost a god preferring his authority not onely above the whole Church but above the Sacred Scripture holding his judgement equall to the divine Oracles and an infallible rule of faith Hos non video cur minus Pseudo-catholicos Papistas appellare possis I see no reason but that these men should be called Pseudo-catholikes or Papists Thus Cassander upon whose judicious observatioÌ„ it followeth that seeing their whole Church and all the members thereof preferre the Popes authority above the whole Church above all generall Councels and quoad nos which is Cassanders meaning above z Ecce potestas Ecclesiae supra Script Enchyr. tit de Eccles the Scriptures also defending them not to be a Enchyr. Ibid. authenticall but by the authority of the Church that there is multo b Th. Boz lib. de signis Eccl. 16. ca. 10. § Illud major authoritas much more authoritie in the Church than in them that it is no c Non adeo absurde dictum est c. Gretz Appen 2. ad lib. 1. de verb. dei pa. 396. absurd nay p Potuit illud pio sensu dici Hos lib. 3. de author Script § Fingamus it may be a pious d saying That the Scriptures without the authoritie of the Church are no more worth than Aesops Fables seeing they all with one consent make the Pope the last supreme and infallible Iudge in all causes of faith there can bee no name devised more proper and fit for them than that of Papists or which is all one Antichristians both which expresse their essentiall dependence on the Pope or Antichrist as on the foundation of their faith which name most essentially also differenceth them from all others which are not of their present Church especially from true Catholikes or the Reformed Churches seeing as we make Christ and his word so they on the contrary make the Pope that is to say Antichrist and his word the ground and foundation of faith In regard wherof as the faith religion of the one is from Christ truly called Christian and they truly Christians so the faith and religion of the other is from the Pope or Antichrist truly and properly called Papisme or Antichristianisme and the professors of it Papists or Antichristians And whereas Bellarmine e Lib. de not Eccl. ca. 4. glorieth of this very name of Papists that it doth attestari veritati give testimony to that truth which they
professe truly we envy not so apt a name unto them Onely the Cardinal shews himself a very unskilful Herald in the blazony of this coat the descēt of this title unto them He fetcheth f Papista deducitur à Papa qualis fuit Petrus Christus ipse ibid. it forsooth frō Pope Clement Pope Peter and Pope Christ Phy it is of no such antiquity nor of so honourable a race Their owne Bristow will assure g Demand ◠him that this name was never heard of till the dayes of Leo the tenth Neither are they so called as the Cardinall fancieth because they hold communion in faith with the Pope which for sixe hundred yeares and more all Christians did and yet were not Papists nor ever so called but because they hold the Popes judgement to be supreme and infallible and so build their faith on him as on the foundation thereof which their owne Church never did till the time of Leo the tenth It is not then the Lion of the Tribe of Iudah but the Lion of that Laterane Synod who is the first God father of that name unto them when hee had once laid the Pope as the foundation of faith in stead of Christ they who then builded their faith upon this new foundation were fitly christened with this name of Papists to distinguish them and their present Romane Church from all others who held the old good and sure foundation 26. You see now the great diuersity which ariseth from the divers manner of holding the same doctrines The errours maintained by all those three sorts of which I have spoken are almost the same and materially they are Popish heresies and yet the first sort did onely erre therein but were not heretikes because not pertinacious The second doe not onely erre but by adding pertinacy to errour are truly heretikes but yet not Papists because they hold those Popish heresies in another manner and on another foundation then Papists doe The third and last sort which containeth all and onely those who are members of the present Romane Church doe both erre and are heretikes and which is the worst degree of heresie are Papists that is Antichristian heretikes not onely holding and that in the highest degree of pertinacy those heresies which are contrary to the faith but holding them upon that foundation which quite overthroweth the faith 27. By this now doth the evidence of that truth appeare which before h Sup. nu 19. I proposed that none who hold the Popes infallibility in causes of faith for their foundation that is none of the present Romane Church either doth or can beleeve any one doctrine of faith which they professe For seeing the beleefe of all other points relyes upō this so that they beleeve thē because they first beleeve this it followeth by that true rule of the Philosopher i Arist lib. 1. demon ca. 2. Propter quod unumquodque illud magis that they doe more firmely and certainly beleeve this which is the foundation than they doe or can beleeve any other doctrine I say not Transubstantiation or Purgatory but more thā that Article of their Creed that Christ is God or that there is a God or any the like which is builded upon this foundatiō And seeing we have cleerly demonstrated that foundation to bee not onely untrue but hereticall and therefore such as cannot be apprehended by faith it being no true object of faith it doth evidently hence ensue that they neither doe nor can beleeve any one doctrine position or point of faith Impossible it is that the roofe should bee more firme than the foundation which supports the roof or the conclusion more certaine unto us than those premisses which cause us to assent and make us certaine of the conclusion That one fundamentall uncertainty contrariety to the faith which is vertually in all the rest breeds the like uncertainty and contrariety to faith in them all and like a Radicall poyson spreads it selfe into the whole body of their religion infecting every arme branch and twigge of their doctrine and faith whatsoever errour or heresie they maintaine and those are not a few those they neither doe nor can beleeve because they are no objects of faith whatsoever truths they maintaine and no doubt they doe many those they thinke they doe and they might doe but indeed they doe not beleeve because they hold them for that reason and upon that foundation which is contrary to faith and which overthroweth the faith For to hold or professe that Christ is God or that there is a God eo nomine because the Devill or Antichrist or a fallible man testifieth it unto us is not truly to beleeve but to overthrow the faith 28. This may be further cleared by returning to our example of Vigilius If because the Pope judicially defineth a doctrine of faith they doe therefore beleeve it then must they beleeve Nestorianisme to be the truth and Christ not to bee God because Pope Vigilius by his judiciall and Apostolicall sentence hath decreed this in decreeing that the three Chapters are to be defēded If they beleeve not this then can they beleeve nothing at all eo nomine because the Pope hath defined it and then the foundation of their faith being abolished their whole faith together with it must needs be abolished also Againe if because the Pope defineth a doctrine they doe therefore beleeve it then seeing Pope Caelestine with the Ephesine and Pope Leo with the Chalcedon Councell decreed Nestorianisme to be heresie they by the strength of their fundamental positiō of the Popes infallibility must at one and the same time beleeve both Nestorianisme to be truth as Pope Vigilius defined and Nestorianisme to be heresie as Pope Caelestine and Leo defined and so they must either beleeve two contradictories to be both true yea to bee truths of the Catholike faith which to beleeve is impossible or else they must beleeve that it is impossible to beleeve either the one or the other eo nomine because the Pope hath defined it and so beleeve it to bee impossible to beleeve that which is the foundation of their whole faith Neither is this true onely in other points but even in this very foundation it selfe for the fift Councell which decreed the Cathedrall and Apostolicall sentence in the cause of the Three Chapters to be hereticall was approved by the decrees of Pope Gregory Agatho and the rest unto Leo the tenth If then they beleeve a doctrine to be true because the Pope hath defined it then must they beleeve the Popes Cathedral sentence in a cause of faith to bee not onely fallible but hereticall and so beleeve that upon this fallible and hereticall foundation they can build no doctrine of faith nor hold thereupon any thing with certainty of faith So if the Pope in defining such causes be fallible then for this cause can they have no faith nor beleeve ought with certainty of faith seeing all
relies upon a fallible foundation If the Pope in defining such causes be infallible then also can they have no faith seeing by the infallble decrees of Pope Gregory Agatho and the rest unto Leo the tenth the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith may bee hereticall as this of Pope Vigilius by their judgement was So whether the Pope in such causes be fallible or infallible it infallibly followeth upon either that none who builds his faith upon that foundation that is none who are members of their present Romane Church can beleeve or hold with certainty of faith any doctrine whatsoever which he professeth to beleeve 29. Here I cannot chuse but to the unspeakeable comfort of all true beleevers observe a wonderfull difference betwixt us and them arising from that diversitie of the foundation which they and we hold their foundation being not onely uncertaine but hereticall and Antichristian poysoneth all which they build thereon it being vertually in them all makes them all like it selfe uncertaine hereticall and Antichristian and so those very doctrines which in themselves are most certaine and orthodoxall by the uncertainty of that ground upon which and for which they are beleeved are overthrowne with us and all Catholikes it fals out otherwise Though such happen to erre in some one or moe doctrines of faith say in Transubstantiation Purgatory or as Cyprian did in Rebaptization yet seeing they hold those errors because they thinke them to be taught in the Scriptures and Word of God on which alone their faith relyeth most firmely and undoubtedly beleeving whatsoever is taught therein among which things are the contrary doctrines to Transubstantiatiō Purgatory Rebaptization such I say even while they doe thus erre in their Explicite profession doe truly though implicitè by consequent and in radice or fundamento beleeve and that most firmely the quite contrary to those errours which they doe outwardly professe and think they doe but indeed doe not beleeve The vertue and strength of that fundamentall truth which they indeed and truly beleeve overcommeth all their errours which in very deed they doe not though they thinke they doe beleeve whereas in very truth they beleeve the quite contrary And this golden foundation in Christ which such men though erring in some points doe constantly hold shall more prevaile to their salvation than the Hay and Stubble of those errours which ignorantly but not pertinaciously they build thereon can prevaile to their destruction and therefore if such a man happen to die without explicite notice and repentance of those errours in particular as the saying of Saint Austen k Lib. 1. de baptism ca. 18. that what faults Saint Cyprian had contracted by humane imbecillity the same by his glorious Martyrdome was washed away perswades mee that Cyprian did and as of Irene Nepos Iustine Martyr and others who held the errour of the Chiliasts I thinke none makes doubt it is not to be doubted but the abundance of this mans faith and love unto Christ to whom in the foundation hee most firmely adhereth shall worke the like effect in him as did the blood of martyrdome in Saint Cypran For the baptisme of martyrdome washeth away sinne not because it is a washing in blood but because it testifieth the inward washing of his heart by faith and by the purging Spirit of God This inward washing in whomsoever it is found and found it is in all who truly beleeve though in some point of faith they erre it is as forcible and effectuall to save Valentinian l Ablutus ascendit quē sua fides lavit Amb. Orat. de obitu Valent. neither baptized with water nor with blood and Nepos m Qui jam ad quietem processit ait Dionys apud Euseb l. 1. ca. 23. baptized with water but not with blood as to save Cyprian baptized both with water and with blood Such a comfort and happinesse it is to hold the right and true foundation of faith 30. The quite contrary is to be seen in them Though they explicitè professe Christ to be God which is a most orthodoxall truth yet because they hold this as all other points upon that foundation of the Popes infallible judgement in causes of faith and in that foundation this is denyed Pope Vigilius by his Cathedrall Constitution defining Nestorianisme to be truth and so Christ not to be God it must needs be confessed that even while they doe explicitè professe Christ to bee God they doe implicitè in radice and in fundamento deny Christ to be God and because by the Philosophers rule they doe more firmely beleeve that foundation than they doe or can beleeve any doctrine depending thereon it must needs ensue hence that they doe and must by their doctrine more firmely beleeve the Negative that Christ is not God which in the foundation is decreed then they doe or can beleeve the Affirmative that Christ is God which upon that foundation is builded The truth which upon that foundation they doe explicitè professe cannot possibly be so strong to salvation as the errour of the foundation upon which they build it will be to destruction For the fundamentall errour is never amended by any truth superedified and laid thereon no more than the rotten foundation of an house is made sound by laying upon it rafters of gold or silver but all the truths that are superedified are ruinated by that fundamentall errour and uncertainty on which they all relye even as the beames and rafters of gold are ruinated by that rottennesse and unsoundnesse which resteth in the foundation Or if they say that both the assertions which are directly contradictory are from that foundation deduced Caelestine and Leo decreeing the one that Christ is God as Vigilius decreed the other that Christ is not God then doth it inevitably follow that they can truly beleeve neither the one nor the other seeing by beleeving that foundation they must equally beleeve them both which is impossible Such an unhappy and wretched thing it is to hold that erroneous hereticall and Antichristian foundation of faith 31. My conclusion of this point is this Seeing we have first declared that all who are members of the present Romane Church doe hold the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith yea hold it as the very foundation on which all their other doctrines faith and religion doth relye and seeing wee have next demonstrated this to be a fundamentall heresie and not onely an hereticall but an Antichristian foundation condemned by Scriptures by generall Councels by ancient Fathers and by the consenting judgement of the whole Catholike Church that now hence followeth which I proposed n Sup. nu 6. to prove that none is or can bee a member of their present Church but the same is convicted and condemned for an heretike by Scriptures generall Councels Fathers and by the uniforme consent of the Catholike Church An heretike first in the very foundation of his faith which
which is in holding the true foundation of faith The contrary of all this falleth out unto them of the present Romane Church For not onely their sinnes are made more sinfull unto them there being no mantle to cover or hide them from the eyes of God and shield them from his vengeance but even their best and most holy actions which they doe or can performe though they should doe nothing but sing hymnes with David or feed Christs flock with Peter or give their goods to the poore and their bodies to be burned for Christ even these I say are so tainted with the venome of that Apostaticall foundation that being of themselves holy actions yet unto them they are turned into sinne and become pernicious and mortiferous For whatsoever act being in it selfe either good or indifferent any of their Church except onely the Pope himselfe who is a member transcendent doth performe because they doe it in obedience unto him whose supreme authority they make the foundation not onely of their faith but of all good actions in doing any such act there is a vertuall and implicit obedience to Antichrist an acknowledgement of his supreme power to teach and command what is to be done a receiving his marke either in their hand or forehead so that every such act is not onely impious but even Antichristian and containeth in it a vertuall and implicit renouncing of the whole faith In regard whereof none can ever sufficiently I say not commend but admire the zeale of Luther who though he was so earnest to have the Communion in both kinds contrarie to the doctrine and custome of the Romane Church yet withall he e Kemnit Exa Conc. Trid. 1. Tract de communi sub utraque specie pa 136. professed that if the Pope as Pope should command it to be received in both kinds he then would receive it not in both but in one kind onely Blessed Luther it was never thy meaning either to receive it onely in one or to deny it to be necessary for Gods Church and people to receive it in both kindes Thou knewest right well that Bibite ex hoc omnes was Christs owne ordinance with which none might dispense Thou for defence of this truth among many was set up as a signe of contradiction unto them and as a marke at which they directed all their darts of malicious and malignant reproaches Farre was it from thee to relent one hare-bredth in this truth But whereas they f Conc. Constant Sess 13. Conc. Trid. Sess 22. in decreto super petit de concessione calici◠Bell. lib. 4. de Euchar ca. 28. taught the use of the Cup to be indifferent and arbitrarie such as the Church that is the Pope might either allow or take away as he should thinke fit upon this supposall and no otherwise didst thou in thine ardent zeale to Christ and detestation of Antichrist say that were the use of both or one kinde onely a thing indeed indifferent as they taught it to be if the Pope as Pope should command the receiving in both kindes thou wouldst not then receive it so lest whilst thou might seeme to obey Christ commanding that but yet upon their supposall as a thing indifferent thou shouldest certainly performe obedience to Antichrist by his authoritie limiting and restraining that indifferency unto both kindes as now by his authority hee restraines it unto one The summe is this To doe any act whether in it selfe good or indifferent but commanded to be done by the Pope as Pope to pray to preach to receive the Sacraments yea but to lift your eyes or hold up your finger or say your Pater noster or your Ave Maria or weare a bead a modell a lace or any garment white or blacke or use any crossing either at Baptisme or any other time to do any one of these or any the like eo nomine because the Pope as Pope teacheth that they are to be done or commands the doing of them is in very deed a yeelding one selfe to be a vassall of Antichrist a receiving the marke of the beast and a vertuall or implicit deniall of the faith in Christ So extremly venemous is that poison which lyeth in the root of that fundamentall heresie which they have laid as the very rocke and Foundation of their faith 34. Hitherto we have examined the former position of Baronius which concerned Heresie His other concerning Schisme is this g Esse schismatici convicti sunt qui diversam à Romano Pontifice his decernendis sententiam sectati essent Bar. an 547. nu 30. That they who dissented from Pope Vigilius when hee decreed that the Three Chapters ought to be defended were Schismatikes A most strange assertion that the whole Catholike Church should bee schismaticall for they all dissented from Vigilius in this cause that Catholikes should all at once become Schismatikes yea and that also for the very defence of the Catholike faith I oppose to this another and true assertion That not onely Pope Vigilius when he defended the Three Chapters and forsooke communion with the condemners of them was a Schismatike himselfe and chiefe of the Schisme but that all who as yet defend Vigilius that is who maintaine the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith and forsake communion with those that condemne it that those all are and that for this very cause Schismatikes and the Pope the ringleader in the Schisme 35. For the manifesting whereof certaine it is that after Pope Vigilius had so solemnly and judicially by his Apostolicall authority defined that the Three Chapters ought to be defended there was a great rent and Schisme in the Church either part separating it selfe from the other and forsaking communion with the other First the holy Councell and they who tooke part with it anathematized h Coll. 8. talis anathema sit saepe ibid. the defenders of those Chapters thereby as themselves expound it declaring their opposites to be separated i Nihil aliud significat anathema nisi à Deo separationem Coll. 5. pa. 551. b. from God and therefore from the society of the church of God On the other side Pope Vigilius they who were on his part were so averse from the others that they would rather endure disgrace yea banishment as Baronius k An. 553. nu 221. sheweth thē communicate with their opposites But I shal not need to stay in proving that there was a rent and schisme at this time betweene the defenders condemners of those chapters Baronius professeth it saying l Ibid. The whole Church was then schismate dilacerata torn asunder by a schisme Againe m An. eodem 553. nu 250. After the end of the Councell there arose a greater war then was before Catholikes so he falsly calls both parts being then divided among themselves some adhaering to the Councell others holding with Vigilius and his Constitution Againe Many n An. eodem nu 229. relying
upon the authority of Vigilius did not receive the fift Synod atque à contraria illis sentientibus sese diviserunt and separated or divided themselves frō those who thought the contrary Such were the Italian Africane Illirian other neighbour Bishops So Baronius truly professing a schisme to have bin then in the Church and Pope Vigilius to have beene the leader of the one part 36. But whether of these two parts were Schismatickes As the name of heresie though it bee common to any opinion whereof one makes choice whether it be true or false in which sense Constantine the great called o Epist ad Crestum apud Euseb lib. 10. ca. 5. the true faith Catholicam sanctissimam haeresim yet in the ordinarie use it is now applied only to the choice of such opinions as are repugnāt to the faith So the name of Schisme though it import any scissure or renting of one from another yet now by the vulgar use of Divines it is appropriated onely to such a rent or division as is made for an unjust cause and from those to whom hee or they who are separated ought to unite themselves hold communion with them This whosoever doe whether they bee moe or fewer then those from whom they separate themselves they are truly and properly to bee termed Schismatikes and factious For it is neither multitude nor paucitie nor the holding with or against any visible head or governour whatsoever nor the bare act of separating ones selfe from others but only the cause for which the separation is made which maketh a Schisme or faction and truly denounceth one to be factious or a Schismatike If Elijah separate himselfe from the foure hundreth Baalites and the whole kingdome of Israel because they are Idolaters and they sever themselves from him because he wil not worship Baal as they did If the three children for the like cause separate themselves from all the Idolatrous Babylonians in separation they are both like but in the cause being most unlike the Baalites onely and not Elijah and the Babylonians only and not the three children are Schismatikes Now because every one is bound to unite himselfe to the Catholike and orthodoxall Church and hold communion with them in faith hence it is that as out of Austine h Lib. de unit Eccl. ca. 4. Stapleton rightly observes i Lib. 6. doct princ ca. 7. §. Istud Tota ratio Schismatis the very essence of a Schisme consists in the separating from the Church I say from the true orthodoxall Church for as Saint Augustine in the same place reacheth whosoever dissents from the Scriptures and so from the true faith though they be spred throughout the whole world k Lib. 10. ca. 7. §. Nempe yet such are not in the sound Church much lesse are they the Church And therefore from them be they never so many never so eminent one may and must separate himselfe But if any sever himselfe from the orthodoxall Church or to speake in Stapletons words si renuit operari in ratione fidei ut pars ecclesiae catholicae if he will not cooperate or joyne together in maintaining the faith as a member of the Catholike or orthodoxall Church Schismaticus hoc ipso est hee is for this very cause a Schismatike 37. Apply now this to Vigilius and the fift generall Councell and the case will be cleare The onely cause of separation on the Councels part was for that Vigilius with all his adherents were Heretikes convicted condemned and accursed for such by that true sentence and judgement of the fift generall Councell which was consonant both to Scriptures Fathers and the foure former generall Councels and approved by all succeeding generall Councels Popes and Bishops that is by the judgement of the whole Catholike Church for more then fifteene hundreth yeares together A cause not onely most just but commanded by the holy Apostle l Tit. 3.10 Shun him that is an hereticke after once or twice admonition much more after publike conviction and condemnation by the upright judgement of the whole Catholike Church On the other side Vigilius and his Faction separated themselves from the Councell and all that tooke part with it for this onely reason because they were Catholikes because they embraced and constantly defended the Catholike faith because he wold not cooperate as Stapleton speaketh with them to maintaine the true Catholike faith and so on their part there was that which essentially made them Schismatickes Baronius in saying that those who then dissented from Vigilius were Schismatickes speakes sutably to all his former assertions For in saying this he in effect saith that Catholikes to avoid a Schisme should have turned Heretickes should have embraced Nestorianisme and so have renounced and condemned the whole Catholike faith as Vigilius then did Had they so done they should have been no Schismatikes with Baronius But now for not condemning the Catholike faith with Vigilius they must all be condemned by the Cardinall for Schismatickes 38. For the very same reason the whole present Romane Church are Schismatickes at this day and not the Reformed Churches from whom they separate themselves For the cause of separation on their part is the same for which Vigilius and his schismaticall faction separated themselves from the fift Councell and the Catholikes of those times who all tooke part with it even because wee refuse to embrace the Popes Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith as the fift Councell refused that of Vigilius The cause on our part is the same which the fift Councell then had for that they defend the Popes hereticall constitution nay not onely that of Vigilius which yet were cause enough but many other like unto that and especially that one of Leo the tenth with his Laterane Councell wherby Supremacie and with it Infallibilitie of judgement is given unto the Pope in all his decrees of faith In which one Cathedrall decree condemned for hereticall by the fift Councell and constant judgement both of precedent and subsequent Councells as before we have declared not onely innumerable heresies such as none yet doth dreame of are included but by the venom and poyson of that one fundamētall heresie not only all the other doctrines are corrupted but the very foundation of faith is utterly overthrowne Let them boast of multitudes and universalitie never so much which at this day is but a vaine brag say they were far more even foure hundreth to one Luther or the whole kingdome of Babilon to the two witnesses of God yet seeing it is the cause which makes a schismaticke the cause of separation on their part is most unjust but on ours most warrantable holy for that they will not cooperate with us in upholding the ancient and Catholike faith that especially of the fift Councell condemning and accursing the Cathedrall sentence of Pope Vigilius as hereticall all that defend it as Heretickes it evidently followeth that they
are the only essentially schismatickes at this time and in this great rent of the Church 39. Whence againe doth ensue another Conclusion of no small importance For it is a ruled case among them such as Bellarmine m Lib. de Eccles milit ca. 5. avoucheth to be proved both by Scriptures by Fathers by pontificall decrees and sound reason that no schismatickes are in the Church or of the Church Now because out of n Extra quam Ecclesiam nullus omnino salvatur Conc. Lateran ca. 1. the Church there is no salvation it nearly concernes them to bethinke themselves seriously what hope there is or can be unto them who being as wee have proved schismatickes are for this cause by their owne doctrine utterly excluded from the Church But I will proceed no further in this matter wherein I have stayed much longer then I intended yet my hope is that I have now abundantly cleared against Baronius not onely That one may dissent in faith and bee disioyned in communion from the Pope yet neither be Heretickes nor Schismatickes but That none can now consent in faith and hold communion with the Pope but for that very cause he is by the judgement of the Catholike Church both an hereticke and a schismaticke CHAP. XIIII The second Exception of Baronius excusing Vigilius from heresie for that he often professeth to hold the Coūcell of Chalcedon and the faith thereof refuted 1. HIs second excuse for Vigilius is taken from that profession which both other defenders of the three Chapters and Vigilius himselfe often maketh in his Constitution that hee holdes the faith of the Councell of Chalcedon and did all for the safety of that Councell Both parties saith Baronius a An. 547. nu 47. as well the defenders as the condemners of those three Chapters did testifie that they desired nothing more quam consultum esse catholica fidei probatae à S. Concilio Chalcedonensi then to provide that the Catholike faith decreed at Chalcedon might be safe Againe b An. 546. nu 33. liquet omnes it is manifest that all Catholikes in defence of the three Chapters at once contradicted this noveltie set downe in the Emperors Edict for condemning those chapters vindicesque se Concilij Chalcedonensis exhibuisse and shewed themselves to bee defenders of the Councell of Chalcedon Of Vigilius in particular hee not so little as fortie times ingeminates this Vigilius c An. 553. nu 197. writ these things pro defensione integritate Synodi Chalcedonensis for the defence and safety of the Councell at Chalcedon Vigilius d Ibid. nu 47. writ his constitution for no other cause as by it is evident but to the end that all things which were defined by the Councell at Chalcedon firma consisterent might remaine firme and by no meanes be infringed Againe e Ibid. nu 231. All that Vigilius or the rest did in this cause did tend hereunto ut consultum esset dignitati authoritati Synodi Chalcedonensis that the dignity and authoritie of the Councell at Chalcedon might be kept safe and sound Thus Baronius 2. The writings of those who defended those Chapters declare the same Victor in plaine termes affirmeth f In Chron. an 2. post Coss Basill the three Chapters to have been approved and judged orthodoxall by the Councell of Chalcedon and the condemning of them to bee the condemning of that Councell and that for this cause he refused to condemne them least in so doing he should condemne the Councell of Chalcedon The like hee witnesseth g An. 10. post Coss Basilij of Facundus whose owne words set downe by Baronius h An. 545. nu 28. shew that hee disliked the condemners of those three Chapters because by condemning them Synodum improbarent they condemned the Councell of Chalcedon But none shewes the like love to that Councell and care for it as doth Pope Vigilius in his Constitution we decree saith he i Apud Bar. an 553. nu 196. That the judgement of the Fathers at Chalcedon shall be kept inviolable in all things and particularly in this touching the Epistle of Ibas wee dare not call into question their judgement their judgement in omnibus conservantes we keepe in all things Againe k Ibid. nu 197 we permit no man to innovate either by additiō or detraction or alteration any thing which is ordained set down by the Councell at Chalcedon Againe l Ibid. nu 207. Behold O Emperor it is more cleare then the light that we have alwayes beene desirous to reverence the foure Councels and that all things might remaine inviolable which by them are defined and judged This and much more to the like purpose saith Vigilius Who now reading these things in his Cōstitution and seeing him so fervent and zealous for the Councell at Chalcedon and the faith therein declared would not thinke nay proclame Vigilius to be a most sound Catholike an utter enemie to Nestorianisme as that holy Councell at Chalcedon was Or who would not applaud Baronius for his devise to defend and excuse Vigilius from heresie because he was so earnest for the Councell of Chalcedon and the faith declared therein which none can embrace and be guiltie of Nestorianisme This is his plea for Vigilius 3. For answer whereunto I am ashamed that Baronius a Cardinall and man of rare knowledge as hee is supposed should shew himselfe so inconsiderate in this cause as to seeke to excuse or defend Vigilius by alledging the name credit or authoritie of the Councell of Chalcedon For even that alone if there were nothing else puls upon him that just Anathema denounced by the fift Councell who thus decree Wee m Coll. 8. pa. 586. b. 588. a. anathematize the defenders of these Three Chapters and those who have written or doe write for them or who doe defend or indeavour to defend the impiety of them nomine sanctorum Patrum aut sancti Chalcedonensis Concilij by the name of the holy fathers or of the Councell at Chalcedon The more then that either Vigilius pretends that Councell for defence of the Three Chapters or that Baronius pretends it for the defence of Vigilius the more they are still involved in the Councels Anathema and no marvell for by alledging that Councell as a patrone of those Three Chapters they slander that most holy Councell and all that approve it that is the whole Catholike Church to be hereticall and patrons of the most blasphemous and condemned heresie of Nestorius 4. Let this passe Is this reason thinke you of Baronius of any force to excuse Vigilius hee professeth to defend the Councell of Chalcedon therefore he is not an heretike Truly of none at all for who knoweth not that heretikes are as forward in chalenging to themselves the names and authority of ancient Councels and in professing to defend the same faith and doctrine which they taught Take a view but of three or foure examples
favour of the Emperor or the importunity of the Easterne Bishops or the feare of exile or deprivation or some such punishment had extorted that sentence and confession from him But now when hee decreeth contrary to the Emperour to the generall Councell and to his owne former and true judgement when by publishing this Decree he was sure to gaine nothing but the censure of an unconstant and wavering minded man the Anathema of the whole generall Councell and tht heavy indignation of the Emperor when he goes thus against the maine current streame of the time who can thinke but that his onely motive to doe this was his zeale and love to Nestorianisme Love a Cant. 8.6 specially of heresie is strong as death It will cause Vigilius or any like him when it hath once got possession of their heart with the Baalites and Donatists to contemne launcing whipping and tearing of their flesh yea to delight as much in Phalaris Bull as in a bed of doune and in the midst of all tortures to sing with him in the Orator b Tusc quaest lib. 2. Quam suave est hoc Quam nihil curo O how glad and merry a man am I that suffer all these for the love of my Three Chapters Losse of fame losse of goods losse of libertie losse of my Countrey losse of my pontificall See losse of communion and society of the Catholike Church and of God himselfe Farewell all these and all things else rather then the Three Chapters then Nestorianisme shall want a defender or a Martyr to seale it with blood 10. You see now the third period and the third judgement of Pope Vigilius in this cause A judgement which being delivered ex Tripode and with all possible circumspection puts downe for many respects both the former what hee spake the first time in defence of these Three Chapters was spoken in stomacke and in his heat and choler against the Emperor What he spake the second time for condemning those Chapters he did therein but temporize and curry favour with the Emperor But what he spake now this third time after seven yeares ventilating of the cause when all heat and passion being abated he was in cold blood and in such a calme that no perturbation did trouble his mind or darken his judgement that I say proceeded from the very bottome of the heart and from the Apostolicall authority of his infallible Chaire which to be a true and divine judgement he like a worthy Confessor sealed with his banishment And of this judgement hee continued in likelihood more but as Baronius whom I now follow tels c An. 554. 555. us about the space of a yeare after the end of the fift Councell even till hee returned out of exile unto Constantinople 11. The fourth and last changing of Vigilius was after his returne from banishment as Baronius and Binius tell us For while hâ—â— was there he saw there was urgentissima causa d Bar. an 553. nu 235. a most urgent cause why he should consent to the Emperour and approve the judgement of the holy Councell and therefore hee was pleased once againe to make another Apostolicall c Synodum 5. eadem Apostolica authoritate comprobasse satis apparet Bar. an 554. nu 7. Bini loc cit §. Praestitit Decree for adnulling his former Apostolicall judgement and for condemning the Three Chapters and confirming the fift Synod I thinke saith Binius f Ibid. that Vigilius confirmed the fift Synod by his Decree and Pontificall authority and abrogated his former Constitution made in defence of the Three Chapters in the next yeare after the Councell was ended when he being loosed from banishment was suffered to returne into Italy being adorned with sundry gifts and priviledges Neither doth he only opinari but he is certaine of it Dubium g Ibid. §. Tunc non est there is no doubt but Vigilius being delivered from exile by the entreatie of Narses did confirme the fift Synod We thinke saith Baronius that h An. 554. nu 4. when Vigilius was by the intreaty of Narses freed from exile hee did then assent to the Emperour and recalling his former sentence in his Constitution declared did approve the fift Synod Againe i Ibidem Seeing we have declared that Vigilius did not approve the fift Synod when hee was driven into banishment for he was exiled for no other cause but for that hee would not approve that Synod Necesse est affirmare it must of necessity bee said that hee did this approve the fift Synod at this time when being loosed out of exile he was sent home to his owne Church So Baronius Now seeing hee returned home after hee had obtained those ample gifts and priviledges which they so magnifie and which are set downe in that pragmaticall sanction of Iustinian k Extat in sine Novell which was dated on the twelfth day of August in the eight and twentieth yeare of his Empire and the fift Councell was ended on the second l Conc. 5. Coll. 8. day of Iune in his seven and twentieth yeare it is cleare that this his last change was made about an whole yeare after the end of the fift Councell after hee had remained a yeare or thereabouts in banishment And in this minde as they m Bar. Bin. locis cit tell us hee returned towards Rome but by the way n Bar. an 555. nu 2. while hee was yeâ— but in Sicily being afflicted with the stone he dyed 12. Here is now the Catastrophe of the Popes turnings and returnings and often changing in this cause of faith Concerning which this is especially to bee remembred that whereas all the three former judgements of Vigilius the first when he defended those three Chapters being in Italie the second when he condemned them upon his comming to Constantinople and the third when he againe defended them at the time of the Councell and after have all of them certaine and undeniable proofes out of antiquitie such as the testimonies of Facundus Victor Liberatus the Popes owne letters and Constitutions together with the witnesse of the Emperor and the whole fift Councell onely this last period and this last change when hee consented to the fift Councell and condemned the Three Chapters This I say which is the onely judgement whereby Vigilius is excused from heresie is utterly destitute of all ancient witnesses not any one that I can finde makes mention of this change or of ought that can any way enforce the same and therefore this may and must be called the Baronian change or Period he being the first man that I can learne of who ever mentioned or dreamed of this change And although this alone were sufficient to oppose to all that the Cardinall or any other can hence collect in excuse of Vigilius reason and equitie forbidding us to bee too credulous upon the Cardinals bare word which even in
this one cause touching the Three Chapters and this fift Councell besides many the like demonstratively to be proved untrue and false I speake it confidently and within compasse in six hundreth sayings at the least yet that they may not say wee decline the force of this so pregnant an exception we will for a little while admit and suppose it to bee true and try whether by this being yeelded unto them there can accrew any advantage to their cause or any help to excuse either Vigilius himselfe or his Constitution set forth in defence of the Three Chapters from being hereticall 13. Say you Vigilius by his last decree confirmed the fift Councell and approved the Catholike faith Be it so we deny not but that Vigilius or any other of their Popes may decree and have decreed a truth that 's not the doubt betwixt us and them The question is whether any of their Popes have at any time by his Cathedrall authoritie and teaching as Popes decreed an heresie or untruth That Pope Vigilius did so his Apostolicall Constitution in defence of the Three Chapters is an eternall witnes against them a monument aere perennius Had Baronius said that Vigilius never decreed the defending of those Chapters he had fully cleared him in this matter if he could have proved what he had said But seeing undeniable records testifie and the Cardinall himselfe with a Stentors voice proclameth this to be the true and undoubted Constitution of Pope Vigilius though hee had revoked and repealed it a thousand times yet can not this quit his former Apostolicall Decree from being hereticall nor excuse their pontificall chaire from being fallible It is nothing at all materiall which of the Popes Cathedrall Decrees the first last or middle bee hereticall If any one of them all bee wee desire no more the field is wonne 14. Say you Vigilius by an Apostolicall decree confirmed the fift Councell Then did hee certainely decree that all writings defending the Three Chapters doe defend heresie and that all persons who defend those Chapters for so long time as they defend them after the judgement of that Councell are convicted and condemned hereticks Then the former Constitution of Pope Vigilius set forth by his Apostolicall authoritie in the time of the Councell in defence of those Chapters is now by Popes Vigilius himselfe and by his Apostolicall authority and infallible Chaire declared to bee hereticall and Vigilius himselfe for that yeare after the Councell is now by Vigilius himselfe pronounced to bee an Hereticke yea a definer of heresie Vigilius now orthodoxal decreeth himselfe to have been before heretical Nay it further followeth that by confirming that Councell hee confirmeth and that by an Apostolicall and infallible Decree that all who defend the Popes Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith to bee infallible are convicted and accursed heretickes for by defending that position they do eo ipso defend that ConstitutioÌ„ of Vigilius made in defence of the Three Chapters to bee true infallible and orthodoxall which Vigilius himselfe by an infallible decree hath declared to bee erroneous and hereticall So far is this last and Baronian change from excusing Vigilius in this cause that upon the admission thereof it doth inevitably ensue both that Vigilius was an hereticke and a definer of heresie and that all who defend the Popes Cathedrall infallibitie in causes of faith that is al who are members of their present Romane Church to bee not onely heretickes and for such condemned and accursed but defenders also of a condemned and accursed heresie even by the infallible judgement and decree of Pope Vigilius 15. Their whole reason whereby Vigilius might bee excused being now fully dissolved There remaineth one point which Baronius and after him Binius observeth touching this often changing of Vigilius which being a point of speciall note I should wrong both Vigilius and Baronius if I should over-passe the same Some men when they heare of these often changings windings and turnings of Pope Vigilius in this cause of faith and of his banishment for defending a condemned heresie will perhaps imagine this to bee a token of some levitie unconstancie or folly in the Pope O fie It was not so saith o Cum saepe sententia mutavit haud arguendus est levitatis an 553. nu 235. Baronius What hee did was not onely lawfull p Cur ei noÌ„lleuit mutato rerum statu mutare seÌ„tentiam ibid. nu 231 jure meritoque mutavit sententiam Bin. § Cum igitur done by good right and reason but it was laudable also done with great q Vigilius magna consideratione adhibita atque prudentiâ diverso modo pugnabat an â—4â— nu â—0 advise wisedome and consideration Vigilius a man of r Summa constaÌ„tiae specimen edidit ibid. nu 49. greatest constancie One who stood Å¿ An. 551. nu 5. up with courage for defence of the Church adversus violentum ecclesiae grassatorem against Iustinian a violent oppressor thereof one t An. 553. nu 251. who fought for the sacred lawes enduring exile constanti animo with a constant minde for the same One who did by this meanes wisely u An. 547. nu 41. yea prudentissimè most wisely provide for the good of the Church One who in thus doing did wisely x PrudeÌ„s piuâ— pontifex hac in re prudenter est imitatus S. Paulum Bin. in Edict nu 11. to 2. pa. 499. §. Cum Bar. an 553. nu 235. imitate Saint Paul who condemned circumcision and yet when hee circumcised Timothie approved circumcision And though there bee a marvellous dissimilitude in their actions the one change being in a mutable at that time an indifferent ceremonie the other being in an immutable doctrine of faith Yet thus do they please themselves and applaud the Pope in these his wise and worthy changes 16. Now in stead of a better conclusion to this Chapter I will entreate the reader to observe with me two things touching their commending Vigilius in this manner The former is what an happie thing it is to be a Pope or have a Cardinall for his spokesman Let Luther Cranmer or a Protestant make farre lesse change theÌ„ did Vigilius what shall they not heare An Apostate unconstant inconsiderate a Chamelion a Polipus another Proteus even Vertumnus himselfe Let the Pope say and gainesay the same doctrine of faith and then ex Cathedra define both his sayings being contradictorie to bee not onely true but infallible truths of the Catholike faith O It is all done with rare wisdome with great reason and consideration The Pope in all this deales wisely and that in the superlative degree If when he is absent from the Emperor he oppugne the truth published by the Emperors edict It is wisely done Kings and Emperors may not make Lawes in causes of faith no not for the faith The Cobler must not goe beyond his latcher If when hee is brought before the Emperor he sing
That the Decree of Vigilius for Taciturnity touching the Three Chapters and the Councell wherein it is supposed to be made and all the Consequents upon that Decree painted out by Baronius are all fictitious and Poeticall 1. THE whole reason of Baronius drawne from Vigilius his confirming of the fift Councell being now fully dissolved we might without further stay and I gladly would according to my intended order in the Treatise proceed to his next exceptioÌ„ but there are two points in this last passage touching the chaÌ„gings of Vigilius which even against my will pull mee backe and call me to examine what Baronius sets downe and with exceeding ostentation paints out in his Annals concerning them the due consideration whereof will cause any man to admire the Cardinals most audacious and shamelesse dealing in Synodall affaires and causes of the Church The one of them concernes the second the other the fourth period in Vigilius changings The former is this 2. As soone as the defenders of the Three Chapters had notice of that Iudiciall sentence and Decree published by Vigilius against the same Chapters upon his comming to Constantinople they began to storme thereat and condemne Vigilius a Obid ipsum Vigilium colluforem praevaricatoremque abadversarijs coÌ„clamatum Bar. an 547. nu 49. as a Prevaricator or revolter from the faith whereupon Vigilius as the Cardinall tels us put in practice a rare peece of wisedome b Prudenter perielitanti Ecclesiae visus est consuluisse Vigilius Jbid. nu 41. and of his Pontificall pollicy sententiam emissam c Ibid. mox suspendit seu potius revocavit be suspends and revokes that his late judgement rursum ab eo promulgatum decretum quo decernebatur ut penitus taceretur and he published a new Decree wherein he decreed that every man should be silent and say never a word either pro or contra touching that question of the Three Chapters till the time of the generall Councel from d Ab hoc anno ad illud usque tempus Jbid. nu 43. this yeare which was the 21 e Bar. ibid. nu 26 of Iustinian the same wherin Vigilius came to Constantinople until the time of the generall Councell in eâ causâ ab ipso Vigilio indictuÌ„ fuit SilentiuÌ„ Silence was injoyned every man in that cause by Pope Vigilius againe f Ibid. nu 48 TacenduÌ„ indixit he injoyned Silence in that cause and very often doth the Cardinall with no small comfort mention this Decree of Taciturnity And for the more solemnitie of the matter Vigilius decreed this in a Councell it was not onely his but decretum g Bar. an 551. nu 2. Synodi the decree of a Councell together with the Pope Vigilius h Ibid. nu 3. Synodicè statuit tacendum esse Vigilius decreed in and with a Synod that there should be a Silence in this cause Bar. an 547. nu 43. untill the generall Councell To which Synodall decree not onely Mennas i and Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea but k Justinianus contra praecedentis Synodi decretuÌ„ et emissam sponsionem de servando usque ad Concilium universale sileÌ„tio appendi jussit Edictum Bar. an 551. nu 2. Iustinian himselfe also consented and promised to observe the same This was the Decree see now the effects and CoÌ„sequents which ensued thereupon declared also by Baronius 3. This Decree tooke so good effect at the first that res aliquandiuÌ„ consopita l Bar. an 547. nu 41. siluit for a space all matters touching the Three Chapters were husht asleepe not a word spoken of that Controversie But some foure yeares m Nam decretuÌ„ editum an 547. Bar. eo an nu 43. ista autem gesta an 551 Bar. eo an nu 2. 5 6. et seq after the publishing thereof when Vigilius saw divers contrary to his decree to condemne the Three Chapters n Bar. an 551. nu 5. erigit se he rouzeth up himselfe for defence thereof and o Sententiam excommunicationis intâ—rquet Ibid. Verba excoÌ„municationis extant Ibid. nu 11 et 12. excommunicated Mennas Patriarch of Constantinople Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea and many moe and this also he did in another Councell consisting of thirteene p Jbid. nu 11. Bishops besides himselfe Yea and whereas the Emperour in that yeare published or hung out his Edict against the same Chapters contrary to his owne promise and the Decree for Taciturnity the Pope withstood him so long and so eagerly that Iustinian began to rage to use threats and violence against him so that the Pope in r Ibid. et confugere coactus est An. 552. nu 8. fuga tantum spem posuit was forced to flee from him out of the Å¿ Bar. an 551. nu 2. house where he dwelled called for good lucke sake Placidiana unto the Church of Saint Peter where he remained a time in adversarios sententiam ferens thundering out his censures against his adversaries But that sacred place t Nec sacer ille locus asylum tanto Pontifici fuit An. 552. nu 8. could be no Sanctuary for Vigilius they buffeted u Dedit alapam infaciem c. Ibid. and beate him on his face q Iustinianus contra Synodi decretum publicé appendi jussit Edictum Ibid. nu 2. they called him an homicide a murderer of Sylverius and of the widowes sonne whereupon hee to avoid the fury x Ab Imperatoris furore ab Imperatoris sacrilegi violentia Ibid. and violence of the sacrilegious Emperour fled y Trans mare quaesivit effugium et in Basilicam S. Euphemia apud Chalcedonem habitare disposuit An. 552. nu 8. from Constantinople to Chalcedon and there lived in the Church of Saint Euphemia taking hold of a Piller or Horne of the Altar And even there though in persecution and affliction he bated z Nihil penitus remisit Apostolicae authoritatis Ibid. nu 9. et 10. not one Ace of his Apostolicall authority but as if he had lived in peace and beene in the Laterane or Vaticane he ascends into his Apostolike Throne a Idem ille locus effectus est Pontificis Romani praesentia eminent cunctisque perspicuum ad judicandum tribunal c. Ibid. nu 10. and high Tribunall and thence by the fulnesse of his Apostolicall power he b Missilia in hostes jacit potentissimaque spiritalia spicula jacit in hostes feritque Ibid. throwes out his darts represseth and prostrateth his adversaries pronounceth sentence c Summa potestatis plenitudine adversus metropolitanos Episcopos iâ—o in ipsum Patriarcham Constantinopolitanum ferre sententiam insuper et perperam facta Imperatoris rescindere magno animo â—ggressus est An. 552. nu 9. against Bishops yea against a Patriarch adnulleth the acts of the Emperour knowing his authoritie to be greater than that Prophets was to whom God said d Jer. 1. I have set thee above
Sebast apud Bar. an 550. nu 22. by defending the Three Chapters and communicating with such as defended them contra Iudicati nostri seriem nitebantur dealt against the tenor of his judgement shewing plainly that till then and in that yeare his judgement against the Three Chapters stood so firmly in force that by a judiciall sentence he deposed the contradictors thereof which had himselfe revoked and by a Decree of silence adnulled in likelihood he wold not certainly in justice he could not have done and seeing hee censured them not for speaking of that controversie but for speaking in defence of those Chapters it is evident that as then he had not made any Decree for silence in that cause for then his censure should have beene because they had done contrary to it not because they had contradicted his judgement in condemning those Chapters 10. Is not Baronius thinke you a very wise and worthy Annalist who perswades you that Vigilius made this Decree of silence in the 21. yeare of Iustinian forbidding all thereby to condemne the Three Chapters which not to have been made either in the 22 or 23 or 24. yeares the undoubted writing and censures of Vigilius expressed by Baronius himselfe doe make evident and testifie that the Pope himselfe was so far from being silent therein that both by words by writings by pontisicall censures and judgements himselfe condemned the 3 Chapters who will again perswade you that the Pope suffered very heavy persecution at the Emperors hands because he would not permit the 3. Chapters to be condemned whereas the Pope himselfe not onely condemned them all that time as well as the Emperor did but both by writings reproved and by judiciall censures punished condemned and deposed such as would not condemne them and that also eo nomine because they would not condemne them nor consent to his judgement whereby he had condemned them Now that Vigilius continued of the same mind both in the 25. 26. yeares of Iustinian that is untill the time that the fift Councell was assembled though there be no particulars to explaine yet by the Emperours words before remembred that per totum tempus perseveravit and ejusdem semper voluntatis fuit it is abundantly testified So that it is most certain that Vigilius at no time observed this decree of Taciturnity and because had there beene any he of all men was the most likely to observe it who as Baronius fableth was so rigorous against others even the Emperor also for not observing thereof his not observing of it is an evidence that he made no such Decree at all but that the whole narration concerning it and the consequents upon it is a very fiction and fable 11. Next after the Pope let us see if the Emperor who as Baronius saith ſ Bar. in 551. nu 2. emissū spōsionē de servado silentio c. promised to observe this law of Taciturnity was silent quiet in this cause And truly there is a strong presumption that he neither did nor would now refuse or forbeare to condemne the 3. Chapters seeing by so doing he should have anathematized himselfe for by his Imperiall Edict he denoūced all those to be an Anathema who do not condemne and t Si quis nō anathematizat Theodoric et Theodoreti scriptà c. Apistola Ibae Anathema sit Edict Iustin anathematize the same Chapters The very silence in this cause and ceasing or refusing to anathematize the Chapters had made him guilty of his owne just Anathema But to leave presumptions Certaine it is that Iustinian continued the same man constant in condemning those Chapters and that not onely for the time after this supposed Decree but from the first publishing of his own Edict whereof the whole fift Councell is a most ample witnesse who thus say u Conc. 5. Coll. 7. in sine omnia semper fecit facit quae sanctam Ecclesiam recta dogmata conservant The most pious Emperor hath ever done concerning this cause of the three Chapters and now doth those things which preserve the holy Church and sound doctrine and that to be the condemning of these Chapters they by their Synodall sentence doe make evident where they professe the condemning thereof to bee the preserving of the good seed x Festinantes bonū fidei semē purum conservare ab impietatis Zizaniis Conc. 5. Coll. 8. pa. 584. a. of faith the preserving of the Councell of Chalcedon and the rooting out of hereticall tares 12. And if wee desire particulars of his constant dealing herein Victor Tunavensis declareth the earnestnesse of Iustinian in condemning these Chapters for every yeare since this Decree of Taciturnity is supposed to have beene made The Decree as y Bar. an 547. nu 1. 41. Baronius sheweth was set out in the sixt yeare after the Consulship of Basilius which account by Consalar yeares Victor useth and it answereth to the end of twenty one and most of the 22. yeare of Iustinian In the seaventh yeare after Basilius z Victo Tun. in Chron. sed vitio Typogra scribitur an 8. pro. 7 nam proxime praecedens ānus apud cū rede numeratur an 6. post Coss Bas neque ullum annum omitti ab eo certum est Coss that is in the very next to that wherein the Decree was made Iustinian writ most earnestly saith Victor a Vict. loc citat into divers provinces antistites cunctos praefata tria Capitula damnare compellit and hee compelled all Bishops to condemne the Three Chapters In the eight he sheweth that the Illyrian Bishops held a Synod and writ unto the Emperour to disswade him from condemning those Chapters In the ninth he shewes that Facundus did the like and further in this yeare b Na sacra Imperatoris ad Iohā datae st an Iust 24. post Cōs Bas a 9. extat in Cōc 5 Col. 6. pa. 553. a. the Emperor commanded the Synod at Mopsvestia to be held against Theodorus that it might appeare how and from how long time before then the name of Theodorus had beene blotted out of the Ecclesiasticall tables the judgement of which Synod the Emperor sent c Facta est suggestio ad sanct papam Vigiliū ab eisdem episcopis Concil Mopsvesteni Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 557. a. Acta in Concilio Mopsvesteno ad Vigilium Iustiniani Concilio opera missa fuere ne in futura generali Synodo Theodorum ipse damnare aliquo modo detrectaret Bar. anno 550. nu 39. to Vigilius to assure him of the truth thereof that hee might with more constancie continue to cōdemne the Three Chapters In the tenth Victor declares that the Emperor sent for Reparatus and Firmus two Primates for Primasius Verecundus two Bishops to deale with them that they would condemne the same Chapters and that Zoilus Patriarch of Alexandria for refusing to condemne them was deposed which to have beene done by
after his returne about a year after out of exile 3. The Cardinall gives yet another evidence hereof Pelagius saith he h Bar. an 553. nu 236. the successor of Vigilius did thinke it fit that the fift Synod should bee approved and the three Chapters condemned moved especially hereunto by this reason that the Easterne Church ob Vigilij constitutum schismate scissa being rent and divided from the Romane by reason of the Constitution of Vigilius might be united unto it How was the Easterne Church divided from the Romane in the time of Pelagius by reason of that decree of Vigilius in defence of the Three Chapters if Vigilius by another decree published after it had recalled and adnulled it If the Popes condemning of those Chapters and approving of the fift Councell could unite the Churches then the decree of Vigilius had there beene any such would have effected that union If the Apostolike Decree of Vigilius could not effect it in vaine it was for Pelagius to thinke by his approbation which could have no more authority then Apostolicall to effect that union If the cause of the breach and disunion of those Churches was as Baronius truly saith the Constitution of Vigilius in defence of the Three Chapters against the judgement of the fift Synod seeing it is cleare by the Cardinalls owne confession that the disunion continued till after the death of Vigilius it certainly hence followeth that the Constitution of Vigilius which was the cause of that breach was never by himselfe repealed which even in Pelagius time remained in force and was then a wall of separation of the Easterne from the Westerne Church Againe if the Popes approving the fift Councell and condemning the three Chapters was as in truth it was and as the Cardinall noteth i Cujus Vigilij postremam sententiam pro approbatione 5. Conc. condemnatione triū Capitulorum posteri omnes sequuti universa Dei Ecclesia paucis schismaticis exceptis eandem Synodum ut oecumenicam semper novit Bar. an 554. nu 7. it to have beene the cause to unite those Churches seeing by his owne confession in Vigilius time they were not united for Pelagius k Bar. an 553. nu 236. after Vigilius his death sought to take away that schisme it certainly hence followeth that Vigilius never by any Decree approved that Synod and their Synodall condemning of those Chapters for had he so done the union had in his time presently beene effected 4. The same may be perceived also by the Westerne Church For as that Pontificall decree of Vigilius had there beene any such would have united the Easterne so much more would it have drawne the Westerne the Italian and specially the Romane Church to consent to the fift Councell and condemning of the three Chapters but that they persisted in the defence of the three Chapters and that also to the very end of Vigilius his life may divers wayes be made evident Whē Pelagius being then but a Deacon was chosen Pope after the death of Vigilius and was to be consecrated Bishop there could no more then two Bishops l Dum non essent Episcopi qui eum ordinarent inventi sunt duo Iohannes Bonus Andreas Presbyter de Ostia ordinaverunt eum Episcopum Anast in vita Pelagij 1. be found in the Westerne Church that would consecrate or ordaine him Bishop wherefore contrary to that Canon both of the Apostles m Can. Apost 1 and Nicene Fathers n Conc. Nic. Can. 4. requiring three o Certe omnimodo 3 Episcopi debent esse congregati ita faciant ordinationem Can. 4. Conc. Nic. Bishops to the consecration of a Bishop which they so often boast p Bell. lib. de Notis Ecclesiae ca. 8. §. Ex quo Et Bin. in Notis ad Can. 1. Apost alijque of in their disputes against us the Pope himselfe was faine to be ordained onely by two Bishops with a Presbyter of Ostia in stead of the third Anastasius very ignorantly if not worse sets downe the reason thereof to have beene for that Pelagius was suspected q Subduxerunt se à communione ejus dicentes quia in morte Vigilij se miscuit Anast in vitae Pelag. 1. to have beene guilty by poison or some other way of the death of Vigilius A very idle fancie as is the most in Anastasius for Pelagius was in banishment long before the death of Vigilius and there continued till Vigilius r Nam Vigilius obijt anno praecedente quum Pelagius de exilio revocatus est Vict. Tun. in Chron. ad an 16. corrupte legitur 17. Basilij et ad an sequentem was dead he had little leisure nor oportunity to thinke of poisoning or murdering his owne Bishop by whose death he could expect no gaine The true cause why the Westerne Bishops distasted Pelagius is noted by Victor who then lived Hee ſ Pelagius condemnans ea tria Capitula quae dudum constantissime defendebat à praevaricatoribus ordinatus est Vict. ad an 17. corrupte legitur 18. post Cons Basilij before hee came from Constantinople consented to the fift Synod and condemned the Three Chapters Now the Westerne t Adeo exhor ruisse visi sunt Antistites occidentales ferè omnes aliam post 4. admittere Oecumenicam Synodum ut non potuerit Pelagius reperire Episcopos Romae à quibus consecraretur Bar. an 556. nu 1. Bishops so detested the fift Synod and those who with it condemned those Chapters that among them all there could be found but two Bishops who held with the Synod and so allowed of Pelagius and his act in consenting thereunto and those two with the Presbyter of Ostia were the ordainers of Pelagius whom Victor in his corrupted language calls prevaricators Let any man now consider with himselfe whether it bee credible that in all Italy and some Provinces adjoyning there should be but two Bishops who would consēt to the Apostolicall decree of Vigilius for approving the fift Councell if he had indeed published such a decree If they knew nor the Popes sentence in this cause which they held and that rightly for a cause of faith to be infallible how was not the westerne or the Romane Church hereticall at this time not knowing that point of faith which is the transcendent principle and foundation of all doctrines of faith If they knew it to bee infallible seeing his judgement must then over-sway their owne how could there bee no more but two bishops found among them all who approved the Popes Cathedrall sentence and consented to his infallible judgement Seeing then it is certaine that the Westerne Church did generally reject the fift Synod after the death of Vigilius and seeing it is not to bee thought that they would have persisted in such a generall dislike thereof had they knowne Vigilius to have by his Apostolicall sentence decreed that all should approve the same of which his sentence had
absque dubio Vigilius after his returne out of exile consented to the fift Councell If now wee can clear this reason wherein consists the whole pith of the Cardinals cause I well hope that this consent of Vigilius of which he so much boasteth will be acknowledged to bee nothing else then a Baronian dreame 12. And first admitting for a while the Cardinalls antecedent the consequent sure is inconsequent Iustinian might upon the entreatie of Narses send Vigilius home though Vigilius had not consented to the Synod after the end thereof Narses was a man for his pietie prudence fortitude felicitie in warre exceedingly beloved honored by Iustinian They who are conversant in histories are not ignorant that Emperors doe yeeld many times greater matters then the restoring of Vigilius at the entreatie of such as Narses was When the Romane Matrones g Theod. histor lib. 2. ca. 17. their husbands not daring to motion such a matter entreated Constantius to restore Liberius to his See from which he was then banished the Emperour though he was most violently bent against Liberius and had placed an other Bishop in his See yet as Theodoret writeth sic inflectebatur hee was so affected with their entreatie that he yeelded to their request thinking it sitter that there should be two Bishops at once in Rome rather then he would seeme so obdurate and unkinde as to deny that petition in the time of his triumph It was as great incongruitie and disproportion in the government of Constantius an Arian to restore Liberius then a Catholike as for Iustinian being a Catholike Emperor to restore Vigilius being now an hereticall Bishop The hatred of Constantius to Liberius was farre greater then Iustinians against Vigilius The parties entreating are so unequall that Constantius seemes to have yeelded onely for popularitie and to get the opinion of courtisie they having done nothing to merit such favour at his hands but Narses had by his valor and late victories not onely won great honor to Iustinian and to the whole Empire but had freed Italie from the servitude of the Gothes and by that meanes besides many other had merited the love and favour of Iustinian who might have seemed not onely unkind but unjust in denying the petition of one so well deserving 13. Nay what if the intreaty of Narses and narration of Anastasius doe prove the quite contrary to that which Baronius from them collects that Vigilius had not consented to the Synod when hee was restored upon that entreaty Narses did this to gratifie h Tunc adunatus clerus rogaverunt Narsete ut rogaret Principem c. Anast in vita Vig. the Romane Clergy and the Italian Bishops who intreated him to bee a meanes for the restoring of Vigilius unto them And who I pray you were they or how affected in this cause of the three Chapters Truly they were eager in defending of them and for that cause rent and divided from the Easterne Churches as Baronius i Cum Vigilius cerneret universum Orientem ab Ecclesia Romana divisum nisi Synodo consentiret Bar. an 553. nu 235 witnesseth It had beene no gratifying but a very heart griefe and vexation to such to have Vigilius the condemner of those Chapters that is in their judgement an heretike restored unto them It was Vigilius the defender of those Chapters whom they desired for whom Narses intreated and whom if any the Emperour upon his intreaty restored which by the Anastasian narration is made very evident for he k Anast in vita Vig. sheweth how the Emperour upon his suggestion mox misit jussiones suas presently sent forth his command to bring Vigilius and the rest from exile He sent not to see if they would consent to the Synod and upon their consent to release them but without any questioning of that matter hee commands that they howsoever they stood affected should be free and brought out of banishment when they were returned did the Emperour aske them one word whether they would consent to the Synod or no He did not but al that he demanded of them was this vultis habere Vigilium will yee have Vigilius to continue your Pope as hee was before or will you have Pelagius who is here among you A demonstration that Vigilius had not then consented to the Synod when the Emperor said this for there was no cause either to deprive Vigilius or elect any other in his roome but his persisting in heresie had he consented to the Synod and condemned the Three Chapters the Emperor should have done wrong unto him to have suffered any other to have beene chosen nay the See being full Pelagius could not though all the banished Clergy had desired it have beene chosen Bishop in his stead Seeing then both the Emperours words and the answer of the Clergy as Anastasius relateth them doe shew that if they had pleased they might lawfully have chosen another Pope and seeing they could not by right have done that unlesse Vigilius had continued in his pertinacious defence of heresie even hereby it may bee perceived that at his restoring he persisted in the same hereticall minde of which he was before and that hee had not then consented to the Synod nor to the condemning of those Three Chapters So blinded was the Cardinall in this cause that he could not or rather would not see how his owne reason drawne from the intreaty of Narses and the narration of Anastasius doth quite overthrow the conclusion which by them he intended to confirme 14. And all this have I said upon supposall onely of the truth of that narration touching Narses his intreatie and the Emperors yeelding thereupon to restore Vigilius out of exile But now I must adde another answere which I feare will bee much more displeasing to the Cardinal and his friends and that is that this whole narration touching the exile of Vigilius after the Synod the intreaty of Narses the restoring him from that banishment and the rest depending thereon is all untrue fictitious such as hath no ground in the whole world but onely the Cardinals owne Poeticall pate For the manifesting whereof I will insist on the two principall points in the Cardinals narration the untruth of which being declared all the rest will easily be acknowledged to bee untrue and fabulous 15. The former concernes the restoring of Vigilius out of Banishment Baronius l Bar. 554. nu 1. following Anastasius saith that the Emperour together with Vigilius restored all the rest who were banished with him Dimisit omnes cum Vigilio and by name Pelagius is expressed to bee one of them of whom the Emperour then said Hic habetis Pelagium you have here Pelagius Vigilius then with him by name among the rest was dismissed home A very fiction and fable witnesse whereof Victor Bishop of Tunea who then lived and who himselfe m Victor Tunnensis author hujus operis post custodias simul et plagas
f Herm. an 547. Cōtractus Gotofridus g Gotof. an 527. Viterbiensis Otho Frisingensis h Otho an 528. Palmerius i Palm in Chr. an 557. their owne Genebrard k Geneb an 537. Stapleton l Stapl. Counterbl ca. 15. and many others These following Anastasius relate the cause of his banishmēt to have bin the not restoring of Anthimus the time before the death of the Empresse Theodora Nor I can finde so much as one either ancient or later writer who saith with Baronius that hee was banished after the fift Councell and for refusing to consent unto it what a rare Poeticall conceit hath the Cardinall who can make such a noble discourse of that fictitious banishment and commend it as an historicall narration for the warrant of which he had not so much as one writer and one is a small number ancient or late upon whose credit and authoritie he might report it and for that one witnesse Anastasius whom he nameth he is so farre from testifying it that he doth clearely testifie the quite contrary yea Baronius himselfe was not ignorant hereof but knew right well Anastasius to referre m Hoc plane tempore accidisse noscuntur quae Anastasius jungit imo confundit cum prioribus quae acciderunt vivente adhuc Theodora Bar. an 552. nu 8. the beating of Vigilius his flight to Chalcedon the other indigne usage set downe by him and his exile to the time while Theodora lived and therefore hee taxeth Anastasius for confounding those things and referring them to that time whereas himselfe placeth them after the death n Caetera quae sequuntur in Anastasio post obitum Theodorae contingerunt Bar. an 547. nu 27. Jnter illa caetera est Vigilij exilium of Theodora And yet for all this though he knew Anastasius to teach the quite contrary yet was not the Cardinall afraid nor ashamed to alleage Anastasius for a witnesse that Vigilius was cast into banishment after the fift Councell and for refusing to consent unto it and to say of this banishment Liquet ex Anastasio it is clearly knowne out of Anastasius whereas not that but the quite contrarie Liquet ex Anastasio 17. From hence now there issueth another consequent to bee remembred It is agreed by all who mention any banishment of Vigilius and it is confessed also by Baronius that Vigilius was but once banished and from that one freed by the intreaty of Narses Now that one cannot bee the Baronian banishment for of it there is no proofe at all to bee found no one author to witnesse it but the Cardinall and his owne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in matters of fact done some thousand and more yeares before the Cardinall was borne is of no worth at all nor can be esteemed ought but one of his owne dreames and figments Againe that one cannot bee the Anastasian banishment which is said to happen before the death of Theodora more than foure yeares before the fift Councell for it is certaine by the Acts of the fift Synod o Conc. 5. Coll. 1 2 3 et 8. that Vigilius at that time was at Constantinople yea that untill then he lived and dwelt p Contigit Vigilium in hac regia urbe degentem omnibus interesse c. Coll. ◠pa. 584. a. at Constantinople Seeing then Vigilius was neither banished before the Councell as Anastasius saith nor banished after the Councell as Baronius saith it followeth which indeed is very truth that Vigilius was not at all banished but all which is reported of his banishment and all that depends thereon is fictitious and Poeticall devised by two Bibliothecarij to his Holinesse the former and precedent to the Councell is an Anastasian the other following the Councell is a Barbarian Poeme but both Poems both fabulous and Aesopicall narrations 18. And truly might wee be allowed to imitate the Cardinals Arte in disputing this matter would easily be made plaine There is one Topicke place of arguing à testimonio negativè which is very familiar to Baronius in his Annals q Vid Bar. an 774. nu 10.11 and it is defended by Gretzer in his Apology r Respondissemus hanc argumentandi rationem ab authoritate negativè in eis praesertim quae ad historiam spectant non esse prorsus infirmam et elum bem Gretz Apol pro Bar. ca. 1 § Peritius for Baronius let us take but one example and that also in this our present cause concerning Vigilius There is in Anastasius ſ Anast in vit Vigil a narration how Vigilius was violently puld away from Rome by Anthemius Scribonius sent thither for that purpose by the Empresse how he was apprehended in the Church thrust into the shippe how the Romanes followed reviling t Populus caepit jactare post cum lapides fustes et cacabos et dicere Fames tua tecum male invenias ubi vadis c. him cursing him and casting stones and dung at him praying that a mischiefe might goe with him Thus it is historified by Anastasius The like is mentioned by many others who borrowed it out of Anastasius by Aimonius * Aim lib. 2. de gest Franc. ca. 32 by the Historia Miscella u Hist misc lib. 16. going under the name of Paulus Diaconus though it be not his by Marianus x Mar. an 553. Scotus by Hermanus y Her an 547. Contractus by Sigebert z Sig. an 543. by Luitprandus a Luitp in vita Vigil de vitis Pontificum as the booke is called by Albo b Alb. in vita Vig. Floriacensis by Platina c Plat. in vita Vig. by Conrade d Conr. Ab. Vrsper an 527. by Nauclerus e Nauc an 540. by Martinus f Mart. in vita Vig. Polonus by Blondus g Blond Dec. 1. lib. 6. by Krantzius h Krant Met. lib. 2. by Sigonius i Sigeb lib. 19. de Occ. Imp. an 545. others Heare now the Cardinals censure of this narration of Anastasius and the rest who followed him Aperti mendacij k Bar. an 546. nu 54. redarguitur Anastasius Anastasius is convicted of a manifest lye herein and how prove you that my Baronius res adeo ignominiosa so ignominious a matter as this is could not have beene unknowne to the Authors who writ most accurately the Acts of their times and those were Facundus and Procopius the Cardinall names no moe from the silence and omission of this matter in them two he concludes Anastasius to be a lyar and his narration seconded by many moe to be a lye 19. Let now but the like liberty of disputing à Testimonio negativè be allowed unto us and the Baronian banishment to begin with that must be rejected banished and set in the same ranke with that lye of Anastasius for thus wee may argue This banishment of Vigilius after the end of the fift Councell and for refusing
to consent unto it is neither mentioned by Victor Bishop of Tunen nor by Liberatus nor by Evagrius nor by Procopius who all then lived and in relating the affaires of the Church were full out as exact as Facundus and Procopius nor by Photius nor by Zonaras nor by Cedrenus nor by Nicephorus nor by Glicas nor by Constantinus Manasses nor by Anastasius nor by Paulus Diaconus nor by Aimonius nor by Luitprandus nor by Albo Floriacensis nor by Otho Frisingensis nor by Conrade Abbat of Vrsberge nor by Hermanus Contractus nor by Sigebert nor by Lambertus Scaffuaburgensis nor by Martinus Polonus nor by Gotofridus Viterbiensis nor by Albertus Stadēsis nor by Vernerus nor by Marianus Scotus nor by Rhegino nor by Bede nor by Platina nor by Nauclerus nor by Tritemius nor by Krantzius nor by the magnum Chronicon Belgicum nor by the Chronicon Reicherspergense nor by Chronicō Germanicum per Monachū Herveldensem nor by Chronica Compendiosa or Compilatio Chronologica nor by Blondus nor by Sabellicus nor by Aventinus nor by Huldericus Mutius nor by Sigonius nor by Palmerius nor by Karanza nor by Papirius Massonius nor by Genebrard nor by Sanders nor by Stapleton and I challenge the welwillers of Baronius by that love they beare unto him his estimatiō to name if they can but any one writer before Baronius who affirmeth Vigilius to have beene banished after the Synod for not consenting unto it that therby it may be knowne that their great Annalist playes the Historian and not the Poet in relating the Ecclesiasticall affaires of the Church Or if they can at any time doe this which I am verily perswaded they neither will nor ever can performe yet seeing none of all these doe mention that banishment truly if Baronius from the silence of two writers might conclude against Anastasius that he was a lyar in the former narration I thinke none will deny but à fortiori it will follow that seeing more than two score are silent in this matter it may farre more justly bee said aperti mendacij redarguitur which is the Cardinals owne doome and words that hee bestoweth on Anastasius and here much more fitly may the Cardinals reason take place res adeo ignominiosa so ignominious a matter nay so glorious a peece of martyrdome on the Popes part as the banishment and cruell persecution of the Pope the chiefe Bishop in the world for such a cause as for not assenting to the Synod could not have bin unknowne unto those writers who most diligently prosecute the affaires of their times and such as concerned the Church Nay from the most of these wee may draw an affirmative argument also and reason more strongly than the Cardinall doth in his disputes Anastasius Aimonius Diaconus Platina and divers moe of the forenamed authors to the number at least of twenty affirme Vigilius was banished before the Synod and in the life time of Theodora and withall teach but one banishment of Vigilius and therefore they not onely are silent of that which the Cardinal saith but they say the quite contrary unto him and so both by their silence and by their speech refute that as an untruth which the Cardinal so positively and historically narrateth 20. Now as the negative kinde of arguing disproves the Baronian so doth it also the Anastasian banishment and forcibly concludes that Vigilius was not at all banished either before or after the Councel for there is no banishmēt at all of Vigilius mentioned either by Victor or by Liberatus or by Evagrius or by Procopius who all lived writ at that time or by Photius or by Zonaras or by Cedrenus or by Glicas or by Constantinus Manasses or by Nicephorus or by Aimonius though Sanders falsely affirmed them to teach this or by Luitprandus or by Bede or by Krantzius or by Mutius or by Papirius Massonius or by Caranza besides others Adde now here againe the Cardinals words Res adeo ignominiosa surely so ignominious and shamefull a fact as the banishing of a Pope could not have beene unknowne to those who writ as exactly as Facundus and Procopius the Ecclesiasticall affaires and occurrents in their times and therfore seeing these so many so exact writers mention not that Anastasian banishment of Vigilius it may be rightly concluded that Anastasius therin aperti mendicij redarguitur or if none but the Cardinall may give the lye to Anastasius yet confessing his narration to be untrue let us leave that as a priviledge of the Cardinals that he alone shal bestow lies for liveries upon Anastasius Nay seeing none of these Writers mention any banishment at all of Vigilius it must further be concluded from their silence that Vigilius neither first nor last neither before nor after the Synod was banished but that the whole narration touching his banishment is a meere fiction and fable devised partly by Anastasius and partly by Baronius 21. Which may much rather be affirmed considering that Victor who was himselfe exiled and brought to Constantinople is not onely careful but even curious that I say not proud in recounting the most eminent persons specially Bishops which were either deposed or imprisoned or banished about this cause of the three Chapters either before or after the Synod In this ranke he l Vict. in Chron. an 8. post Coss Bas nameth Benenatus Bishop of Iustinianea Zoilus Patriarch of Alexandria Reparatus Bishop of Carthage Verecundus Bishop of Nica Macarius Bishop of Ierusalem Rusticus a Romane Deacon Foelix a Monke of Guilla Frontinus Bishop of Salone Theodosius Bishop of Sebarsuse himselfe being Bishop of Tunen and Pelagius then a Deacon but afterwards Bishop of Rome and successor to Vigilius Had Baronius this negative argument à testimonio in hand how would hee insult and even triumph in it how easily would he perswade the world that certainly Bishop Victor who by name and so particularly recounteth meaner Bishops yea Deacons and Monkes who suffered banishment for this cause would never have omitted the Prince of Bishops had hee beene exiled for it as they were That one example had graced the defenders of the Three Chapters more than twenty nay than twenty hundred besides seeing by this it would have beene evident that the Oracle of the world the infallible Iudge had sealed the truth of that cause with his glorious banishment which is a kinde of Martyrdome Anastasius Diaconus Otho and all the rest who say he was banished should have had the lye an hundred times at the Cardinals hands for saying that he was banished either before or after the Councell rather than Bishop Victor who then lived at Constantinople and was fellow-partner in those troubles and banishments should have beene thought either ignorant or forgetfull to expresse that banishment of Vigilius had there beene truly any at all 22. Thus from the Cardinals owne Topicks it is concluded that both the Anastasian the Baronian banishments are both fictitious Nor can I find what they
the Pope or any Bishop hinder the assembling of a generall Councell and so the publike peace and tranquillity of the whole Church Open but this gappe and there never should have been nor ever shall be any generall Councell The wilfulnesse of Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia at Nice of Iohn Patriarch of Antioch at Ephesus of Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria at Chalcedon will frustrate all those holy Councells and make them to be neither generall nor lawfull The saying of Cardinall Cusanus is worthy observing to this purpose I beleeve saith he m Lib. 3. de Concor ca. 15. that to be spoken not absurdly that the Emperor himselfe in regard of that care and custody of preserving the faith which is committed unto him may praeceptivè indicere Synodum by his Imperiall authority and command assemble a Synod when the great danger of the Church requireth the same negligence aut contradicente Romano Pontifice the Pope either neglecting so to doe or resisting and contradicting the doing thereof So Cusanus This was the very state and condition of the Church at this time when the fift Councell was assembled The n Vid sup ca. 1. nu 6. whole Church had beene a long time scandalized and troubled about those Three Chapters it was rent and divided from East to West High time it was and necessary for Iustinian to see that flame quenched although Pope Vigilius or any other Patriarch had never so eagerly resisted the remedie thereof 15. Had the Cardinall pleaded against this Synod that Vigilius had not beene called unto it hee had spoken indeed to the purpose For this is essentiall and such as without which a Synod cannot bee generall and lawfull that all Bishops be summoned to the Synod and comming thither have free accesse unto it and freedome of speech and judgment therein But the Cardinall durst not take this exception against this Synod or for Vigilius for none of these to have beene wanting in this Councell is so cleare that pertinacie it selfe cannot deny it It was not the Pope as they vainly boast but the Emperor who by his owne and Imperiall authority called this Councell as the whole Synod even in their Synodall sentence witnesse Wee are assembled here in this City jussione pijssimi Imperatoris vocati being called by the commandement of our most religious Emperor His calling to have beene generall Nicephorus doth expresly declare The Emperor saith he o Lib. 17. ca. 27. assembled the fift generall Councell Episcopis ecclesiarum omnium evocatis the Bishops of all Churches being called unto it yea the Emperor was so equall in this cause that Binius p Not. in Conc. 5. §. Concilium testifieth of him Paris numeri Episcopos ex Oriente Occidente convocavit that he called in particular and besides his generall summons by which all without exception had free accesse as many out of the West where the defenders of those Chapters did abound as he did out of the East where the same Chapters were generally condemned And yet further Vigilius himselfe was by name not onely invited intreated and by many reasons perswaded but even commanded by the Emperor and in his name to come unto the Synod as before q Sup. ca. 2. nu 1. 3. we shewed Now what freedome hee might have had in the Councell both that offer of the Presidencie doth shew for him in particular and the words of the Councell spoken concerning all in generall doth declare for when Sabinianus and others who being then at Constantinople were invited to the Synod and refused to come the synod sayd r Collat. 2. pa. 524. b. It was meet that they being called should have come to the Councell and have been partakers of all things which are here done and debated especially seeing both the most holy Emperour and we licentiam dedimus unicuique have granted free liberty to every one to manifest his minde in the Synod concerning the causes proposed Seeing then he not onely might but in his duty both to God to the Emperour and to the whole Church hee ought to have come and freely spoken his minde in this cause his resisting the will of the Emperor and refusing to come doth evidently demonstrate his want of love to the truth and dutifulnesse to the Emperor and the Church but it can no way impaire or impeach the dignity and authority of the Councell neither for the generality nor for the lawfulnesse thereof 16. Besides all which there is yet one thing above all the rest to be remembred for though Pope Vigilius was not present in the Synod either personally or by his Legates but in that sort resisted to come unto it yet he was present there by his letters of instruction by his Apostolicall and Cathedrall Constitution which hee published as a direction what was to be judged and held in that cause of the Three Chapters That Decree and Constitution he promised to send ad Imperatorem Synodum both to the Emperor and to the Synod quod ingenuè praestitit which also he ingenuously performed as the Cardinall tells Å¿ An. 553. nu 47. us That elaborate t Jdque elaboravâ—â— ibid. decree to which an whole Synod together with the Pope subscribed containing the Popes sentence and instruction given in this cause Vniverso u An. eod nu 48. orbi Catholico cunctisque fidelibus not onely to the Synod teaching them what they should define but to all Christians teaching them what they shold beleeve was in consessu Episcoporum recitatum read and recited before all the Bishops in that Councell as Binius doth x Not. in Conc. 5. §. Constitutâ—â— assure us This one kinde of presence in the Synod is suppletive of all the rest of more worth then 20. nay then 200. Legates à latere sent from his holinesse They all may deale besides or contrary to the Popes minde as Zacharias and Rhodoaldus did in a Councell held about the cause of Photius but this Cathedrall instruction is an inflexible messenger no bribes no perswasions no feare no favour can extort from it one syllable more then his holinesse by the infallible direction of his Chaire hath delivered yea though the Pope should have beene personally present in the Synod and face to face spoken his mind in his cause yet could not his sudden or lesse premeditated speech have beene for weight or authority comparable to this decree being elaborated after seven yeares ponderation of the cause and all things in it being disposed cum omni undique cautela atque diligentia with all diligence and circumspection that could possibly bee used which the Pope though absent in body yet sent as an Oracle from heaven to be a direction to the Synod and to supply his own absence So many wayes is this former objection of Baronius vaine and unsound when he pretends this Councell to have beene unlawfull because the Pope resisted it and the members assembled without
authoritie to preach publikely and therefore such a decree is as fully authorized confirmed and approved as if all the Bishops and Presbyters in the world had personally subscribed in this manner I confirme this Decree Hereof there is a worthy example in the third generall Councell No Presbyters at all were therein not in their owne right Very many Bishops were personally absent and present onely by their Legates or Agents as almost all the Westerne Bishops and by name Celestine Patriarch of Rome Some no question upon other occasions neglected that businesse as it may be the Bishops of Gangra and of Heraclea in Macedonia who were not at this Councell Divers others wilfully and obstinately refused to come to that holy Synod as by name Nestorius Patriarch of Constantinople Iohn Patriarch of Antioch and some forty Bishops who at the same time while the holy Councell was held in the Church at Ephesus held a Conventicle by themselves in an Inne in the same Citie and yet notwithstanding the personall absence of the first the negligent of the second and wilfull absence of the last the holy x Epist Conc. Ephes ad Imper. tom 2. Act. Con. Ephes epist 17. generall Councell saith of their Synodall judgement given by those who were then present that it was nihil aliud quam communis concors terrarum orbis sensus consensus nothing else but the common and consenting judgment of the whole world How could this be when so many Bishops besides three Patriarchs were either personally or negligently or wifully absent How was there in that decree the consent of these Truly because they all even all the Bishops in the world did either personally or by their Agents expresse or else in such a tacit and implicit manner as wee declared wrap up their judgement in the Synodall decree made by the Bishops present in the Councell 28. But what if many of those who are present doe dissent from that which the rest being the greater part doe decree Truly even these also doe implicitè and are in reason to bee judged to consent to that same decree For every one is supposed to agree on that generall Maxime of reason that in such an assembly of Iudges what the greater part decreeth shall stand as the Act and Iudgement of the whole seeing otherwise it would be impossible that such a multitude of Bishops should ever give any judgement in a cause for still some in perversenesse and pertinacie would dissent Seeing then it is the ordinance of God that the Church shall judge and seeing there can no other meanes be devised how they should judge unlesse the sentence of the greater part may stand for their judgement reason enforceth all to consent upon this Maxime Vpon this is that Imperiall Law grounded Quod y Dig. lib. 50. leg 19. major pars curiae effecit pro rato habetur acsi omnes id egerint what the greater part of the Court shall do that is ratified or to stand for the judgement of the Court as if all had done the same And againe Refertur z Dig. lib. 5. tit 17. de Reg. Iuris 160. ad universos quod publicè fit per majorem partem That is accounted the act of all which is publikely done by the greater part Vpon this ground is that truly said by Bellarmine a Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 11. §. At. That whereon the greater part doth consent est verum decretum Concilij is the true decree of the Councell even of the whole Councell Vpon the equitie of this rule was it said in the Councell at Chalcedon b Act. 4. p. 90. b. when ten Bishops dissented from the rest Non est justum decem audiri It is not just that the sentence of ten should prevaile against a thousand and two hundred Bishops Vpon the equitie of the same rule did the fift generall Councell truly constantly judge c Coll. 6. p. 576. b that the Councell of Chalcedon even in that definition of faith which they all with one consent agreed upon condemned the Epistle of Ibas as hereticall although they knew that Maximus with Pascasinus and the other Legats of Pope Leo in the Councell of Chalcedon adjudged that Epistle to be orthodoxall How was it the consenting judgement of the whole Councell of Chalcedon when yet some did expresse their dissent therein How but by that implicit consent which all give to that rule of reason that the judgement of the greater part shall stand for the judgment of the whole which the fift Councell doth plainly signifie saying d Ibid. pa. 563. b. In Councels we must not attend the interloquutions of one or two but what is defined in common ab omnibus aut amplioribus either by all or by the greater part to that we must attend as to the judgement of the whole Councell But omitting all the rest there is one example in the Councell of Chalcedon most pregnant to this purpose 29. All e Haec omnes dicimus haec omnibus placent Act. 16. pa. 137. a. the Councell save onely the Popes Legates consented upon that third Canon decreed in the second and now confirmed in this fourth Councell that the See of Constantinople should have Patriarchall dignity over Thrace Asia and Pontus and have precedence before other Patriarches as the next after the Bishop of Rome The Legates following the instructions of Leo were so averse in this matter that they said f Ibid. pa. 137. b. not without some choler Contradictio nostra his gesti◠inhaereat Let our contradiction cleave to these Acts and so it doth to the eternall disgrace both of them and their master The glorious Iudges notwithstanding this dissenting of the Legates and of Pope Leo himselfe in them said g Ibid. concerning that Canon That which we have spoken that the See of Constantinople ought to be the second c. Tota Synodus the whole Councell hath approved it Why but the Popes Legates approved it not they contradicted it True in this particular they dissented But because they as all other Bishops even Pope Leo himselfe consented unto that generall Maxime That the judgement of the greater part shall stand for the judgement of the whole Councell in that generall both the Legats of Leo and Leo himselfe did implicitè and virtually consent to that very Canon from which actually and explicitè they did then dissent For which cause the most prudent Iudges truly said Tota Synodus the whole Councell hath approved this Canon either explicitè or implicitè either expressely or virtually approved it Neither did onely those secular Iudges so esteeme the whole generall Councell it selfe professed the same and that even in the Synodall Relation of their Acts to Pope Leo The universall h Sancta universal Synod Leoni Relat. Synod post Act. 16 Synod said thus We have condemned Dioscorus we have confirmed the faith wee have confirmed the Canon of the second
Councell for the honour of the See of Constantinople we have condemned the heresie of Eutyches Thus writ the whole Councell to Leo declaring evidently that act of approving that Canon to be the Act of the whole Synod although they knew the contradiction of the Pope and his Legates to cleave unto it 30. You see now that in every sentence of a generall and lawfull Councell there is an assent of all Bishops and Presbyters they all either explicitè or tacitè or implicitè consenting to that decree whether they be absent or present and whether in that particular they consent or dissent Now because there can bee no greater humane judgement in any cause of faith or ecclesiasticall matter than is the consenting judgement of all Bishops and Presbyters that is of all who have power either to teach or judge in those causes it hence clearly ensueth that there neither is nor can be any Episcopall or Ecclesiasticall confirmation or approbation whatsoever of any decree greater stronger or of more authority then is the judgement it selfe of such a generall Councell and their owne confirmation or approbation of the decrees which they make for in every such decree there is the consent of all the Bishops and Presbyters in the whole world 31. Besides this confirmation of any synodall decree which is by Bishops and therefore to bee called Episcopall there is also another confirmation added by Kings and Emperors which is called Royall or Imperiall by this later religious Kings not onely give freedome and liberty that those decrees of the Councell shall stand in force of Ecclesiasticall Canons within their dominions so that the contemners of them may be with allowance of Kings corrected by Ecclesiasticall censures but further also doe so strengthen and backe the same by their sword and civill authority that the contradicters of those decrees are made liable to those temporall punishments which are set downe in EZra i Ez. 7.16 to death to banishment to confiscation of goods or to imprisonment as the quality of the offence shall require and the wisedome of that Imperiall State shall think fit Betwixt these two confirmations Episcopall and Imperiall there is exceeding great oddes and difference By the former judiciall sentence is given and the synodall decree made or declared to be made for which cause it may rightly be called a judiciall or definitive confirmation by the later neither is the synodal decree made nor any judgment given to define that cause for neither Princes nor any Lay men are Iudges to decide those matters as the Emperours Theodosius and Valentinian excellently declare in k Nefas est eum qui Episcoporum catalogo adscriptus non est Ecclesiasticis negotijs se immiscere nempe ut IudiceÌ„ qui definiat Epist Imp. ad Synod Ephes to 1. Act. Ephes Conc. ca. 32. their directions to Candidianus in the Councell of Ephesus but the synodall decree being already made by the Bishops and their judgement given in that cause is strengthened by Imperiall authority for which cause this may fitly be called a superemineÌ„t or corrobotative confirmation of the synodall judgement The former confirmation is Directive teaching what all are to beleeve or observe in the Church the later is Coactive compelling all by civill punishment to beleeve or observe the Synodall directions The former is Essentiall to the Decree such as if it want there is no Synodall decree made at all the later is Accidentall which though it want yet is the Decree of the Councell a true Synodall Decree and sentence The former bindes all men to obedience to that Decree but yet onely under paine of Ecclesiasticall censures the latter bindes the subjects only of those Princes who give the Royall Confirmation to such Decrees and binds them under the pain only of temporal punishmeÌ„t By vertue of the former the contradicters or contemners of those Decrees are rightly to be accounted either heretikes in causes of faith or contumacious in other matters and such are truly subject to the censures of the Church though if the later be wanting those censures cannot bee inflicted by any or upon any but with danger to incurre the indignation of Princes By vertue of the later not onely the Church may safely yea with great allowance and praise inflict their Ecclesiasticall censures but inferiour Magistrates also may nay ought to proceed against such contemners of those Synodall decrees as against notorious convicted and condemned heretikes or in causes which are not of faith but of externall discipline and orders as against contumacious persons The Episcopall confirmation is the first in order but yet because it proceeds from those who are all subject to Imperiall authority it is in dignitie inferiour The Imperiall confirmation is the last in order but because it proceeds from those to whom everie soule is subject it is in dignity Supreme 32. This Imperiall confirmation as holy generall Councels did with all submission intreate of Emperours so religious Emperors did with all willingnesse grant unto them Of the great Nicene Councell Eusebius saith l Lib. 4. de vita Constant ca 27. Constantine sealed ratified and confirmed the decrees which were made therein The second general Councel writ m Epist Synod 2. post Act. Concil pa. 518. thus to the Emperour Theodosius We beseech your clemency that by your letters ratum esse jubeas confirmesque Concilij decretum that you would ratifie and confirme the decree of this Councell and that the Emperour did so his Emperiall Edict before n Hoc cap. nu 19. mentioned doth make evident To the third Councell the Emperor writ thus o Act Ephes Conc tom 3. ca. 17. Let matters coÌ„cerning religion and piety be diligently examined contention being laid aside ac tum demuÌ„ à nostra pietate confirmationem expectate and then expect from us our imperiall confirmation The holy Councell having done so writ p Act. Conc. Eph. to 4. ca. 8. thus to the Emperour We earnestly intreate your piety ut jubeat ea omnia that you would coÌ„mand that all which is done by this holy and Oecumenical Councell against Nestorius may stand in force per vestrae pietatis nutum et consensum confirmata being confirmed by your roall assent And that the Emperour yeelded to their request his Edict q Imperator sententia Synodi publicè approbata Nestorio exilium indicit Act. Con. Eph. to 5. ca. 11. et lege ult de haeret Cod. Theod. against Nestorius doth declare In the fourth Councell the Emperour said r Act. 6. We come to this Synod not to shew our power sed ad confirmandam fidem but to confirme the faith And wheÌ„ he had signified before all the Bishops his royall assent Å¿ Jn perpetuum quae à vobis termÃnata sunt serventur Jbid. to their decree the whole Councell cryed out Orthodoxam fidem tu confirmasti thou hast confirmed the Catholike faith often ingeminating those joyfull acclamations That
those subsequent confirmations whether by succeeding Councels or absent Bishops and that was that every one should thereby either testifie his orthodoxy in the faith or else manifest himselfe to bee an heretike For as the approving of the six generall Councels and their decrees of faith did witnesse one to be a Catholike in those doctrines so the very refusing to approve or confirme any one of those Councels or their decrees of faith was ipso facto without any further examination of the cause an evident conviction that he was a condemned heretike such an one as in the pride and pertinacie of his heart rejected that holy synodall judgement which all the whole catholike Church and every member thereof even himselfe also had implicitè before confirmed and approved In which respect an heretike may truly bee called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being convicted and condemned not onely by the evidence of truth and by synodall sentence but even by that judgment which his owne selfe had given implicitè in the decree of the Councell The summe is this The former confirmation by the Bishops present in the Synod is Iudiciall the later confirmation by the Bishops who are absent is Pacificall The former is authoritativè such as gives the whole authority to any decree the later whether by succeeding Councels or absent Bishops is Testificativè such as witnesseth them to be orthodoxall in that decree The former joyned to the Imperiall confirmation is Essentiall which essentially makes both the Councell an approved Councel all the decrees therof approved synodal and Oecumenicall decrees the later is accidentall which being granted by a Bishop doth much grace himselfe but little or nothing the Synod and being denyed by any doth no whit at all either disgrace the Synod or impare the dignity and authority thereof but doth extreamely disgrace the partie himselfe who denyeth it and puls downe upon him both the just censures of the Church and those civill punishments which are due to heretikes or contumacious persons 38. My conclusion now is this Seeing this fift Councell was both for the calling generall and for the proceeding therin lawfull and orderly and seeing although it wanted the Popes consent yet it had the concurrence of those two confirmations before mentioned Episcopall and Imperiall in which is included the Oecumenicall approbation of the whole catholike Church it hence therefore ensueth that as from the first assembling of the Bishops it was an holy a lawfull and Oecumenicall Councell so from the first pronouncing of their synodall sentence and the Imperiall assent added thereunto it was an approved generall Councell approved by the whole catholike Church and so approved that without any expresse consent of the Pope added unto it it was of as great worth dignity and authoritie as if all the Popes since S. Peters time had with their owne hands subscribed unto it And this may suffice to satisfie the fourth and last exception which Baronius devised to excuse Vigilius from heresie CAP. XIX The true notes to know which are generall and lawfull and which either are not generall or being generall are no lawfull Councels with divers examples of both kindes 1. THAT which hath beene said in the former Chapter is sufficient to refute that cavill of Baronius against the fift Councell whereby he pretends it to have neither been a general nor a lawfull Synod because the Pope resisted the assembling and contradicted the decree and sentence thereof but for as much as it is not victory but truth which I seeke and the full satisfaction of the reader in this cause and seeing this point about the lawfulnesse of generall Councels is frequent and very obvious and such as being rightly conceived will give great light to this whole controversie about Councels I will crave liberty to lanch somewhat further into this deepe and explane with what convenient brevity I can what it is which maketh any Synod to bee or rightly to be esteemed a generall and lawfull Councell 2. As the name of Synod doth in his primary and large acception agree to every assembly so doth the name of Councell to every assembly of consultation The former being derived from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is all one with Coetus and imports the assembly of any multitude which meeteth and commeth together The later being derived of Cilia a Concilium dictuÌ„ à communi intentione â—o quod in unum omnes dirigant mentis obtutuÌ„ Cilia enim oculorum sunt Isiod Mer. in suam Canon collect whence also supercilium imports the common or joynt intending or bending their eyes both of body and minde to the investigation of the truth in that matter which is proposed in their assembly But both of those words being now drawne from those their large and primitive significations are by Ecclesiasticall writers and use of speech penes quem jus est norma loquendi restrained and appropriated onely to those assemblies of Bishops and Ecclesiasticall persons wherein they come together to consult of such matters as concernes either the faith or discipline of the Church Of these because some are lawfull others unlawfull Synods if we can finde what it is which maketh a generall and lawfull Councell it will bee easie therby to discerne which are unlawfull Synods seeing it is vulgarly and truly said that Rectum is index sui obliqui 3. That a Synod be generall and lawfull there are three things necessarily and even essentially required the want of any one of which is a just barre and exception why that Synod is either not generall or not lawfull The first which concernes the generalitie is that the calling and summons to the Councell be generall and Oecumenicall so that all Bishops be called and when they are come have free accesse to the same Councell unlesse for some fault of their owne or some just reason they ought to bee debarred For if the calling to any Synod bee out of some parts onely of the Church and not out of the whole the judgement also of such a Councell is but partiall not generall and the Councell is but particular not Oecumenicall seeing some of those who have judicatory power are either omitted or unjustly excluded from the Synod The want of this was a just exception taken by the Pope Iulius against that Councell of Antioch b Extat tom 1. Conc. pa. 420. wherein Athanasius was deposed by the Arian faction and Gregory of Cappadocia intruded into his See why it neither was nor could be esteemed generall or such as should binde the whole Church by the decrees made by it for said Iulius c Apud Socr. l. 2 ca. 13. et Zozom lib. 3. ca. 9. they did against the Canons of the Church 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because they did not so much as call him to that Synod whereas the Canons of the Church forbid that any decree which should have power to binde the whole Church should bee made without the sentence judgement and
by the Pope alone and by his authority Of the sixt which was the second at Lions Pope Gregory Indixit l Bin. Not. in Conc. 2. Lugdun ex Blond p. 1495. a. hoc Concilium appointed this Councell Of the seventh which was at Vienna Pope Clement m Bin. ex Tritem Not. in Conc. Vien to 3. Conc. pa. 1510. a. indixit Concilium appointed this Councell Of the Florentine which is the eighth This Synod was ab n Bin. Not. in Conc. Florent to 4. pa. 495. b. Eugenio indicta appointed by Eugenius at the intreaty of the Emperour Of the ninth which was the fift Laterane This was appointed and assembled Authoritate o Bin. Notis in Con. Later 1. sub Leone 10. to 4. Conc. pa. 651. Iulij Papae by the authority of Pope Iulius nor onely was it selfe so assembled but it p Conc. Later sub Leone 10. Sess 11. p. 639. b decreed which was never done before that all generall Councels ought to be so assembled For the last which is their faire Helen q Haec est Helena qua nuper Tridenti obtinuit Espenceon in Epist ad Tit. pa. 42. of Trent the Popes Bull whereby hee appointed summoned and assembled it is set in the forefront of it wherein the Pope saith Conventum r Pauli 3. Bulla indict praesixa Act. Conc. Trid. Mantuae indiximus we have appointed that this Councell should bee held at Mantua but afterwards he removed it to Trent 23. Thus were all the ten assembled by Papall not one of them by Imperiall authority For though some Emperours and Kings consented indeed unto some of them as to the first Laterane Henry 5. to that at Vienna Philip of France and so in some others yet the consent of Emperours and Kings is not sufficient for holding a Councell the authority by which the Bishops are called and come together must bee regall which in all these as Bellarmine ſ Cur tunc non solus Pontifex concilia indixerit ut postea factum est rationes multae sunt Bell. lib. 1. de Concil ca. 13. §. Habemus truly teacheth was onely pontificial Againe that very consent to hold those Councels which Kings then gave was a servile consent not Imperiall nor was it free and willing but coacted and extorted They knew certainly by the dealing of Pope Hildebrand with Henry the fourth what they might expect if they withstood the Popes will or wrastled with such a Giant no lesse than the losse of their Crownes had beene the censure for denying to consent to what the Pope would have them their consent was no other but that by the Popes authority the Synod should bee called and held a consent that the Synod should be called by an unlawfull and usurped authority even such a consent as if a rightfull King being overcome by a Rebell should for feare of his life consent that the Rebell should call and assemble a Parliament and there enact what lawes himselfe listed It is the authority by which those Councels were gathered not by whose consent they were gathered of which we doe now enquire The authority whereby they were assembled was onely in the Pope though to that authority Emperours and Kings consented and as they are not a little brag that the Pope could doe such worthy acts by his authority so are we so farre from denying him to have done this that wee willingly professe the same but withall doe affirme which inevitably ensues thereof that even for this very cause all those Councels are unlawfull because they were called by Papall and not by Imperiall authority This demonstrates them to have assembled without lawfull authority to have beene nothing else than so many great Routs and Riots in the Church so many tumultuous and disorderly Conventicles so much more odious both in the sight of God and men as those who tumultuously and without authority convented should have beene patternes of piety obedience and order unto others 24. Yea and this very exception which may equally be opposed against them all was most justly taken to omit the rest against their Trent Riot when it was congregated by that Papall and usurped authority The King t Innoc. Gentil in Examin Con. Trid. lib. 2. in initio of England gave this as a reason of his refusall to send to it because the right to call Councels belonged to Kings and Emperours nullam vero esse potestatem penes Pontificem but the Pope had no authority to call or assemble a Councell The French King writ a letter to them at Trent and the superscription u Gent. in Exam sess 12. Cōc Trid. pa. 96. Ioh. Sleid. Comment lib. 22. pa. 332. b. et seq was Conventui Tridentino The Fathers stormed and snuffed a long while at that disdaining that the King should write Conventui and not Concilio and hardly were they perswaded to read his letter At last when credence and audience was obtained for Iames Aimiot his Legate he signified before all the Trent Fathers that the King protested and published to al as also before he had done at Rome that he accounted not that assembly pro Oecumenico legitimo Concilio sed pro privato Conventu not for a generall Councell but for a private Convent gathered together for the private benefit and good of some few adding se suosque subditos nullo vinculo ad parendum his quae in eo decreta fuerint obstrictos iri that hee and his subjects would not be tyed by the decrees thereof exhorting further that this his protestation might bee recorded among the Acts of their Synod and that all Christian Kings might have notice thereof The Electours x Epit. rerum in orbe gest sub Ferd. 1. an 1561. apud Scard tom 3. pa. 2171. et seq and Princes of Germany being assembled at Nurimberge when Zacharias Delphinus and Franciscus Commendonius the Popes Legates came to warne them in the Popes name y Summus Pontifex sacrum Concilium Tridenti celebrandii authoritate divinitus sibi tradita decrevit nosque ablegavit nuncios suos qui pij Pontificis nomine singulos conveniremus et rogaremus ut ad Concilium hoc accederent Ibid. to come or send to the Councell of Trent returned this answere unto them Mirantur illustrissimi Electores Principes the most illustrious Electours and Princes doe wonder that the Pope would take upon him Celsitudinibus suis Concilij indictionem obtrudere to obtrude to their Celsitude his appointment of a Councell and that he durst call them to Trent adding wee would have both the Pope and you his Legates to know that wee acknowledge no such authority in the Pope and we are certainly perswaded by the undoubted testimonies both of Gods law and mans Concilij indicendi jus Pontificem Romanum non habere that the Pope hath no authority and right to appoint call or assemble a Councell Thus they whose answer is at large
et qui non audierlut Ecclesiam fuerunt habiti ut Ethnici et Publicani ut legitur de Anastasio et Liberio Resp Synodalis Conc. Bas pa. â—05 a. et pa. eadem b. enumerat Ioh. 12. et alios of the Church in judging and deposing Liberius and Iohn the 12. by the very words of Bellarmine himselfe If the Bishops saith he u Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 21. §. Denique in a Synod can convince the Pope of heresie possunt eum judicare deponere they may judge and depose him And if in any cause he have a superiour Iudge then is he not supreme Seeing then by all these besides infinite moe it is not onely proved but demonstrated that the Pope is not nor ought to be held as supreme Iudge but may in some causes be both judged condemned and deposed and seeing by Bellarmines owne confession none can be judge in his owne cause or of his adversaries towards whom he professeth open enmity but onely the supreme Iudge it inevitably followeth upon the Cardinalls owne words besides evident reason that the Pope neither was in the Councell of Trent nor can be in any Councell a lawfull Iudge either of Protestants or in those causes which he then undertooke to judge in which himselfe was a party and Reus seeing then he should be Iudge in his owne cause which equity and reason the law both divine and humane doe constantly prohibite 34. Adde hereunto the judgement of the ancient and Catholike Church I doe never reade or almost remember the holy Councell of Chalcedon but with a kinde of amazement I admire the rare piety prudence integrity moderation and gravity of those most glorious Iudges who supplying the Emperours place when he was absent were the Imperiall Presidents in that Councell Had they or such like Presidents beene wanting at that time it may justly be feared considering the eagernesse and temerity that I say not the insolency of the Popes Legates in that Synod that the Councell of Chalcedon had proved a worse Latrociny than the second Ephesine was In that Councell both these causes now mentioned fell out the one in Dioscorus the other in Athanasius Bishop of Paros Dioscorus came and sate down in his place among the other Patriarks Bishops as one who would be a Iudge in the causes proposed for in ancient Councels there was a different x Eusebius et Theodoretus in ordine accusantium sedent sicut et vos in loco accusatorum sedetis Conc. Chal. Act. 1. pa. 13. a. place and seats for the Bishops who judged and gave sentence in the Councell and for others who were actors whether plaintiffs and accusers or Rei and accused Now because Dioscorus himselfe was the partie who was called into question and to be judged and equity forbids a man to bee Iudge in his owne cause The Councell and by name the Popes Legates to whom the rest therein assented tooke this just exception thereat and said y Act. 1. Conc. Chal. pa. 5. a. Non patimur we cannot indure this wrong to be done ut iste sedeat qui judicandus advenit that Dioscorus who is to bee judged sit as a Iudge in his owne cause upon which most just and equall motion the glorious Iudges who were Presidents for order commanded Dioscorus to remove z Dioscoro secundum jussionem gloriosiss Judicum resideÌ„te in medio Ibid. from the Bench as I may say of Iudges and to sit in the middle of the Church which was the place both for the Accusers and Rei and Dioscorus accordingly sate there as the glorious Iudges had appointed Vpon the very same ground of equitie did the religious Emperour command in the second Ephesine Synod that if a Epist Theodos et Valent. ad Diosc extat in Actis Conc. Chal. Act. 1. pa. 5. b. any question or cause fell out to be debated concerning Theodoret whom he commanded to be present that then absque illo Synodum convenire the Synod should asseÌ„ble judge that cause without Theodoret he should have no judicatory power in his own cause And the like he further coÌ„manded coÌ„cerning that holy Bish Flavianus He some others had before in the Synod at Constantinople beene Iudges against Eutiches and condemned him An higher even that generall Councell at Ephesus which proved a Latrociny in the end was called to examine b Nunc vos convenistis ut eos qui judicaverant judicciis Elpidij dierum nomine Imper. in Concilia b. Ephes recitatur vero in Conc. Chal. Act. 1. pa. 13. b. that judgment of Flavianus and the rest whether it was just or no. The Emperour commanded c Ibid. those who had beene Iudges of late in loco eorum esse qui judicandi sunt now to bee in the place of Rei such as were to bee judged A demonstration that if Theodosius or Martian or such like worthy and equall Iudges as they were at Chalcedon had been Presidents for order in their Trent assembly the Pope though hee had beene as just and orthodoxall as Flavianus much more being in impiety and heresie farre superiour to Dioscorus should not have beene permitted to sit among the Bishops of the Councell nor have so much as one single decisive suffrage or any judicatory power in his owne cause much lesse have had such a supremacie of judgement that his onely voyce and sentence should over-rule and over-sway the whole Councell besides 35. The other example is this Athanasius Bishop of Paros being accused d Conc. Chal. Act. 14. per totuÌ„ of sundry crimes was called to triall before a Provinciall Councell at Antioch held by Domnus Bishop of that See unto whose Patriarchall authority Athanasius was subject when hee refused to come after three citations hee was deposed by that Synod and Sabinianus by the same authority made Bishop of Paros in his roome In the Councel at Chalcedon Athanasius came complained of wrongfull extrusion and desired of the generall Councell that his Bishopricke might be restored unto him pleading for his refusall to come to trial at the Synod at Antioch nothing else but this e Dicat Athanasius cur tertâ—ò evocatus à Conci io Antiocheno non occurrit Athanasius dixit Quoniam inimicus meus erat ipse qui judicabat et rogo haec relegi et veritateÌ„ probari Ib. pa. 127 b. Solum quia sunt inimicus esset ipse qui judicabat clamavit à sancta Chal. Synodo ad causas illatas sibi examinandas reservatur Epist 8 Nich. 1. § Veniamus that DoÌ„nus who was the chiefe Iudge in that Synod was his enemy and therefore hee thought it not equall to be tryed before him though he was his owne Patriarch The glorious Iudges gave order that the accusations against Athanasius should within eight moneths bee examined by Maximus then Bishop of Antioch and a Synod with him and if he were found guilty of those crimes or any other worthy deposition
he should for ever want the Bishopricke But if either they did not within such time examine the cause or examining it finde the accusations untrue that then the See of Paros should be restored unto Athanasius as unjustly deposed and that Sabinianus should remaine but a substitute unto him untill Maximus could provide him of another Bishopricke Thus ordered the secular Iudges and the whole Councell of Chalcedon approved this sentence crying out Nihil justius nothing is more just nothing is more equall this is a just sentence you judge according to Gods minde O that once againe the world might bee so happy as to see one other such holy Councell as was this of Chalcedon and such worthy Iudges to be Presidents thereof All the Anathemaes and censures of their Councell at Trent where the Romane Domnus our capitall enemy was the chiefe nay rather the onely Iudge would even for this very cause be adjudged of no validity nor of force to bind I say not other Churches such as these of Britany but not those very men who are otherwise subject to the Popes Patriarchall authority as Athanasius was to Domnus Such an holy Councell would cause a melius inquirendum to be taken of all their judgements and proceedings against the Saints of God and unlesse they could justifie which while the Sun and Moone endureth they can never their slanderous crimes of heresie imputed unto us and withall purge themselves of that Antichristian apostasie whereof they are most justly accused and convicted not onely in foro poli but in their owne consciences and by the consenting judgement of the Catholike Church for six hundred nay in some points for fifteene hundred yeares after Christ they should and would by such a Councell bee deposed from all those Episcopall dignities and functions which they have so long time usurped and abused unto all tyranny injustice and subversion of the Catholike Faith 36. As the proceedings in that Councell were all unlawfull on the Popes part so were they also both unlawfull and servile in respect of the other Bishops who were assessors in that Assembly Could there possibly be any freedome or safety for Protestants among them being the children of that generation which had most perfidiously violated their faith and promise to Iohn Hus in the Councell of Constance and murdered the Prophets Among whom that Canon authorizing trecherous and perfidious dealing stood in force Quod f Const Const sess 19. non obstantibus that notwithstanding the safe conducts of Emperours Kings or any other granted to such as come to their Councels Quocunque vinculo se astrinxerint by what bond soever they have tyed themselves by promise by their honour by their oath yet non obstante any such band they may bring them into inquisition and proceed to censure to punish them as they shall thinke fit and then vaunt and glory in their perfidiousnesse saying Caesar obsignavit g Campian Rat. 4. Christianus orbis major Caesare resignavit The Emperour hath sealed this with his promise and oath but our Councell which is above the Emperour hath repealed it it shall not stand in force 37. Could there be any freedome or liberty among those who were by many obligations most servilely addicted to the Pope The Apulian Bishops h Carol. Molin lib. de Concil Trident. nu 21. crying out aliorum omnium nomine in the name of all the rest in their Councell Nihil aliud sumus praeterquam creaturae mancipia sanctissimi patris O we are all but the Popes creatures his very slaves The complaint i Cl. Espenc cont in Epist ad Tit. ca. 1. pa. 42. of the Bishop of Arles might here be renewed which he made of such like Councels at Basil that must bee done and of necessity be done and decreed in Councells quod nationi placeat Italicae which the Italian nation shall affect which country alone k Vt quae sol â— Episcoporum numero nationes alias aequet aut superet ibid. for multitude of Bishops doth equall or exceed other nations and this very Italian faction to have prevailed at Trent their owne Bishop Espencaeus who was at the Councell doth testifie Haec l Jbid. illa Helena est this is the Helena which of late prevailed at Trent this Italian faction overswayed all whereof Molineus m Car. Mol. locò citato gives a plaine instance For when an wholesome Canon that the Pope might not dispence in some matters had like to have beene decreed many in the Councell liking well thereof the Pope procured a respite n Pont fex ad sesquimensem decreti conclusionem ampliari fussit ibid. for that businesse for a month and an halfe during which time some forty poore Bishops of Italy and Sicily were shipped and sent to Trent like so many levis armaturae milites and so the good Canon was by their valour discomsited and rejected by that holy Synod Some of the Councell also were the Popes pensioners and stipendary Bishops nay rather ought than Bishops such as among others were Olaus â—agnus o Olaus lagnus Suevus qui Archiepiscopi Vpsalensis nomen et titulum vendicabat quae quidem regio nec Pontificem unquâ—m nec Ecclesiam Romanam agnovit Gent. Exam. Conc. Trid. sess 1. nu 3 the titular Archbishop of Vpsala in Gothia and Robertus Venantius the titular p Jbid. and blinde Bishop of Armach and yet not halfe so blinde in body as in minde Archbishops q Archiepiscopi sine Archiepiscopatu sine Ecclesia sine Clero sine ullo censu reditu ibid. without Archbishoprickes without a Church without a Clergy without Diocesse without any revenues save a small * Hos Archiepiscopos rerum tenues inopes Romae suis stipeÌ„diis aluerat Pontifex ibid. Olao in singulos menses 15. aureos nummos suppeditabat ibid. pension which the Pope allowed them that they might be cyphers in the Councell and taking his pay might doe him some service for it and grace his Synod with their subscriptions But all the other bonds are as nothing to that r Extr. ad Iurejur ca. Ego N. oath wherewith every one of them was tyed and fettered to the Pope swearing to uphold the Papall authority against all men and to fight Å¿ In nova juramenti forma insuper hoc jurant Episcopi se haereticos omnesque rebelles Pontifici extremè infestaturos persequuturos Grav oppos Conc. Trident p. 2. caus 4 pa. 52. against all that should rebell against him an oath so exercrable that Aeneas Sylvius is t Ibidem in Paral ad Abbat Vsper pa. 41â— mentioned to have said Quod etiam verum dicere contra Papam sit contra Episcoporum juramentum that even to speake the truth to speake for the truth if it be contrary to the Pope is against the oath of Bishops By this they were so tyed ut u Ibid. pa. â—1 ne mutire quidem
many things are praised quae omnia monstrosa sunt prorsus explodenda all which are utterly to be hissed at where also he seemeth to allow the impious Art of Magicke and Divinations His approving of Appolonius and Danis two wicked Magitians who both are relegati ad inferos condemned to Hell And to omit very many of this kinde of impieties and fables which abound in Suidas His narration in verbo Iesus which not onely Baronius rejecteth but Pope Paul the fourth for that cause beside some other k Exploserit in Jndicem lib. prohib exploded the booke of Suidas and placed it in the ranke librorum prohibitorum Such even by the confession of their owne Iesuite is this Suidas a depraver of good a commender of wicked men a fabler a lyer a falsifier of Histories a Magitian an Heretike whose booke is by the Pope forbidden to bee read Such a worthy witnesse hath the Cardinall of his Suidas with whom he conspireth in reviling Iustinian as one utterly unlearned Concerning which untruth I will say no more at this time than that which Gotofrid doth in his censure l Arte lib. Instit of those words of Suidas where calling it in plaine termes a slander he rejects it as it justly deserveth in this manner Valeant calumniae nos sinceriora sequamur Away with this and such like opprobrious slanders of Suidas and Baronius but let us follow the truth 5. His second reproofe of the Emperour is for presuming to make lawes in causes of faith which for Kings and Emperours to doe brings as he saith an hellish confusion into the Church of God The wit of a Cardinal Iustinian may not doe that which King Hezekiah which Asa which Iosiah and Constantine the great the two Theodosii Martian and other holy Emperours before had done and done it by the warrant of God to the eternall good of the Church and their owne immortall fame Had hee indeed or any of those Emperours taken upon them by their lawes to establish some new erronious or hereticall doctrine the Cardinall might in this case have justly reproved them but this they did not what doctrines the Prophets delivered the word of God taught and holy Synods had before decreed and explaned those and none else did Iustinian by his Edict and other religious Emperours ratifie by their imperiall authority Heare Iustinians owne words Wee f Edict Justin in causa trium Capitul in princip have thought it needfull by this our Edict to manifest that right confession of faith quae in sancta Dei Ecclesiâ praedicatur which is preached in the holy Church of God Here is no new faith no Edict for any new doctrine but for maintaining that onely faith which the holy Catholike Church taught and the Councell of Chalcedon had decreed wherein that Iustinian did nothing but worthy of eternal praise the whole fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church approving it is a witnesse aboue exception which entreating of that which Iustinian had done in this cause of the Three Chapters the chiefe of all which was the publishing of his most religious Edict to cōdemne the same saith g Coll. 7. in fine Omnia semper fecit facit quae sanctam Ecclesiam recta dogmata conservant Iustinian hath ever done and as yet doth all things which preserve the holy Church and the true faith So the Councell Is not Baronius minde composed of venome and malice who condemnes and reviles the Emperour as bringing hellish confusion into the Church by publishing that law which to have beene an especiall meanes to preserve the Church and Catholike faith the holy generall Councell and all the whole Catholike Church with it proclameth 6. See here againe the love and respect which Baronius beares to the Imperiall lawes and to those holy and religious Emperors which were the nursing fathers of Gods Church and pillers to uphold the faith in their dayes There are extant in the Theodosian Code many laws cōcerning the Catholike faith concerning Bish Churches and the Clergy concerning Heretikes Apostates Monkes Iewes and Samaritanes concerning Pagan sacrifices and Temples concerning Religion Episcopall judgement those who flee unto Churches and many other of the same kinde lawes wholesome and necessary for those times The like titles are extant also in the Code of Iustinian In the Authenticks there are I know not how many lawes in the like causes Of the foure Councels of the Order of Patriarchs of the building of Churches of goods belonging to sacred places Of the holy Communion of Litanies of the memorials for the dead of the Priviledges of Churches of Patriarchs of the Pope of old Rome of Archbishops of Abbots of Presbyters of Deacons of Subdeacons of Monkes of Anchorites of Synods of deposing Bishops who fall into heresie that Patrons who builded Churches and their heyers shall nominate the Clerks for the same and in case they name such as are unmeet then the Bishop to appoint who he thinks sit that Heretikes shall be uncapable of any legacies and exceeding many the like Now such a spite hath the Cardinall to the Emperours and these their Imperiall lawes made concerning the affaires of the Church that like some new Aristarchus with one dash of his pen hee takes upon him to casheire and utterly abolish those lawes five or sixe hundreth at the least with such care piety and prudēce set forth by Constantine Theodosius Valentinian Gratian Martian Iustinian and other holy and religious Emperours And when these are gone whether the Cardinall meant not after them to wipe away which with as good reason and authority he may all the other lawes which are in the Digest Code and Authenticks that so his master the Pope may play even another Iack Cade that all law might proceed out of his mouth let the judicious consider This is cleare that the Cardinals malice is not satisfied with reproofe of the lawes themselves even these holy Emperors Constantine Theodosius and the rest are together with Iustinian for the making of those lawes touching Ecclesiasticall affaires and persons reproved nay reviled by Baronius as having beene presumptuous persons authors of an hellish confusion in the Church and for turning heaven into hell They and such as they make lawes of faith lawes for Bishops lawes for the Church let them heare as they well deserve and as the * An. 550. nu 14. Cardinall shameth not to upbraid to Iustinian Ne ultra crepidam Sir Cobler goe not beyond you Last and Latchet So indignly doth the Cardinall use those holy and religious Princes and that even for their zeale to Gods truth and love to his Church for that which with exceeding piety and prudence they performed to their owne immortall honor and to the peace and tranquillity of the whole Church of God 7. His third calumnie is that hee revileth Iustinian for his sacrilegious fury and persecution which hee used against Pope Vigilius partly when Vigilius h Bar. an 551.
another mans servant or against uncharitable censures Charity thinketh not evill g 1 Cor. 13.5 it rejoyceth not in iniquity but rejoyceth in the truth why did not the Cardinall harken rather to the judgement of the Church of Constantinople Wherein the memory h Jn ipso Dei Verbi Sapientiae templo quotannis magnificè memoriam ejus celebrari populi universi concione ad rem divinam coacta Nicep lib. 17. ca. 31. of Iustinian was yearely celebrated and that with great pompe and solemnity in the Church of Sophia in the time of divine service all the people being assēbled The like celebrity i Ibid. of his memory was observed at Ephesus in the Church of Saint Iohn which he had builded Or if the authority of these particular Churches could not sway the Cardinall seemed it a small matter unto him to contemne the consenting judgement of Pope Agatho and his Romane Councell which ranke him among the glorious and blessed Saints in heaven with Saint Constantine Theodosius and Martian yea of the whole sixt generall Councell wherein his memory is so often called holy blessed divine happy and the like if his memory then much more himselfe is happy and blessed for to the just onely doth that honor belong The k Pro. 10.7 memoriall of the just shall be blessed but the name of the wicked shall rot To which purpose that is specially to be observed which Nicephorus addeth in plaine termes of the sixt generall Councell Iustinianum l Loc. citat beata quiete dignatur It placeth Iustinian in blessed rest and peace and againe Semper eum qui in Sanctis est Iustinianum dicunt That general Councell ever calleth Iustinian one who is a Saint and among the Saints Adde to all these that seeing by the Cardinals confession the Epistles of Agatho In omnibus and therefore even in that which he saith of this holy Emperour That hee is a blessed Saint venerable in all Nations are to be imbraced as divine Oracles it may bee truly concluded that Iustinian not onely by the testimonies of mortall men and of all nations but even by the voyce of God himselfe is blessed and hath ever since his death and doth now rest and raigne with God When by the unpartiall judgement of S. Agatho of the Romane Synod of the whole sixt generall Councell of all Nations yea of God himselfe Iustinian is proclamed to be a venerable Saint now resting raigning with God in heaven who is Baronius a man of yesterday that after a thousand years possession of that heavenly rest he should unsaint him dethrone him and thrust him downe to the lowest pit and most hideous torments of hell I' st not enough for that Hildebrandicall generation to devest Kings Emperors of their earthly diadems unless in the pride of their hearts climbing up into heaven they thrust them out thence also deprive them of their crowns of immortality eternal glory 43. And yet were there neither Historian nor Pope nor Provinciall nor Generall Councell to testifie this felicity of Iustinian unto us that very text out of which being maimed the Cardinall sucked poyson and collected His death damnation doth so forcible prove the beatitude of Iustinian that it alone may bee sufficient in this cause The Cardinall cites but one part of the text but the whole doth manifest his fraud and malicious collection Apoc. 14.13 Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from hence forth even so saith the Spirit for they rest from their labours and opera illorum sequuntur illos their workes follow them which last words the Cardinall onely alleageth and applyeth them to Iustinian Now who are Those that are meant by Their works and follow Them who are those Them that the Spirit meaneth in that text Out of al doubt those selfe-same of whom before he spake Them that dye in the Lord Them that are blessed and rest from their labours Of Them the Spirit there saith Opera illorum Their workes follow Them Seeing then the Cardinall confesseth this text to belong to Iustinian and himselfe applyeth it unto him it certainly hence followeth that Iustinian is of their number who dye in the Lord and are blessed for of Them and Them onely doth the holy Ghost speake in that text saying They rest from their labours and Their workes follow Them So hard it is for the Cardinal to cite or say ought against Iustinian which doth not redound to the Emperours honour and the Cardinals owne ignominie 44. But let us suppose the words to bee generall as being uttered alone without any reference to that text they may bee truly affirmed both of the good bad There cannot be found in al Scripture more faire evidence nor a more authentike Charter for the happy estate of any one in particular that lived since the Apostles times then is this for Iustinian For what were those workes which did accompanie and follow Iustinian Truely the workes of sincere faith of fervent zeale to GOD of love to the Church and Children of God the workes of piety of prudence of justice of fortitude of munificence of many other heroicall vertues with these as with a garment and chaine of pure Gold Iustinian being decked was brought unto the Bridegroom every decree made or ratified by him for confirming the faith every Anathema denounced against heresies heretiks particularly those against Vigilius al that defend him that is against Baronius and all who defend the Popes infallibility in defining causes of faith everie Temple or Church every Monastery and Hospitall every City and Towne everie Bridge Haven and High-way every Castle Fort and Munition whether made or repaired by him tending either immediately to the advancement of Gods service or to the maintaining or relieving of Gods servants or strengthning the Empire against his and Gods enemies every booke in the Digest Code and Authentikes every Title yea every law in any title whereby either the Christian faith and religion or peaceable order and tranquillity have beene either planted or propagated or continued either in the Church or Common-wealth all these and every one of them and many other the like which I cannot either remember or recount are like so many Rubies Chrysolites and Diamonds in the costly garment or so many linkes in that golden chaine of his faith and vertues Seeing they who offer but one mite into the treasury of the Lord or give but one cup of cold water to a Prophet shall not want a reward O! what a weight of eternity and glory shall that troope of vertues and traine of good workes obtaine at his hands who rewardeth indeed every man according to their workes but withall rewardeth them infinitely above all the dignity or condignity of their workes 45. If Iustinian and those who are beautified with so many vertues and glorious works be as the Card. judgeth tormented in hell belike the Cardinall himselfe hoped by workes contrary unto
intends such a calamity as hapned before the condemning of the three Chapters but after the condemning of the Acephali Now it is certaine by the Acts of the fift Councell and by the Emperours testimony that as the Easterne Bishops so also Vigilius presently after he came to Constantinople consented to condemne the three Chapters yea condemned them by a Pontificall decree and judgement and continued in that minde till the time of the fift Councell at which time by the general Synod they were also condemned Gregory then should have spoken against himselfe had hee meant Vigilius and his comming to Constantinople in saying that after the sentence of Vigilius against Theodora the City was besieged and taken as it was once againe indeed taken by Totilas p Proc. lib. eodē 3. an 15. belli Goth. pa. 394. in the 23. yeare of Iustinus for his adversaries to whom he writ being defenders of the three Chapters would have replyed against him that this calamity befell them from the very same cause seeing both the Easterne Bishops and the Pope consented in that doctrine of condemning of the three Chapters Thus it appeareth not by surmises and conjectures but by certaine and evident proofe that the text of Gregory is corrupted or else that Gregory himselfe was mistaken therein which in a matter so neare his dayes wee may not thinke and so that it was not Vigilius but Agapetus whom Gregory intended to denounce that sentence against the Acephali or Theodora of which Baronius maketh such boast and commends with such great ostentation that thereby he might make the Empresse who was a condemner of the three Chapters more odious and strengthen that fiction and fabulous tale of Anastasius that Vigilius contended with Iustinian and Theodora about Anthimus CAP. XXII How Baronius declameth against the cause it selfe of the Three Chapters and a refutation thereof 1. BAronius not content to wrecke his spite upon the Emperour and Empresse in such uncivill manner as you have seene carpes in the next place at the very cause it selfe of the three Chapters What did Vigilius saith hee a Bar. an 547. nu 48. offend in appointing that men should be silent and say nothing untill the future Synod of this cause of the three Chapters which if it could have beene potius perpetuo erat silentio condemnanda sopienda sepelienda atque penitus extinguenda was rather to be condemned to perpetuall silence to be buried and utterly extinguished Againe b an 553. n. 237 I doe never feare to avouch that it had beene much better that the Church had remained without these controversies about the three Chapters nec unquam de his aliquis habitus esset sermo and that there had never beene one word spoken of them Thus Baronius 2. What thinke you moved the Cardinall to have such an immortall hatred to this cause as to wish the condemning buriall and utter extinguishing of those controversies What more hurt did this to the Church than the question abut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or about the opinion of Eutiches Very great calamity saith Baronius c Jbidem insued upon this controversie both in the East and West True it did so and so there did and far greater and longer about the controversie of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and more againe than that upon the question whether the Gospell or Paganisme should prevaile and yet by moving those controversies was the faith propagated the truth of Christ spred abroad the blood of Martyrs was made the seed of the Gospell No affliction calamity or persecution is a just cause either to wish that there had never beene any such controversie or to forsake the truth of God when the controversie is moved It was an excellent saying of the Aegyptian Bishops in the Councell of Chalcedon d Act. 1. pa. 8. Christianus neminem timet a Christian feareth no mortall man si homines timerentur martyres non essent if men should be feared there would be no Martyrs But the truth is it was not as Baronius fancieth the controversie it selfe nor the disputing and debating thereof that caused so great calamities in the East and West that is non causa pro causa the peevishnesse and perversenesse of wicked men maintaining heresies and oppugning the truth that was the true cause thereof The controversie it selfe if you well marke it was very beneficiall to the Church Oportet haereses e 1 Cor. 11.19 esse there must be heresies among you that they which are approved might bee knowne Every heresie is a probation and tryall of mens love to God and his truth whether they esteeme it more than their honours pleasures and their owne wilfull conceits and the greater the heresie is and the further it spreads it is still a greater tryall Heretikes saith S. Austen f Lib. de ver◠relig ca. 8. doe much profit the Church though they be out of the Church not by teaching the truth which they doe not know but by stirring up those who are more carnall Catholikes to seeke and those who are more spirituall to defend and manifest the truth This triall and probation of men if I mistake not was never so great in any controversie or question as in this of the three Chapters First it sifted and tryed Vigilius to the full and tryed him to be a wether-cocke in faith an heretike and a defender of heresies even by his Apostolicall authority Next it sifted out divers notable conclusions as first that which I think was never before that tryed that not onely the Pope but the Apostolike See also to wit the Romane Church and with it the Westerne Churches all at once adhered to heresie and forsooke the truth and that even after it was decreed and judged by the generall approved Councell and so it proved both Pope and Romane Church to be properly hereticall the Easterne Churches constantly upholding the truth at that time it shewed that the Catholike faith was tied neither to the Chair nor Church of Rome Another conclusion then tryed was that either persons or Churches may not onely dissent from the Pope and the Romane Church and that in a cause of faith judicially defined by the Pope with a Synod but may renounce communion with them and yet remaine Catholikes and in the unity of the Catholike Church the Pope the Westerne Church and all that adheered unto them being then by forsaking the Catholike faith Heretikes and by forsaking the unity of the Church Schismatikes 3. Neither onely was this controversie a triall to them in that age a tryall of their faith love to God charity to the Church obedience to the Emperour but it is as great a triall even in these our dayes and ever since that doctrine of the Popes infallibility in causes of faith hath beene defined and condemned By this controversie most happly decided by the generall Councell all that hold the Popes definitions of faith to be infallible
that is all that are Papists or members of the present Church of Rome they are all hereby tryed to defend this Apostolicall Constitution of Vigilius that is to maintaine all the blasphemies of the Nestorians to deny the Catholike faith the doctrine of the Apostles of the primative Church of the fift generall Councell so to be not only heretikes but convicted anathematized and cōdemned heretikes by the judgement of a generall approved Councell and so by the consenting judgement of the Catholike Church Further yet there is a tryall of them whether upon that ground or foundation of the Popes infallibility they will build up and maintaine any other doctrine or position of faith or religion if they doe as indeed every point of the Romish faith and Religion relyeth upon that they are againe hereby tryed to be hereticall not onely in the foundation but in every position and doctrine of their faith and religion which relyes upon that foundation 4. This was it which netled Baronius and extorted from him those earnest and affectionate wishes that this controversie had never beene heard of nor mentioned in the world he saw what a tryall was like to be made by it of men of doctrines of Churches of the Pope himselfe and their whole Romish Church and seeing that tryall he never ceased to say that it had beene much better that this controversie had never beene moved nor spoken of for so they had avoided this most notable triall Blessed be God for that it pleased him in the infinite depth of his unspeakable wisedome to cause this controversie to be ventilated and discussed to the utmost that among many other tryals this might be one of the Antichristian Synagogue to try them even untill the very destruction of Antichrist It is for heretikes whose errors and obstinacy is tryed and discovered to the world it is for them I say to wish that the controversies about Arianisme Nestorianisme Eutycheanisme and the like had never beene moved they had scaped the just censures and anathemaes by that meanes But Catholikes have cause to rejoyce and triumph in such controversies by which both the truth which they maintaine is made more resplendent and victorious themselves and their faith tryed to be like refined gold the Church thereby is quieted the truth propagated heresies confounded and the glory of Almighty God much more magnified and praysed CAP. XXIII How Baronius revileth both the Imperiall Edict of Iustinian and Theodorus B. of Caesarea and a refutation of the same 1. SEeing now notwithstanding the wishing of Baronius this controversie could not be buried it ought him and all ill-willers of it a greater shame than that in the next place let us see how he declameth both against the Emperors Edict whereby these three Chapters were condemned Theodorus Bish of Caesarea who as he saith was the author penner of that Edict The Edict it self he calleth first Seminarium a An. 534. n. 2◠dissentionū a seed-plot of sedition which was never made upon a good occasion nor had any good end And not content herewith he tells b An. 546. nu 9. us out of Facundus that it is contrary to the faith yea even to that faith which Iustinian himselfe professed as orthodoxall to which effect also Baronius himselfe saith c Ibid. nu 8. that the Emperours Edict was set forth contrary to the three Chapters of the most holy Councell of Chalcedon But he specially seekes to disgrace it by the author of it for though it was published by Iustinian yet saith he d Edere sanctiones sibi arrogat Iustin quas dolose conscripsissent haeretici an 546. nu 41. Egerunt callide adversarii veritatis c. ibid. nu 9. it was written and that craftily by heretikes and adversaries to the truth by the e Ingenue professus est Origenistarum studiis ea fuisse ab Jmperatore promulgata ibid. nu 49. Origenists and in particular by f Illud à Theodoro conscriptū edictum suo nomine Iustin promulgavit ibid. nu 8. Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea one gratious g an 538. nu 85 potent and familiar with the Emperour and for proofe of all this the Cardinall citeth Liberatus h an 546. nu 9. an 534. nu 21. alibi Facundus and Vigilius 2. Having thus declared Theodorus to be the author and writer of the Edict Baronius then rageth against Theodorus as if he were to act veterē comoediam or according to the Proverbe ex plaustro to raile out of a cart against him calling him factious i Justin factiosorum studijs se inseruit an 550. nu 14. fraudulēt k Hominem vafrum an 551. nu 4. 564. nu 7. impudēt l Ejus gratia factus impudens ibid. nu 3. a most wicked m Theodorum illum nequissimum quem mirum in modum favisse ostendimus Origenis haeresibus an 564. nu 6. occullum haereticum manifestum schismaticum an 551. nu 5. Praeceps Origenista an eod nu 4. hereticall schismaticall headstrong Origenist the ring-leader of the Origenists one marvellously addicted to the heresie of Origen nor onely a servant to Origens errors but also n Non Origenis tantum errorum assecla sed Eutychianae blasphemia vehementissimus propugnator an 564. nu 7. a most earnest defender of the Eutychean blasphemy nor onely so but plunged o Ita miser Iustinianus caecus cacum Theodorum sectans cū īpso pariter mergitur in profundum an 564. nu 7. agit autē de haresi Aphthardochitarum in the heresie of the Aphthardokites or Phantastickes and like a blinde guide leading the blinde Emperour into that ditch of heresie a sacrilegious p Iuque sacrilegum Theodorum pseudoepiscopum imotyrannum insurgit in perversorem legum eversorem juriū an 551. nu 5. person a pseudobishop a tyrant a perverter of lawes an overthrower of right the q Qui Imperatori omnium illi malorum causa fuit an 551. n. 3 author of all mischiefe to the Empire the very r Hic igitur nefandissimus totius Ecclesiae pestis an 564. nu 7. plague of the whole Church Thus and much more doth Baronius utter against Theodorus by whom being so unworthy an author hee would disgrace the Edict it selfe which he writ though the Emperour published it 3. Let us first begin with that most untrue and malicious calumny of Baronius that the Emperor published his Edict against the three Chapters of the Councell of Chalcedon Truly the Cardinall should and might most truly have said the quite contrary that he published his Edict for defence not onely of the three but of every Chapter of every position of every decree of the Councell of Chalcedon The three Chapters which that Imperiall Edict and after it the fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church condemneth were not Chapters of the Councell of Chalcedon but three impious positions assertions or as they were by an
Like lips like lettuce Such a writing is a most fit witnesse for Baronius who delighteth in untruths and not finding true records to give testimony to them it was fit hee should applaud the most vile and abject forgeries if they seeme to speak ought pleasing to the Cardinals pallate or which may serve to support his untruths 9. You see that yet it appeares not that Theodorus was the writer or penner of this Decree none of Baronius his witnesses affirming it and Liberatus who is the best of them all affirming the contrary I might now with this answer put off a great part of those reviling speeches which Baronius so prodigally bestoweth on Theodorus But I minde not so to leave the Cardinall nor suffer the proud Philistine so insolently to revile and insult over any one of the Israelites much lesse this worthy Bishop of Cesarea to whom hee could not have done a greater honor than in that which he intended as an exceeding disgrace to him to call and account him the Author and Writer of this Edict It is no small honour that Iustinian so wise and religious an Emperour should commit the care of so waighty a matter to Theodorus that hee should have him in so high esteeme as account his word an Oracle to bee guided and directed by his judgement so to adhere unto him as Constantine did to that renowned Hosius as to thinke it a piaculum or great offence not to follow his advice in matters of so great waight consequence and importance Nay this one Edict supposing with the Cardinall Theodorus to bee the Author of it shall not onely pleade for Theodorus but utterly wipe away all those vile slanders of heresie impiety imprudency and the like so often and so odiously objected and exaggerated by the Cardinall against him this writing and the words thereof being as whosoever readeth them will easily conceive and if hee deale ingenuously confesse the words of truth of faith of sobriety of profound knowledge evidences of a minde full fraught with faith with piety with the love of God and Gods Church and in a word full of the holy Ghost As Sophocles k Cic. de Senect being accused to doate recited his Oedipus Coloneus and demanding whether that did seeme the Poeme of a doating man was by the sentence of all the Iudges acquitted So none can reade this Edict but forthwith acknowledge it a meere calumny in Baronius to call the maker of it an heretike whose profession of faith is so pious divine and Catholike Or rather Theodorus may answer that Baronian slander with the like words as did S. Paul l Act. 24.12.13 They neither found me making an uproare among the people nor in the Synagogues nor in the City neither can they prove these things whereof they now accuse mee but this I confesse that after this way declared in this Edict which they call heresie so worship I the God of my fathers 10. Now as this may serve for a generall Antidote at once as it were to expell all the whole poyson of those Baronian calumnies so if we shall descend to particulars the innocency of Theodorus as also the malice and malignity of Baronius will much more clearly appeare The crimes objected to Theodorus by Baronius are reduced to three heads one his threefold heresie another his opposing himselfe to Pope Vigilius or the Decree of Taciturnity in the cause of the Three Chapters the third his misleading of Iustinian into the heresie of the Aphthardokites and so causing that great persecution of the Church which thereupon ensued all the other disgracefull termes are but the superfluity of that malice which the Cardinall beares against all that were opposite to Vigilius and his Apostolicall Constitution To begin then with that which is easiest the two last crimes are not so easily uttered as refuted they both are nothing else but meere slanders and calumnies without any certaine ground or probability of truth devised either by Baronius himselfe or by such as he is enemies and haters of the truth and truly for the later his misleading Iustinian into the heresie of the Apthardokites that is not onely a manifest untruth for Iustinian as wee have before m Ca. 20. proved did not onely at all hold that heresie but it is wholly forged and devised by Baronius he hath not any one Author no not so much as a forged writing to testifie this no nor any probable collection out of any Author to induce him to lay this imputation upon Theodorus the world is wholly and soly beholden to the Cardinall for this shamelesse calumny and yet see the wisedome of Baronius herein hee was not content barely and in a word to taxe and reprove Theodorus which had beene more than sufficient having no proofe nor evidence of the crime but in this passage as if hee had demonstratively proved Theodorus to bee guilty hereof hee rageth and foameth like a wilde Bore against him calling him a most wicked man and most vehement propugner of blasphemy the plague of the whole Church who with a visor affrayed the Emperour like a little Boy from the truth and led him captive into heresâ—e Doe you not thinke that the Cardinall needed to be sent to Anticyra when he writ this not onely without truth but without braine and ordinary sense 11. The other crime that Theodorus opposed himselfe to Vigilius and to the decree of silence is like the former save that this difference is to be observed betwixt them that the former was forged by Baronius but this later is grounded on a foolish and forged writing applauded by Baronius fictions and forgeries they are both but the one was fained to the Cardinals hand for the other hee was faine to beate it out of his owne anvill There was neither any such decree for taciturnity neither did Theodorus nor needed hee to oppose himselfe to Vigilius for Vigilius as well as Theodorus all the whole time almost from his comming to Constantinople till the fift Councell was assembled wholly consented to condemne the Three Chapters as besides other evident proofes before alleaged to which I remit the reader that one testimony of the Emperour doth undeniably demonstrate Quod n Epist Iustin ad Conc. 5. Act. 1 pa. 520. a. vero ejusdem voluntatis semper fuit de condemnatione Trium Capitulorum per plurima declaravit Vigilius hath by very many things declared that he hath been alwayes since his comming to Constantinople of the same minde in condemning the Three Chapters what thinke you here againe of Baronius who upon this occasion of contradicting Vigilius his decree of silence reviles Theodorus calling o Locis supra citatis him sacrilegious a Pseudo-Bishop a tyrant a schismatike a perverter of lawes the author of all evils and yet when the Cardinall hath said all this there is no truth nor reality in the cause and occasion for which hee thus rageth and revileth no opposition to Vigilius no
fift Synod they obtained now they added to the words of the Synod this clause qui est Dominus unus de sancta Trinitate A very perilous corruption sure to expresse that clause which all the Bishops of Rome semper excipio Hormisdam with all Catholikes beleeved and taught which whosoever denieth or wil not professe is anathematized and excluded from the Catholike Church Is not this thinke you a very sore corruption of the Councell of Chalcedon Is not the Cardinall a rare man of judgement that could spie such a maine fault in these Acts of the fift Councell that they professe Christ to be unum de sancta Trinitate to which profession both they and all other were bound under the censure of an anathema 7. Yea but in the Acts those words are cited as the words of the Councell of Chalcedon whose they are not A meere fancy and calumny of the Cardinall they are plainly set downe as the words of the fift Synod whose indeed they are and it relateth not precisely the words of the Councell of Chalcedon nor what it there expressed totidem verbis but the true summe and substance of what is there decreed For thus they say i Coll. 6. pa. 575. a. The holy Synod of Chalcedon in the definition which it made of faith doth professe God the Word incarnate to be made man this is all they report of the Councell of Chalcedon as by the opposition of Ibas his Epistle is apparent wherein they oppose not that he denyed Christ to be one of the Trinity but that hee called them heretikes who taught the Word incarnate to be made man That clause which they adde That Christ is one of the Trinity is an addition of the fift Councell it selfe explicating that of Christ which the Emperours Edict bound them to professe as being the true sense and meaning of the Councell at Chalcedon but not as being word for word set downe in the decree of Chalcedon And even as he were more than ridiculous who would accuse one to corrupt the Councell of Chalcedon for saying they professed Christ to be God and man who was borne in Bethleem and fled from Herod into Aegypt so is the Cardinall as ridiculous in objecting this as a corruption of the Synod or addition to the Councell of Chalcedon that they say the Councell taught the Word of God to bee man who is our Lord Iesus Christ one of the holy Trinity Both additions are true but neither of them affirmed to be expresly and totidem verbis set downe in the Councell of Chalcedon Why but looke to the Cardinals proofe for he would not for any good affirme such a matter without proofe What doe yee aske for proofe of the Cardinall I tell you it is proofe enough that he sayth it and truly in this poynt he produceth neither any proofe nor any shadow of reason to prove either that those words are falsely inserted into the Acts of the fift Councell or that the fift Councell cited them as the very expresse words of the Councell of Chalcedon all the proofe is grounded on his old Topicke place Ipse dixit which is a sory kind of arguing against any that love the truth for although against the Pope or their popish cause any thing which he writeth is a very strong evidence against them seeing the Cardinall is very circumspect wary to let nothing no not a syllable fall from him which may in the least wise seem to prejudice the Popes dignity or the cause of their Church unlesse the maine force and undeniable evidence of truth doe wrest and wring it from his pen yet in any matter of history wherein he may advantage the Pope or benefit their cause it is not by many degrees so good to say the illustrissimus Cardinalis affirmes it which is now growne a familiar kinde of proofe among them k Vide Gretz tractatus varios alios ejus farinae as to say Ovid Aesop or Iacobus Voraginensis affirme it therefore it is certainly true His Annals in the art of fraudulent vile and pernicious untruths farre excell the most base fictitious Poemes or Legends that ever as yet have seene the Sunne CAP. XXVI The second alteration of the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius for that Ibas is sayd therein to have denyed the Epistle written to Maris to be his refuted 1. THe second thing which our Momus a Dum falsa quaedam ibi in Actis 5. Concilij asserta reperiuntur de impostura non mediocrem suspicionem inducunt cum viz. ibi dictum habetur Ibam negasse Epistolā esse suam Bar. an 553. nu 211 carpeth at is for that in these Acts it is sayd that Ibas denyed the Epistle written to Maris to bee his which saith Baronius is untrue for Ibas professed the Epistle to be his And Binius not content to call it with the Cardinall an untruth in plaine termes affirmes b Duo aut plura mendacia de Ibae epistola leguntur Bin. Notis in Conc. 5. pa. 606. b. Acta Conc. 5. nō uno loco indicant quod Ibas Epistolam non agnoverit verū haec sententia c. iid p. 607. a it to be a lye Had not hatred to the truth corrupted or quite blinded the judgement of Baronius and Binius they would never have quarelled with the Acts about this matter nor for this accused them to have beene corrupt They may as well collect the Edict of Iustinian or that famous Epistle of Pope Gregorie wherein he writeth of Ibas and the three Chapters to be corrupted and of no credit as well as the Acts of the fift Councell for in both c Ibas non est ausus eam suam dicere Epistolam Iustin edictum pa. 496. b. Epistolam Jbas denegat suam Greg. lib. 7. Epist 53. them the same is said concerning the deniall of Ibas which is in these Acts. If notwithstanding the avouching of that denyall they may passe for sincere and incorrupt it was certainly malice and not reason that moved the Cardinall and Binius to carpe at the Acts for this cause which will much more appeare if any please but to view the Acts themselves For this is not spoken obitèr nor once but the Councell insisteth upon it repeateth it in severall d Abnegans Epistolam Coll. 6. pa. 563. b. Eo quod abnegabat Ibas illa Coll. eadem pa. 564. a. Vnde Jbas eam abnegabat ibid. alibi places and divers times and if those words were taken away there would be an apparent hiatus in the text of those Acts. The words then are truly the words of the true Acts the corruption is onely in the braine of Baronius and Binius 2. Now whereas the Cardinall and Binius so confidently affirme this to be untrue or a lye that Ibas denyed his Epistle and so accuse the whole Councell to lye in this matter they doe but keepe their owne tongues and pens inure with calumnies the untruth
onely a briefe mention that Origen and his errours were condemned Baronius adds one speciall point further out of Cedrenus that in this fift Councell first f An. eod nu 242. porro de Origine actum esse in Synodo ponitur inde vero de Theodoro c. they handled the cause against Origen and then against the Three Chapters So by the Cardinals profession there wants the whole first action in these Acts of this Synod which it may be had many Sessions as the other Action about the three Chapters Besides this there wants also saith hee g CaeteruÌ„ et illas putamus esse his actis de Origine subjectas literas imperatoris ad Mennam Origenis errores continâ—ntes Bar. an eod 553. nu 242. the letters or Edict published by Iustinian Thirdly there wants h Fuisse eandem Epistolam quam Cedrenus recital ad Synodum datam actis ejus intextam nemo jure dubitarit ut ex his intelligas quam plurima desiderari Bar. an eod nu 243. the Epistle of Iustinian sent to the Synod about the condemning of Origen which is set downe by Cedrenus out of whom both Baronius reciteth it and Binius adjoyns it at the end of the Acts among the fragments which are wanting in these Acts. These three defects touching the cause of Origen doth the Cardinall alleage 3. But in very deed none of these three nor ought else which Baronius mentioneth argue any defect at all in these Acts but they evidently demonstrate in the Card. a maine defect of judgement and an overflowing superabundance of malice against this holy Synod and these true Acts thereof That the cause of Origen was not as hee supposeth the first Action or the first cause handled by the Synod I might alleage the most cleare testimony of his i An. eod nu 238. owne witnesse Nicephorus who after the narration of the three Chapters and the Synodall sentence touching them delivered which he accounts for the first Session of the Synod addeth k Niceph. Col. â—st lib 17. Eccl. Histor ca. 27. In secunda autem Sessione but in the second SessioÌ„ the Libels against the impious doctrines of Origen were offred read and Iustinian rursum SynoduÌ„ de eis sententiaÌ„ ferre jussit commanded againe the Synod to give sentence in that cause So Nicephorus whereby it is evident that the Cardinal and his Cedrenus are foully deceived in saying that the cause of Origen was first handled by the Synod and after that the cause of the three Chapters but I oppose to these farre greater and even authentike records the Epistle of the Emperour l Extat Conc. 5. Coll. 1. to the Synod who at the beginning and first meeting of the Bishops in the Councell proposed to their handling the cause of the Three Chapters and no other at all commanding them without delay to discusse and give their judgement in that I oppose the definition and Synodall decree m Collat. 8. wherein is set downe their whole proceeding and what they handled almost every day of their meeting from the beginning to the ending so that it alone is as a Thesean thred which wil not permit a man to erre in this cause unlesse he maliciously shut his eyes against the truth and wilfully depart out of that plaine path They n Pro Dei voluntate jussione pijssimi Imperatoris convenimus Jbid. came to the Synod to decide the controversie then moved about the Three Chapters at the command of the Emperour before they entred to the handling thereof they often intreated by their messengers Pope Vigilius to come together with them which was all that they did in the first o 1. Coll. 4. die Maij. second p 2. Coll. 8. die Maij. day of their meeting or Collation when Vigilius would not come then by the Apostles admonition they prepared themselves to the handling of the cause proposed by setting downe a confession of their faith consonant to the foure former Councels and exposition of the Fathers and promising in their next meeting to handle the cause of the Three Chapters which was the summe of the third q 3. Coll. 9. die Maij. dayes Collation Cumque r Loc. cit Coll. 8. pa. 584. ita confessi simus initium fecimus examinationis trium Capitulorum and when wee had made this confession wee began the examination of the Three Chapters loe they did initium sumere they began with this Could they speak more plainly that the cause of Origen was not first handled as if prophetically they meant to refute this untruth of Baronius and Cedrenus and wee first discussed the cause of Theodorus Mopsvestenus out of his owne writing there read before us This was all they did the fourth Å¿ Coll. 4. 12. die Maij. and a great part of the fift t Coll. 5. 14 die Maij. pridiè Idus Maij. Bar. an 553. nu 41. day of their CollatioÌ„ His de Theodoro discussis pauca de Theodoreto next after the discussing of the Chapter touching Theodorus wee caused a few things to bee repeated out of the impious writings of Theodoret for the satisfying of the reader and this they did in the end of the fift day or Collation Tertio loco Epistola quam Ibas In the third place we proposed and examined the Epistle of Ibas and this they did at large and it was all they did in the sixt u 6. Coll. 19. Maij. day of their Collation The whole cause being thus and as the Councell confesseth most diligently and sufficiently examined the Councell as it seemeth by their owne words in the end of the sixt Collation intended to proceed to sentence in the next day of their meeting but before ought was done therein the Emperour sent unto the Synod certaine letters of Vigilius testifying his condemning of those Three Chapters and some other writings the reading of theÌ„ is all was done in the seventh x 7. Coll. 26. die Maij. day of their Collation Now for that the cause was sufficiently examined before and these letters were read onely for a further evidence but not for necessity of the cause and for that the Synod did nothing themselves but onely heard the letters and applauded the Emperours zeale and care for the truth therefore it is that this seventh Collation and what was done therein is omitted in the Synodall sentence and the Councell which on that seventh day had made ready and intended to have pronounced their sentence by this occasion deferred it to the next which was the eighth y 8. Coll. 2. die Iunij day of their Collation using these for the last words of their seventh dayes meeting De tribus capitulis altero die adjuvante Deo Synodicam sententiam proferemus God willing wee will pronounce our Synodall sentence touching this cause of the three Chapters the next day And so they did in that eighth which was their last day of Collation Thus
not onely by Nicephorus and the Emperours Epistle but by the evident testimony of the whole Synod in the synodall sentence it is undoubtedly certaine that the cause of Origen was not as he fancieth the first action or cause handled in the Synod and that he doth but play the Mome in carping at the Acts for want of the first Action 4. It may bee yet that the cause of Origen was the second action in the fift Synod as Nicephorus z Loco citato saith and after him Evagrius * Evag. lib. 4. ca. 37. and that is enough to prove the defects of these Acts. No it was not the second neither as it was not before so neither was it handled after the other of the Three Chapters witnesse the Synodall sentence it selfe wherein all the matters which every day they examined and discussed are set downe and repeated after repetition they testifie a Coll. 8. p. 586. a also Repetitis igitur omnibus quae apud nos acta sunt all things being repeated which were done or handled by way of discussion among us or in this Synod Seeing they repeated all that was debated among them and make no mention of this cause of Origen it is undoubtedly certaine that Origens cause was not debated either first or last in the Synod it was neither the first action as Cedrenus and Baronius nor the second as Evagrius and Nicephorus suppose besides the very determination of the Synod evidently declares the errours of Nicephorus and Evagrius The books say they b Niceph. et Evag. loc citat against the doctrine of Origen being offered to the Synod the Emperour demanded of the Councell Quid de his statueret What it would decree concerning those doctrines A matter utterly incoherent and improbable for in the synodall decree concerning the three Chapters which they suppose to be made before this cause of Origen was either heard or proposed the Councell had expresly delivered their judgement and condemned both Origen and his impious writings When they had already condemned both him and his errors what an incongruity is it to make the Emperour demand what they would decree of him and his errours Or may we thinke that the holy Synod would first condemne Origen and his impious writings as they did in the synodall sentence against the three Chapters and then afterwards examin the matter and make an enquiry whether Origen and his writings were to bee condemned or not which were to follow that disorder which the Switzers are reported to have used in judgement which was most justly called Iudicium vetitum to execute a man and then try and examine whether he ought to be executed or not Farre be it from any to imagine such injustice and rashnesse to have beene in this holy generall Councell Seeing then they condemned and accursed Origen and all his errours in that which Nicephorus and Evagrius account the former Session it is ridiculous to think that either the Emperour urged or that they themselves would in the second Session goe Switzer-like to examine the bookes and doctrines of Origen whether he they ought to be condemned Some doubt perhaps may arise out of those words in the Councell d Coll. 5. p. 552. a which the Cardinall slily e An. 553. nu 42 haec acta inquit desiderantur in Synodâ— c. alledgeth Origen was condemned in the time of Theophilus Quod etiam nunc in ipsa fecit vestra Sanctitas which your Holinesse hath now done and Pope Vigilius also But if the words be marked they make nothing against that which I have said for neither hath that Nunc a relation to this present Councell for it is certaine that in it Vigilius did not condemne Origen seeing he was not at all present in the Synod but to this age he was condemned in former ages as namely by Theophilus and now also that is in this your age and even by your selves and by Vigilius and if ought else were imported thereby yet is it onely said that Origen was now condemned which was indeed done by the Synod but that his cause was then examined and debated there neither is it true neither doe the words any way imply 5. Nay I adde further not onely that this Councell did not debate this cause of Origen but it had beene both superfluous and an open wrong to themselves and to the whole Church to have entred into the examination thereof For beside many other former judgements not many e Anno nempe 12. Iustiniani Vigilii 2. ut notat Bar. an 538. nu 29. et 31. yeares before in the time of Mennas both the Emperour in an Imperiall Edict f Extat Edict to 2. Conc. pa. 482. et seq had condemned Origen and his errors and by the Emperours command Mennas with a Synod of Bishops then present at Constantinople had confirmed that condemnation the other Bishops who were absent did the like the Emperour requiring every Patriarke to cause all the Bishops subject to his jurisdiction to subscribe to the same The doctrines and writings of Origen were no doubt at that time fully debated all the Bishops present in this fift Councell had then subscribed and consented to the condemnation of him and his errors so had Vigilius and all Catholike Bishops in the West Seeing the judgement of the Church in condemning Origen was universall would the Councell after themselves and all other Catholike Bishops that is after the judgement of the whole Catholike Church now debate and examine whether Origen and his doctrines ought to be condemned They might as well call into question whether Arius or Macedonius or Nestorius or Eutyches and their doctrine should bee condemned the judgement of the Catholike Church was alike passed on them all for this Councell g Coll. 8. pa. 587 condemned and accursed Origen and his errors as it did Arius Macedonius Nestorius and Eutyches but it condemned them all upon the knowne judgement of the Catholike Church not upon a new tryall or examination then taken of any one of them And this verily seemes to have deceived and led into error Evagrius Nicephorus and Cedrenus for of Baronius I cannot for many reasons imagine it to have beene errour or ignorance in him but wilfull and malicious oppugning the truth they knew or heard by report for even Evagrius h Evag. loc cit who lived in that age saith of that which hee writeth touching the fift Synod Of these things sic actum accepimus we have heard they were thus done I say they might heare that which indeed was true that Origen and his errours were condemned in a Councell at Constantinople in the time of Iustinian and they not being curious nor carefull to sift the diversities of Councels nor exact in computating times confounded the former particular Synod under Mennas wherein many of the doctrines of Origen were recited and he with them condemned in eleven Anathematismes i
purpose of the Emperour should bee made frustrate Their third reason is an argument à testimonio negativè because neither u Ba. an eo n. 54 Procopius nor Facundus mention any such violence or abuse offered to the Pope of which reason I have spoken before A fourth is taken from the time whereas he saith that Vigilius came to Constant on Christmas eve mendacij x Bar. an eod 546. nu 60. redarguitur hee is proved to lye by that which Procopius saith Many other reasons might bee added but these of Baronius and Binius are sufficient to convince Anastasius of lying and open lying in this passage which is as now you see nothing but a fardell of lyes for neither did the people take that oportunity to accuse Vigilius nor did they accuse him of those crimes nor did the Empresse for that cause send for Vigilius neither did shee but Iustinian call him to Constantinople neither did shee send Anthimus Scribo to pull him away by violence neither commanded she him not to forbeare Vigilius in any place but only in Saint Peters Church this was but the kind affection of Anastasius to the honour of Peters See neither did shee sweare to excommunicate Scribo if hee brought not Vigilius neither did Scribo apprehend him in the Temple of Saint Cicile neither did Vigilius distribute a largesse at that time when he was apprehended neither did they violently carry him to Tiber and there ship him neither did the people follow him and desire him to pray for them neither when the ship was gone did they revile him nor cast stones nor clubs nor dung after him nor imprecate and curse him neither was hee at that time brought but as by Procopius y Interea Vigilius ab Imperatore ex Siciliâ evocatus Bizantium venit Nam ut eò contenderent diutinam in eâ insulâ— traxerunt moraÌ„ Proc. lib. 3. de bell Goth. p. 364 Evocatus autem fuit circa finem an 11. bell Goth. ut liquet ex praecedeÌ„tibus verbis undeâ—imus hujus bellise verterat annus Jnterea Vigilius c. Iam 11. illius belli est Iustiniani 20. nam belluÌ„ capit anno ejus nono prope sinito ut testatur Proc. lib. 1. Bell. Goth. pa. 253. Imperator se ad bellum parat annos novenos potitus Imperio appeareth long before hee voluntarily went to Sicilie and made so long stay there that the Emperour having called him the yeare before as by Victor z Victor loc cit etiam et Marcellinus anno priori evocatum ab Imperatore sed sequenti Constan venisse expressè docet In Chron. an 546. et 547. is cleare by reason of his long abode in Sicilie he called him the yeare after againe out of Sicily as Procopius sheweth Neither came he to Constantinople on Christmas Eeve but either on the five and twentieth of Ianuary as Marcellinus a Vigilius Constantinopolim ingressus est 8. Calend Febr. saith or as by Procopius who is farre more worthy of credit may bee gathered b Nam adventus Vigilij Constantinopolim ponitur à Procopio in initio 12. anni belli Gothici lib. 3. pa. 364. Jam 12. an illius belli iâ—choatur in sine anni 20. Iustiniani is autem imperare coepit 1. die Aprilis ut docet Marcell in Chr. an 527. about the middle of April next ensuing neither did the Emperour when they met kisse him nor did they weepe for joy the one of the other nor did they sing the hymne of Ecce advenit Dominus Dominator behold the Lord the Ruler is come It was a very pretty allusion of Anastasius and very apt for the season in honour of the Pope to take part of the text expressing the joy for Christs Advent in the flesh and turne it to an Anthem to congratulate the Popes Advent on Christmas eve to Constantinople but I feare it will hardly be beleeved that men in those dayes did use such base nay blasphemous flattery to the Pope this hymne would have better befitted the time of Leo the tenth when in the open Councell they durst say c Conc. Later sub Leone 10. sess 6. in Orat. Simonis Begnij to Pope Leo Weepe not O daughter Syon Ecce venit Leo de Tribu Iuda behold the Lion of the Tribe of Iuda commeth the roote of Iesse behold GOD hath raised up to thee a Saviour who shall save thee from the hands of the destroying Turks and deliver thee from the hand of the Persecutors O most blessed Leo wee have looked for thee we have hoped that thou shouldest come and be our deliverer The former Anthem had beene sutable to such a time the art of their blasphemous Gnatonisme to the Popes was not halfe learned in Iustinians dayes and most incredible it is that Iustinian would use or could endure in his presence such entertainment of Vigilius knowing that hee was an earnest and violent oppugner of his Imperiall Edict in which he had expresly anathematized and accursed all that did defend the Three Chapters This proclaming of an Anathema against Vigilius and the hymne of Ecce advenit Dominus Dominator with kissing weeping for joy make no good concord nor harmony together Let this be accounted for no moe than twenty Anastasian lyes and those are the fewest which are bound up in this fardle 19. After that Anastasius hath as you have seene safely landed the Pope at Constantinople then hee tels you That for two yeares space there was continuall strife about Anthimus the Emperour and Empresse laboured to have Vigilius restore him urged him with his promise and handwriting but Vigilius would no way consent and when he found them so heavy towards him he said I perceive now it was not Iustinian and Theodora but Dioclesian and Eleutheria that called mee hither doe with me what you will thereupon they buffeted him and called him homicide and killer of Sylverius then hee fled to the Church of Euphemia and held himselfe by a Piller of the Altar but they puld him thence cast him out of the Church put a rope about his necke dragged him through all the City till evening and then put him in prison feeding him with a little bread and water and after this they banished him also with the rest of the Romane Clergy And these like the rest are meerely the fond and sottish dreames of Anastasius or as Baronius useth to call them lyes Baronius will assure you that it was not Anthimus or his restoring but the Three Chapters about which Vigilius was sent for The cause of Anthimus who was deposed tenne d Anthimus depositus in Conc. Constant sub Menna Act. 4. an post Cons Basilij qui est primus belli Gothici Vigilius autem venit Bizantium an 12. ejusdem belli yeares before was quite forgotten and to see the sottishnesse of Anastasius Iustinian had long before e Anno nimiruÌ„ 540. Bar. in illum an nu 12. written to Vigilius
send him in scarlet robes unto heaven and woe be to that Church which shall thinke Martyrdome an hurt unto it which was and ever will bee the glory of the Catholike Church Non decet sub spinoso capite membrum esse delicatum when Christ his Apostles and glorious Saints and Martyrs have gone before upon thornes and briars wee must not looke to have a silken way strewed with Roses and Lillies unto the Kingdome of God This which is yet the very worst that can befall any Catholike Reu. 14.13 is no harme to him who hath learned that lesson Blessed are they which die in the Lord so whether Pope and Emperour be both of one or of a different religion his presence with the Emperour may happen to doe good but it is certaine it can never possibly doe hurt unto the Church The greatest hurt that was ever done to the Church by this meanes was when Constantine after his baptisme by Pope Silvester in liew of his paines and in token of a thankful minde sealed unto him that donation k Donationis exemplar extat Dist 96. ca. Constantinus of the Romane and Westerne Provinces That one fable I must particularly except for by it hath beene lift up the man of sinne Christian Empires have beene robbed the ignorant seduced the whole Church abused Nero did not the thousand part so much hurt by martyring Peter and Paul when they were present with him as the most falsly supposed donation hath done to the Catholike Church 5. Will you yet see the great vanity of the Cardinall in this reason drawne from the event and the Emperours presence Some l Agapetus Barbarico coactus Imperio c. Bar. an 536. nu 10. qui Agapeti profectionem eo anno contigisse probat ten yeares before this Pope Agapetus being sent by Theodotus King of the Gothes came to Constantinople and to the same Emperour It so fell out that at that time Anthimus an heretike and an intruder held the Sea of Constantinople Agapetus deposed him that is hee declared and denounced which was true indeed that hee was never lawfully Bishop of that See and that himselfe did not nor ought others to hold him for the lawfull Bishop thereof whereupon Mennas was chosen and consecrated Bishop by Agapetus in Anthimus his roome Vigilius was called by the Emperour Agapetus sent by a Gothish usurper Vigilius called by a religious and most orthodoxall Professor Agapetus sent by an heretike and Arian King Vigilius called purposely about causes of faith Agapetus sent only about civill and but casually intermedling w th Ecclesiasticall causes You would now even blesse your selfe to see how the Card. here turns this argument ab eventu by it proves the Popes presence at the same Court with the same Emperor to have brought such an infinite unspeakeable good unto the Church as could scarce bee wished Agapetus m Agapetus licet à Rege visus sit missus ad Imperatorem à Deo tamen proficisci missus apparuit ut imperaret imperantibus c. Bar. an 536. nu 12. no longer sent from Theodotus a barbarous Goth but even from God himselfe and by him commanded to goe thither with an errant from heaven hee seemed to bee sent to intreat of peace but hee was commanded by God to goe ut imperaret imperantibus that he should shew himselfe to be an Emperour above the Emperour He like Saint Peter n Illud ipsum ferme contigit Agapeto quod olim Petro c. Jbid. nu 13. had not gold nor silver being faine to pawne the holy Vessels for to furnish him with money in the journey but he was rich in the power and heavenly treasures of working miracles Now was demonstrated o In his omnibus peragendis summa potestas Apostolicae sedit Antistitis demonstrata est c. Ibid. nu 22. the highest power of the Pope that without any Councell called about the matter as the custome is hee could depose a Patriarke at other times hee may not have that title and a Patriark of so high a See as Constantinople and so highly favoured by the Emp. Empresse Now was demonstrated p Ibid. nu 23. that Pontifex supra omnes Canones eminet that the Popes power is above all Canōs for herby was shewed that he by his omnipotēt authority may do matters w th the Canōs without the Canons against all Canons seeing his judgement was without a Synod which in a Patriarks cause is required fuit secundum supremam Apostolicae sedis authoritatem it was according to his supreme authority which is transcēdent above all Canōs or to use Bellarmines q Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 18. Pontifex et Princeps Ecclesiae sūmus potest retractare judicium Concilij et non sequi majorem partem phrase hee did shew himselfe to bee Princeps Ecclesiae one that may doe against the whole Church Nay if you well consider r Bar. an 536. nu 31. admirari non desines you will never cease to wonder to see that Agapetus a poore man as soone as hee came to Constantinople should imperare Imperatoribus eorū facta rescindere jura dare omnibusque jubere to command Emperours to adnull their Acts to depose a Patriarke and thrust him from his throne to set another there to set downe lawes and command all men and to do all this without any Synod such a Pope ſ Jbid. nu 70. was Agapetus that I know not an similis alius inveniri possit whether such another can bee found among them all Thus declameth Baronius Where thinke you all time was the Cardinals argument ab adventu Experience teacheth that when Popes leave their See and goe to the Court or Emperours presence the ship of S. Peter is then in great hazzard If Agapetus his comming to Constantinople or to the Emperour did not hazzard or endanger the Church how came it to bee perillous a few yeares after in Vigilius and where were now the most wise examples of Pope Leo and the other who in great wisedome could never be drawne to the East and from their owne See how was the holy Church now fixed to Rome when Agapetus had it in the greatest majesty and honour at Constantinople perceive you not how these arguments lie asleepe in the cause of Agapetus which the Cardinall rouseth up when Vigilius goes to Constantinople This ab adventu as all the Cardinals Topicke places is drawne from the art and authority of Esops Satyr If they make for the Pope as the event did in Agapetus then the Cardinall with his Satyrs blast will puffe them up and make them swell to demonstrations But if they make against the Pope as did the event in Vigilius all arguments in the world drawne from the cause effect or any other Topicall or demonstrative place the Cardinall with a contrary breath can turne them al to Sophistications He is another Iannes or Iambres of
duty they should what to teach or knowing it but willingly teaching the contrary to their knowledge which in duty they should not even so Nestorius Macedonius Arius and Eutyches every Bishop and Presbyter when they erred they erred not simply as Bishops or as Presbyters but as persons failing in their Episcopall or Presbyteriall duties either not knowing the truth as by their office they should or wilfully oppugning and contradicting the truth as by their office they should not So by his subtilty if any applaud themselves in it not only the Bishops of Rome but of Constantinople of Antioch of Alexandria yea all Bishops and Presbyters in the world shall be as free from errour as his holinesse himselfe yea all professors of any Art Science or faculty shall plead the like Papall exemption from errour every man shall bee a Pope in his owne faculty no Grammarian speaking incongruously as a Grammarian but as wanting the skil required in a Grammarian no Iudge giving a wrongfull sentence as a Iudge no Galenist ministring unwholsome physicke as a Physitian no Artificer working any thing amisse in his trade as an Artificer but as being defective in the duties either of that knowledge or of that fidelity which is required in a Iudge a Physitian and in every Artificer If they will exempt all Bishops and Presbyters all Iudges and Physitians from erring as they are such Officers or Artificers we also will in the same sort and sense allow the like immunity to the Pope If they notwithstanding this subtilty will admit another Bishop to erre as Bishop they must not thinke much if wee exempt not the Pope as Pope For to speake that which is the very truth of them all and exactly to measure every thing by his owne line a Iudge simply as Iudge doth pronounce a judiciall sentence as a skilfull and faithfull judge an upright judiciall sentence as an unskilful or unfaithfull Iudge an erronious or unjust sentence A Bishop or Presbyter simply as Bishop or Presbyter doth teach with publike authority in the Church as a skilfull and faithfull Bishop or Presbyter he teacheth the truth of God as an ignorant and unfaithful Bishop he teacheth errours and heresies in the Church the one without the other with judicall power to censure the gainsayers The like in all Arts Sciences and faculties is to be sayd even in the Pope himselfe A Pope simply as he is Pope and defined by them teacheth both with authority to teach with power to censure the gainsayers and with a supremacy of judgement binding all to embrace his doctrine without appeale without doubt as an infallible Oracle as a skilfull or faithfull Pope he teacheth the truth in that sort as an unskilfull or unfaithfull Pope he teacheth errour or heresie with the like authority power and supremacy binding others to receive and swallow up his heresies for Catholike truth and that with a most blind obedience without once doubting of the same 48. Apply this to Vigilius his hereticall Epistle In a vulgar sense Vig. erred as Pope because he erred in those very Pōtifical duties of feeding confirming which are proper to his office In a strickt sense though hee did not therein erre simply as Pope but quatenus talis taught onely with a supreme binding authority yet hee erred as an unfaithfull Pope binding others by that his Pontificall and supreme authority to receive Eutycheanisme as Catholike truth without once moving any doubt or making scruple of the same What may wee thinke will they oppose to this If they say Vigilius doth not expresse in this Epistle that hee writ it by his Apostolicall authority Hee doth not indeed Nor doth Pope Leo in that Epistle to Flavianus against the heresie of Eutyches which to have beene writ by his Apostolicall authority and as he was Pope none of them doe or will deny that Epistle being approved by the whole Councell r Conc. Chalc. Act. 2. et 3. of Chalcedon Pope Leo by his Papall authority condemneth Eutycheanisme Pope Vigilius by his Papall authority confirme Eutycheanisme both of them confirmed their doctrine by their Papall authority both writ as Popes the one as orthodoxall the other as a perfidious and hereticall Pope neither of both expresse that their Apostolicall authority by which they both writ The like in many other Epistles of Leo and of other Popes might easily bee observed Not the tenth part of their decretal Epistles such as they writ as Popes have this clause of doing it by their Apostolicall authority expressed in them It is sufficient that this is vertually in them all and vertually it is in this of Pope Vigilius Yea but hee taught this onely in a private letter to a few to Anthimus Severus and Theodosius not in a publike generall and encyclicall Epistle written for instruction of the whole Church What is the Pope fallible in teaching of a few in confirming three of his brethren why not in foure in eight in twenty and if in twenty why not in an hundred if so why not in a thousand if in one why not in two foure or ten thousand Caudaeque pilos ut equinae paulatim vellam where or at what number shall we stay as being the least which with infallibility he can teach Certainly confirma fratres in cathedra sede pasce oves respects two as well as two millions If in confirming or feeding three the Chaire may bee erroneous how can wee know to what number God hath tyed the infallibility of it But the sixt generall Councell may teach them a better lesson Pope Honorius writ an hereticall Epistle ſ Quae recitatur Conc. 6. Act. 12. pa. 64. but onely to Sergius Bishop of Constantinople Vigilius writ this to three all of patriarchall dignity as Sergius was Honorius writ it privately as Vigilius did which was the cause as it seemes that the Romane Church tooke so little notice thereof yet though it was private and but to one it is condemned by the sixt Councell for t Vocantur istae et aliae Epistolae dogmatica scripta In eodem Conc. Act. 12. p. 65. a. et retractantes dogmaticas Epistolas à Sergio et ab Honorio ad Sergium Act. 13. pa. 67. a. et Honorius impia dogmata confirmavit Jbid. a domaticall writing of Pope Honorius for a writing wherein hee confirmes others in heresie and Pope Leo u Anathematizamus quoque Honorium qui hanc Apostolicam Ecclesiam et immaculatam fidem prophana proditione subvertere conatus est Leo 2. Epist 1 the second judged it to bee such as was a blemish to the Apostolike See such as by which Honorius did labour to subvert the Catholike faith The like and more danger was in this to these three deposed patriarchs It confirmed them in heresie it confirmed the Empresse it confirmed all that tooke part with them it was the meanes whereby the faith was in hazard to have beene utterly subverted For plurality or paucity it is
not materiall be they few be they moe if the Pope as Pope or as an hereticall pope may confirme three or but one that one is abundant to prove his Chaire and judiciall sentence not to be infallible 49. But he taught this alone not in a Councell not with advice of his Cardinalls and Consistory why he did it not as a member of a Councell but as x Pontifex non ut praeses Concilij sed ut Princeps Ecclesiae summus potest iudicium Concilij retractare c. Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 18. § Dico secundo Princeps Ecclesiae He did this as did Agapetus y Agapeti Papae contra Anthimū iudicium absque Synodo fuit secundum supremam Apostolicae sedis authoritatem qua supra omnes Canones Pontifex eminet Bar. an 536. nu 23. in deposing Anthimus above and besides the Canons The whole power of his Apostolike authority much shined in this decision more than in any other where either his Cardinals or a Councell hath ought to doe much more was this done by him as Pope than any of them And yet had he listed to follow the judgement of others or of a Synod herein what better direction advice or counsell could his Cardinalls or any Synod in the world give unto him than the decree of the whole Councell of Chalcedon That Vigilius had before his eyes at this time that was in stead of a thousand Cardinals unto him seeing he as Ecclesiae Princeps defined Eutycheanisme notwithstanding that most holy and generall Synod yea against that Synod what could the advice of another or of a few Cardinals have avayled at this time 50. Thus all the evasions which they use being refuted it may now be clearly concluded not onely that Vigilius writ this impious and hereticall Epistle and writ it when he was the true and lawfull Pope but that he writ it also ex animo even out of an hereticall heart and writ it as he was Pope that is in such sort as that by his Pontificall and supreme authority hee confirmed that heresie which hee taught therein And this is the former of his Acts which as I told you is very remarkable his purpose and intent therein being the overthrow of the Councell at Chalcedon and of the whole Catholike faith 51. The other act of Vigilius concernes the cause of the three Chapters wherein by the heresie of Nestorius he publikely decreed and performed that as much as in him lay and as by his Apostolicall decree could be effected which hee had purposed and intended to doe by the heresie of Eutycheanisme In which whole cause how Vigilius from the first to the last behaved himselfe how at the first hee oppugned the Emperours most religious Edict and the Catholike faith how afterward he played the dissembling Proteus with the Emperour and the whole Church for the space of five or six yeares together how at the last he returned to his naturall and habituall love of heresie and how in decreeing it by the fulnesse of his Apostolicall authority hee sought utterly and for ever to abolish the Councell of Chalcedon and with it the whole Catholike faith the former Treatise doth abundantly declare which withall demonstrates the vanity of that saying of Bellarmine For the time sayth he a Bell. lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 10. § Contigit Ab hoc tempore nullus inventus est in Vigilio aut error aut erroris simulatio c. that hee was true Pope neither any errour nor simulation of errour was found in him sed summa constantia in fide but the greatest constancy of faith that could be For as by our former treatise is evident he was not only most wavering but hereticall in faith And this was in a manner the whole course of Vigilius life or the most eminent acts thereof while he was Pope pretending orthodoxy but embracing heresie and as opportunity offered it selfe labouring by words by private Epistles by resisting the imperiall just and godly Edict by publike constitutions to overthrow the faith and the whole Church of God 52. You see now his ingresse into the Papacy and his progresse in the same touching his egresse both out of it and this life heare what S. Liberatus b Liber Brev ca. 22. saith How Vigilius being by heresie afflicted died it is knowne unto all Heare what Cardinall Bellarmine c Bell. loc cit saith out of Liberatus Ab illa ipsa haeresi afflictus Vigilius was miserably afflicted by that selfesame heresie which at the first he nourished and againe Misere vexatus usque ad mortem he was miserably vexed even untill hee dyed Heare Baronius who first promised d Bar. an 538. nu 20. to declare how invigilavit in Vigilio vindicta Dei how the vengeance of God watched Vigilius and at last revenged the innocent blood which he shed and then performing that promise sayth e Bar. an 556. nu 2. He died in an Iland in Sicily by the just judgement of God confectus ipse aerumnis ex morbo himselfe being wasted with misery by reason of his disease who had caused Silverius in an Iland in Palmaria to bee pined away and put to death As he got the papacy by wicked meanes so was he immensis agitatus fluctibus tossed with exceeding great tempests therein hated by the Emperour not gratefull to the Easterne and execrable to the Westerne Bishops and when hee seemed to have come out of the streame into the haven and almost one foot into the City being pined away immensis doloribus with unmeasurable paines he dyed Thus Baronius Now if we should deale with him as Baronius f Opinari si cui licet facilius est invenire qui Evagrij de ejus condemnatione ad supplicia apud inferos luenda velit sequi sententiam quam aliorum Bar. an 565. nu 2. c. doth with Iustinian and by his precedent acts judge of his reward according to the Text Opera eorum sequuntur eos I feare the censure would seeme very harsh to those who are so ready to examine Iustinian by that rule For what workes I pray you followed Pope Vigilius Ambition usurpation sacriledge murder symony hypocrisie schisme heresie and Antichristianisme concerning which the Apostle sayth They which doe them shall not inherit the kingdome of God I will not I list not be rigorous in this point neither towards him or any other I content my selfe with that lesson of the Apostle g Rom. 14.4 Domino suo stat aut cadit Yet thus much by occasion of this Treatise and the approved judgement of the Church declared therein concerning Theodorus of Mopsvestia long before dead must needs bee said of him of Baronius and of all other who have already or shall at any time hereafter write as they have done in defence of heresie and oppugnation of Gods truth As repentance for such sinnes and impious writings opens unto them so impenitency and
persevering therein eternally shuts against them the gates of Gods mercy and the kingdome of heaven Both which because they are hid from mans eyes the Church leaving the judgement of certainty and verity onely to God passeth her sentence which is the judgement of charity by the outward and apparent acts which are open unto them whomsoever shee seeth not nor findes by certaine and evident proofe to have manifested the detestation and revocation of their hereticall and impious writings which before they published and maintained all those though dead ten an hundred or a thousand years before she by her censure doth and doth most justly condemne accurse and anathematize as by her sentence against Theodorus of Mopsvestia dead an hundred yeares before is most evident whose condemnation and anathema pronounced by the fift Councell is approved by all succeeding generall Councels by all Catholikes and even by the whole Catholike Church Nor will I here dispute whether such a sentence doth not sometimes passe errante clave the party having repented whom they not having proofe of his repentance thought to dye impenitent but howsoever that fall out none may justly complaine of the Churches judgement as unjust or unequall herein for besides that it is presumed that those who so notoriously and publikely by their hereticall writings doe scandalize the Church and people of God if they had seriously repented would have expressed some publike and outward testimony of the same the Church would by this severity of her censure teach all men a lesson which is very hard to learne first that they should not have such an itch and ambitious desire to write or utter those detestable heresies which lurk within their breasts or if they cannot observe that yet at least to learne to be so lowly and humble in heart as to revoke their impieties and blasphemies although to some blemish and disgrace of themselves yet to the great honour of Gods truth and the satisfaction and edification of the holy Church which they had scandalized If in ambition they will first oppugne the truth and then in a worse pride of heart not be reclamed to the truth nor shew their love unto it why should not the Church by her most charitable judgement shew her open detestation of their persons who in the insolency of their hearts will not shew any open detestation of their heresies That Vigilius writ a papall Constitution in defence of heresie it is apparent and undenyable that he at any time revoked that writing I wish it were but it is not yet evident The like may be sayd of Baronius of Pighius of Eccius of the Laterane Florentine and Trent conspirators of all who have whet their tongues against other truth and specially to uphold that fundamentall heresie of the Popes infallibility Their writings for heresie are evident that they ever reclamed those writings it is inevident and if ever they and their cause come to bee tryed in such a free lawfull and oecumenicall Councell as was this fift under Iustinian they may justly feare and certainly expect from the Church unlesse the disclaming of their writings may by certaine proofe be made knowne the very like sentence though a hundred yeares after theirs as passed upon Theodorus of Mopsvestia an hundred yeares after his death And because the houre-glasse for repentance is runne out to the former all that we can doe is which I seriously now doe from my heart to cry amaine unto others to admonish exhort yea even pray and entreat them by the mercies of God and by the love of their owne soules first that they keepe their tongues and pennes from once uttering any heresie or if they have not done that with the same hands to give the medicine wherewith they gave the wound and as openly nay much more openly to disclame than they have ever proclamed their impious and hereticall doctrines 53. You have now some view both of the life and death of Vigilius The exact pourtraiture of the Popes lives Baronius had beene able to set forth if he had listed but he addeth such fucos and so many sophisticall colours that indeed scarce you shall see any one of them in his Annals set out in his native and naturall habit If ought be amisse in this our description and not set forth according to the lively lineaments of Vigilius and his impieties the equall reader will not too rigorously censure the same I acknowledge that I can but dolare in this kinde to polish and set forth the lively image of their Popes I have not learned That is an Art which may not bee too vulgar lest their Romane policies be too farre divulged But by this it is easie to perceive what a silly excuse it is which Baronius useth in this cause blaming Vigilius for coming to Constantinople as if not the Popes owne hereticall minde but the ayre of Constantinople had wrought such effects as to produce that hereticall and yet as they count it Apostolicall Constitution in defence of the Three Chapters FINIS Laus Deo sine fine Errata haec corrigat benevolus Lector In Textu Pag. 48. lin 2. read Theodorus ibid. lin 9. diptisis p. 509. l. 14. eos p. 99. l. 3. John B. p. 125. l. 38. Catholikes p. 141 l. 35. Binius he was p. 145. l. 39. Son of God p. 163. prope finem substances p. 164. l. 5. explanation p. 172. l. 20. of the Pope p. 182. l. 45. their present p. 199. prope finem Catholicae p. 216. l. 17. it p. 224. l. 25. Popes p. 227. l. 5. yeeld p. 289. l. 33. the. p. 350. l. 30. aequiparare p. 425. l. 8. where is ibid. l. 27. Commana ibid. Marcellinus l. 42. inflamed p. 442. in fine Euphemia p. 462. l. 11. quarrels with Pope p. 465. l. 35. all this time p. 478. l. 23. it was written p. 495. l. 37. poysoner of p. 500. l. 35. right hand In Margine Pa. 9. lit c lege Marsorum p. 67. lit e Antioâ—henum p. 233. lit s emissam ibid. lit c corruptè p. 409. lit c commentitias supposititias p. 410. lit q Consilij 5. p. 437. lit l Concil 5. Coll. 5. AN ALPHABETICALL TABLE OF THE CHIEFE THINGS CONTAINED IN THIS TREATISE A. ACts in Councels not so intire but there may be faults from the exscriber pag. 433. Sect. 17 18. Acts of the fift Councell unjustly excepted against by Baronius pa. 379. sect 3 4. Agnoites and other sectaries called Acephali p. 3. sect 6. Agapetus lost nothing by the Emperours presence p. 464. sect 5. Antichrist the Pope first Antichrist nascent secondly crescent thirdly regnant fourthly in their Laterane Councell he was Antichrist triumphant pa. 186. sect 24. Anthimus a Catholike in shew and outward profession p. 157. sect 4. Anastasius narration not helped by Binius p. 458. sect 23. Anastasius a fabler p. 256. sect 23. and pa. 447. sect 12. c. The Author of that Apologicall Epistle published Anno 1601. a vaunting
Braggadochio p. 205. sect 10. To Assent to the Popes or to their Cathedrall definitions in a cause of faith makes one an heretike pa. 172. sect 6. Author of the Edict was Iustinian himselfe p. 366. sect 6 7. B. BAronius nice in approving the Epistle of Ibas and why p. 128. sect 22. Baronius wittingly obstinate in maintaining the heresie of Nestorius by approving the later part of that epistle p. 129 sect 24 25. and p. 31. sect 28. Baronius sports himselfe with contradictions p. 131. sect 27. Baronius revileth the cause of the Three Chapt. p. 361. sect 1. Baronius Annals not altogether intire pag. 435. sect 19. Baronius by his own reasons proves his Annals to be untrue p. 436. sect 19. in fine sect 20. c. Baronius holds it dangerous for Vigilius to leave Rome to come to Constantinople p. 462 sect 1 2. Bellisarius most renowned save in the matter of Silverius p 470. sect 11. Bellarmine and Baronius at variance about the Epistle of Vigilius to Anthimus Severus and others p. 477. sect 19 20. Baronius first reason to disprove it is taken from the inscription p 477. in fine p. 478. sect 21 22 23. c. his second reason from the subscription pa. 482. sect 26. his last reason is because hee was not upbraided for it by the Emperour and others p. 483. sect 27. Bellarmines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to know when a Councell decreeth any doctrine tanquam de fide pa. 40. sect 9. c. Baronius vilifieth the fift generall Councell p. 266. sect 2. The Banishment of Vigilius after the fift Councell a fiction p. 250. sect 16. and p. 253. sect 19. When and for what Vigilius was banished p. 252. sect 18. Baronius his three reasons for Vigilius his consenting to the Synod after his exile p. 245. sect 8. First from the testimony of Evagrius sect ibid. the second from the fact of Iustinian in restoring Vigilius p. 247. sect 11. the third of Vigilius consenting to the Synod taken from the words of Liberatus He was afflicted not crowned p. 160. sect 30. C. COnstitution of Vigilius sent unto the Synod pag. 8. sect 4. in fine the summe of the Constitution was the defence of the Three Chapters p. 10. sect 8. c. The Councell refuteth the Popes decree and ground of it p. 14. sect 1 2. c. The Councell condemneth and accurseth the Popes decree p. 17. sect 6. and p. 22. sect 15 16 The Councels decree consonant to Scripture p. 26. sect 24. The fift Councell approved by succeeding Councels and Popes p. 27. sect 26. and how long p. 29. sect 29. c. Councells above the Pope p. 29. sect 30 31. The Cause of the Three Chapters a cause of faith p. 37. sect 3 4. c. professed by Baronius p. 42. sect 14. a tryall of mens faith p. 362. sect 4. The Councell proposeth their decree about them tanquam de fide p. 41. sect 13. The Churches in the East divided from the West about the three Chapters p. 39. sect 7. The fift Councell explaineth a former definition of faith made no decree to condemne any new heresie p. 46. sect 20 21. Fift Councell of authority without the Popes approbation p. 268. sect 5 6 c. it was neither hereticall nor schismaticall p. 269. sect 7. it was assembled with the Popes consent p. 272. sect 12 13. Corruptions crept into some synodall acts are not just causes of rejecting others of that Councell p. 378. sect 3. The Councell of Chalcedon held Christ to be unum de sancta Trinitate p. 382. sect 8. 3. the Councell of Chalcedon not corrupted pa. 384. sect 6 7. The Constitution of Vigilius no part of the synodall acts p. 399. sect 1 2 3. not published in the Synod p 401. sect 4. Chrysostomes bones not translated from Commana to Constantinople p. 426. sect 3. Councell against Councell at Ephesus p. 113. sect 2. The Church may binde or loose a man after death p. 53. sect 15 16. The Church cannot loose those who dye impenitent p. 55. sect 20 21. Coronati non coronati as two sorts so two rewards of professors p. 263. sect 43. A Councell is approved though the Pope approve it not p. 275. sect 17 18. Generall Councels have sought the Popes approbation p. 287. sect 34. Cyrill cleares himselfe of Nestorianisme p. 123. sect 16. D. VVHether a dead man may novitèr bee condemned is a question of faith p. 48. sect 3. That a dead man may be condemned is the judgement of Fathers p. 49. sect 6. the judgement of provinciall Synods p. 50. sect 7. the judgement of generall Councels p. ibid. sect 7. the judgement of Baronius p. 51. sect 10. Defenders of the Popes infallibility accursed by the Councell p. 24 sect 20 21 22. Dioscorus being hereticall judged Ibas his profession hereticall therefore the profession of Ibas must be orthodoxall Vigilius his reason p. 151. sect 29. Defenders of the three Chapters heretikes p. 171. sect 4. Divination or Mathematicall predictions nor allowable p. 343. sect 28. Domnus his action not inserted at Chalcedon p. 44. sect 9. To dissent from the Pope in a cause of faith makes not one an heretike p. 171. sect 5. Many Doctrines of their Romish Church may be held except that of the Popes infallibility and yet the party that holds them no papist p. 182. sect 21. in fine E. EPistle of Ibas wholly hereticall p. 19. sect 8 9. and p. 24. sect 19. Eunomius approved not any part of this Epistle p. 20. sect 11. Eunomius approved the confession of Ibas p. 21. sect 14. The Epistle of Ibas not approved at Chalcedon p. 107. sect 2 3 4 c. The Epistle was truly the writing of Ibas p. 109. sect 5 6. At Ephesus a great rent and division between Iohn and Cyrill ibid. At Ephesus Cyrill was deposed by the Conventicle ibid. sect 3. The Emperour ignorant for a time of the division betweene Iohn and Cyrill p. 15. sect 4. The Emperour had knowledge of the division by a letter brought into the Court by a beggar ibid. Eustathius full of forgeries p. 340. sect 24 25 c. Eutychius not banished for not consenting to the heresie of the Phantastickes p. 341. sect 25. Eutychius given to divination hereticall and what it was p. 343. sect 28 29. for these supposed to be banished ibid. Evagrius full of fables p. 345. sect 30. c. The Emperours Edict reviled by Baronius p. 363. sect 1. it was not repugnant to the orthodoxall faith it was no seminary of sedition ibid. sect 3 4. The Epistle of Ibas condemned by the Councell at Chalcedon p. 381. sect 1. the Epistle in Cedrenus not Iustinians p. 398. sect 1. Epistles writ to Dioscorus and Leo were forged and not Theodorets p. 417. sect 7 8. and p. 444. sect 8. Epistles by their erroneous inscription are not proved to be forged p. 429. sect 9 10. c. Epiphanius his writing against images read
in the second Nicene Synod and by them rejected p. 109. sect 7. the booke was the booke of Epiphanius p. 112. sect 12. The explanation meant by Ibas was a condemning of the twelve chapters of Cyrill pa. 159. sect 42 43. a condemning of the faith p. 160. sect 44. the like explanation meant by Vigilius p. 166. sect 52. F. FAcundus set on by the Pope writ against the Emperours Edict p. 214. sect 4. Facundus and Baronius revile the Emperor p. 215. sect 4. Facundus an enemy to the Catholike faith p. 371. sect 13. The Foundation being hereticall poysons all which is built thereon p. 190. sect 29 30. Faith unto certainty of faith two things required p. 182. sect 20. G. GOntharis not trecherously slaine by Bellisarius p. 448. sect 15. Gregory his words and meaning pretended by Basil about the three Chapt. explained p. 43. sect 16 17. c. H. HEretikes dying dye not in the peace of the Church pag. 59. and pag. 61. § 6. Heresie with pertinacy differs much from an error p. 61. in fine First in regard of matter p. 62. sec 8. secondly for the manner ibid. sec 9. thirdly in regard of the persons who erre p. 64. sec 11. fourthly in regard of the Churches judgement ibid. sec 12. Heresie in its owne habit doth lesse harme p. 103. sec 27. Heretikes in words orthodoxall in sense and meaning hereticall p. 147. sec 20. proved in Vitalis ibid. An hereticall profession may be in termes orthodoxall ibid. sec 21. Heretikes pretend to hold with ancient Councels p. 201. sec 4 5. Worst Heretikes are the moderne Romanists p. 204. sec 10. Heretikes lyars in their profession pa. 207. sec 15. Heretikes profession contradictory to it selfe p. 208. sec 16. An hereticall profession gives denomination to a man rather than an orthodoxall pa. 208. sec 17 18. Heresie is a tryall of mens love to God pa. 361. sec 2. I. IBas his epistle unto Marie an heretike of Persia p. 125. sec 19. full of Nestorianisme Ibas denyeth God to be incarnate and Mary the mother of God p. 122. sec 13. Ibas professeth two natures and one person in Christ p. 139. sec 1. and p. 143. sec 9. Ibas his consenting to the Ephesme Counsell proves not his epistle Catholike p. 154. sec Ibas consented not to Cyrill upon his explanation p. 155. sec 35. c. Vigilius his first reason explained in five severall things first the Popes Rhetorick sec 35. second his Chronology of time sec 36. third his Logicke sec 40. the fourth and fifth his Ethicall and Theologicall knowledge sec 41. vide p. 168. sec 55. Ibas embraced the union in Nestorianisme p. 125. sec 19. Ibas professed not the epistle to bee his as the Acts declare p. 386. sec 2. The Image of Christ sent to Abgarus a fable p. 346. sec 32. Infallibility of the Popes judgement the foundation of a papists faith p. 34. sec 34. and a doctrine of the Romish Church p. 172. sec 7. 8 c. and p. 177. sec 13 14. Infallibility of the Popes judgement in causes of faith defended by any makes the defender hereticall p. 61. sec 6. and p. 63. sec 10. and to dye out of the peace of the Church ibid. Infallibility of the Popes judgement taught by commending the Churches judgement to be infallible and generall Councels pa. 173. sec 8. and by the Church they understand the Pope sec 8 9. and p. 178. sec 15. Infallibility only peculiar to the Pope p. 174 sec 11. Infallibility of the Popes judgement is hereticall p. 180. sec 18. Iustinian his Edict for defence of the three Chapters p. 3. sec 7. Iustinian the Emperour spared Vigilius from banishment and why p. 257. sec 26 27. Iustinian reviled by Baronius p. 324. slandered to be illiterate p. 325. sec 3. 4. for making lawes in causes of faith sec 5 6. for persecuting Vigilius sec 7. Iustinian in his last age no Aphthardokite p. 330. sec 8. and p. 333. sec 12. c. no disturber of the peace of the Church p. 331. in fine Iustinian a defender of the faith witnesse Pope Agatho p. 356. sec 16 witnesse the Rom. Synod sec 17. witnesse the sixt Councell sec 18. witnesse Pope Gregory sec 19. Iustinian no subverter of the faith pa. 349. sec 37 38. Iustinian founded many stately Churches and Monasteries p. 350. sec 39. Iustinian no subverter of the Empire ibid. sec 40. Iustinian severely censured by Baronius p. 354. sec 45. Ierusalem not advanced by the fift Synod to a Patriarchship p. 430. sec 1 2 c. Iustinian Dioclesian-like caused not Vigilius to be beaten p. 453. sec 19. Iustinian favoured not the heresie of Anthimus p. 454. sec 21. K. THe King of England refused to send to their Trent Councell p. 308. sec 24. Kings and Emperours have onely right to call Councels p. 239. sec 5. L. THe Laterane Councell under Leo the 10. reprobated the Councell at Constance and Basil touching the authority of Gen Councels p. 33. sec 33. The Laterane decree condemned by the Vniversity of Paris p. 34. sec 35. The more learned the man is the more dangerous are his heresies p. 123. sec 27. Luther his zeale that hee would not communicate in both kindes if the Pope as Pope should command him p. 195. sec 33. Liberatus an unfit witnesse in the cause of the three Chapt. p. 373. sec 15 16. Leo judged the Nicene Canons for the limits of Sees unalterable p. 405. sec 4. Leo his judgement erroneous for preheminency of Bishops p. 400. sec 4 5. Leontius no sufficient witnesse for the Epistle of Theodoret p. 415. sec 3. Lawes besides those in the Theodosian Code p. 412. sec 5 6. Lawfull Synods and what makes them so p. 282. sec 24 25 26. c. To Lawful Synods besides an Episcopall confirmation p. 281. sec 25. c. there is required a Regall or Imperiall p. 285. sec 31 32. Lawfull Councels require first that the summons be generall p. 292. sec 3. secondly that it be lawfull thirdly that it be orderly ibid. sec 4. M. MEnnas died in the 21. yeare of Iustinian and the Pope excommunicated him in the 25 p. 237. sec 18. The Matrones of Rome entreated Constantius to restore Liberius 248. sec 12. Monkes of Sythia slandred by Baronius for falsifying the Acts of the Councell at Chalcedon p. 383. sec 4 5. Monothelite additions not extant in the fift Synod p. 409. sec 2 3. Mennas his confession to Vigilius a forgery p. 441. sec 2. Mennas not excommunicated by Vigilius p. 442. sec 4 5. N. NEpos died in an errour onely not in any formall heresie p. 65. sec 13. The 2. Nicene assembly a conspiracy p. 111. sec 11. in fine Nestorius his bookes being restrained the bookes of Theodorus and Diodorus were in more esteeme p. 121. sec 12. The Nestorians forged a false union between Iohn
all who are members of the present Romane Church and so continue till their death nay they not onely accurse all such but further also even all who doe not accurse such And because the decree of this fift Councill is approved by them to the least iôta it in the last place followeth that the condemning and accursing for hereticall that doctrine of the Popes infallibilitie in causes of faith and accursing for heretikes all who either by word or writing have or doe at any time hereafter defend the same and so presist till they dye nay not onely the accursing of all such but of all who doe not accurse them is warranted by Scriptures by Fathers by all generall Councils by all Popes and Bishops that have beene for more then 14. hundred yeares after Christ 30. This Vniforme consent continued in the Church untill the time of Leo the 10 and his Laterane Councill Till then neither was the Popes authoritie held for supreme nor his judiciall sentence in causes of faith held for infallible nay to hold these was judged and defined to be hereticall and the maintainers of them to be heretikes For besides that they all till that time approved this fift Councill wherein these truths were decreed the same was expresly decreed by two generall Councils the one at Constance the other at Basil not long before m Conc. Basil sinitum est an 1442. id est an 74. ante concil Later that Laterane Synod In both which it was defined that not the Popes sentence but the Iudgement of a generall Councill n Concil Basil in Decreto quinq conclus pa. 96. a. is supremum in terris the highest judgement in earth for rooting out of errors and preserving the true faith unto which judgement every one even the Pope o Cui quilibet etiamsi papalis status existat obedire tenetur Conc. Constant sess 4. et Bas sess 2. himselfe is subject and ought to obey it or if he will not is punishable p Debitè puniatur Conc. Const ses 5. Basil ses 3. by the same Consider beside many other that one testimony of the Councill of Basil and you shall see they beleeved and professed this as a Catholike truth which in all ages of the Church had beene and still ought to be embraced They having recited that Decree of the Councill at Constance for the supreme authority of a Councill to which the Pope is subject say q Sess 33. thus Licet has esse veritates fidei catholicae satis constet although it is sufficiently evident by many declarations made both at Constance here at Basil that these are truths of the Catholike faith yet for the better confirming of all Catholikes herein This holy Synod doth define as followeth The verity of the power of a generall Councill above the Pope declared in the generall Councill at Constance and in this at Basil est veritas fidei Catholicae is a veritie of the Catholike faith and after a second conclusion like to this they adjoyne a third which concernes them both He who pertinaciously gainsayeth these two verities est censendus haereticus is to be accounted an heretike Thus the Councill at Basil cleerly witnessing that till this time of the Councill the defending of the Popes authority to be supreme or his judgement to be infallible was esteemed an Heresie by the Catholike Church and the maintainers of that doctrine to be heretikes which their decrees were not as some falsly pretend rejected by the Popes of those times but ratified and confirmed and that r Per Concilia generalia quae summi Pontifices Consistorialiter declaraverunt esse legitima etiam pro eo tempore quo ejusmodi declarationes ediderunt Conc. Basil pa. 144. a. Consistorialiter judicially and cathedrally by the indubitate Popes that then were for so the Councill of Basil witnesseth who hearing that Eugenius would dissolve the Councill say s Epist Conc. Basil pa. 100. b. thus It is not likely that Eugenius will any way thinke to dissolve this sacred Council especially seeing that it is against the decrees of the Councill at Constance per praedecessorem suum et seipsum approbata which both his predecessor Pope Martine the fift and himselfe also hath approved Besides this that Eugenius confirmed the Councill at Basil there are other evident proofes His owne Bull or embossed letters wherein he saith t Literae bullatae Eugenij lectae sunt in Conc. Bas Ses 16. of this Councill purè simpliciter ac cum effectu et omni devotione prosequimur we embrace sincerely absolutely and with all affection and devotion the generall Councill at Basil The Councill often mention his adhesion v Jn sua adhaesione sess 16. his maximā adhaesionem x Decreto quinque Concl. pa. 96. b. to the Council by which Adhesion as they teach y Sess 29. pa. 96. b. Decreta corroborata sunt the Decrees of the Council at Basil made for the superiority of a Council above the Pope were cōfirmed Further yet the Orators which Pope Eug. sent to the council did not only promise but z Jurabant ejus decreta defendere c. Sess 16. corporally sweare before the whole Councill that they would defend the decrees therof particularly that which was made at Constance was now renewed at Basil Such an Harmonie there was in beleeving and professing this doctrine that the Popes judgement in causes of faith is neither supreme nor infallible that generall Councils at this time decreed it the indubitate Popes confirmed it the Popes Orators solemnly sware unto it the Vniversall a Haec veritas toties et tam solenniter per universam ecclesiam declarata est Epist Conc. Bas pa. 144. a. and Catholike Church untill then embraced it and that with such constancy and uniforme consent that as the Council of b Jn decreto quinque conclus pa. 96. Basil saith and their saying is worthy to be remembred nunquam aliquis peritorum dubitavit never any learned and skilfull man doubted therof It may be some illiterate Gnatho hath soothed the Pope in his Hildebrandicall pride vaunting c Hildebrandum sic gloriari solitum testatur Avent lib. 5. Annal. pa. 455. Se quasi deus sit errare non posse I sit in the temple of God as God I cannot erre but for any that was truly judicious or learned never any such man in all the ages of the Church untill then as the Councill witnesseth so much as doubted thereof but constantly beleeved the Popes authoritie not to be supreme and his judgement not to be infallible 31. After the Councill of Basil the same truth was still embraced in the Church though with far greater opposition then before it had witnesse hereof Nich. Cusanus a Bishop d Poss Biblic in Nic. Cusano a Cardinall a man scientijs pene omnibus excultus who lived 20 e Obijt ann 1464. Poss Conc. autem finitum
thought so unmannerly as once to touch his Holinesse or speake one syllable against him 38. After Fathers and Councels Vigilius will next finde that the Emperour Iustinian himselfe who was so earnest in condemning Theodorus doth yet teach that Theodorus ought not to bee condemned and how proves hee this You saith o In Const nu 175. Vigilius to the Emperour laudabiliter adduxistis have with praise and approbation alleaged that Relation of the Councell of Chalcedon in your law de sancta Trinitate Seeing then that Relation of the Councell approveth the letters of Iohn and the letters of Iohn shew that Theodorus being dead ought not to bee condemned the Pope from hence inferreth that by Iustinians own law approving that Relation Theodorus ought not to be condemned It were very easie with Baronius Hatchet to chop off this reason and cut it up by the roote seeing neither Iohns letters did teach that Theodorus being dead might not be condemned nor did the Councell in their Relation approve either the person or doctrine or any praises of Theodorus or so much as mention him But I will not trouble the Cardinall in so easie a matter as this Besides all the inconsequences in this reason Iustinian is so farre from teaching or thinking this so much as in a dreame that in the same title p In Cod. Iust leg 6. tit de summa Trin. de Summa Trinitate fide Catholica which seemes to be that which Vigilius intended he accurseth all heresies and specially that of Nestorius and all qui eadem cum ipso sentiunt vel senserunt who either doe thinke or have thought as Nestorius did in which number Theodorus of Mopsvestia to be comprehended not onely by that which we have said before is manifest but even by Iustinian himselfe who expresly witnesseth Theodorus q Theodorus haereticos omnes impietate superat c. Iust in edict § Tali to have thought so and to have r Iste autem Theodorus usque ad mortem in sua permanens impietate Ibid. § Quod autem dyed in that hereticall opinion and for that very cause doth he condemne and accurse him Now seeing that law de Summa Trinitate was published in the seventh yeare of Iustinians raigne as by the Å¿ Datum Iustiniano August 3. Coss Is vero est annus 7. Iustiniani ut docet Marcell in ChroÌ„ et Bar. in eum an nu 1. date appeareth and sent into twelve severall Provinces seeing after this Iustinian in his twentieth t Vt ait Bar. an 546 nu 8. yeare set forth another Edict u Edictum hoc de quo toties mentionem feâ—imus concerning these three Chapters wherein he particularly and by name anathematizeth y Iust Edict § Si quis defendit Theodorum Theodorus nor him onely but all that defend him yea all who doe not anathematize him out of which number Vigilius himselfe is not exempted seeing he remained so constant in this truth that after Vigilius had published his Constitution both himselfe signified to the fift Councell that he still persisted in condemning the three Chapters one of which was the condemning of Theodorus and the whole fift Synod testified the same saying in their seventh Collation semper z Pa. 582. b. fecit facit the Emperour hath ever done and now continueth to doe that which preserveth the holy Church and true faith Was it not a very strange thing in Vigilius to pretend in his Constitution that by the Emperours owne law Theodorus ought not be condemned whereas by the Emperours Edict not onely Theodorus by name but all who defend him even Vigilius himselfe eo nomine because he defendeth him is condemned and anathematized 39. And now you have seene all that Vigilius bringeth for defence of Theodorus all that hee found after his most diligent search of the Fathers Councels and ancient writings whereby I doubt not but it is evident unto all that Nestorianisme had either quite blinded the Pope or at least induced him to play which he hath done very skilfully one of the Lamiae in this cause when ought that tended to the truth came in his way and offered it selfe unto him he then lockt up his eyes and kept them fast in a basket but when or where ought that tended to Nestorianisme and the defence of a condemned heretike might in a likelihood be found then he put his eyes in his head and became as quicksighted as the Serpent of Epidaurus The writings of Cyril and Proclus condemning Theodorus for an heretike worse than either Iew or Pagan the Councels of Ephesus of Armenia of Chalcedon anathematizing him the Imperiall lawes of Theodosius commanding all memory of him to bee abolished his heretical books to be burned the expunging his name out of the Ecclesiasticall tables even in that Church where hee had beene Bishop and a number the like none of all these could Vigilius in his most diligent inquisition finde or see why the Lamia had lockt up his eyes against all these publike and known evidences and records But when the base Counterfeits forged in the name of Cyrill and Proclus when the depraving or calumniating the Councels of Ephesus of Chalcedon and of Iustinian as being maintainers of a condemned heresie when these or the like might be found oh the Pope saw these at the first his eyes were now as cleare as the sight of Linceus he could spie these through a Milstone nay which is more hee could see them though there were no such matters at all to bee seene And truly if you well consider there was good reason why hee should see the one and not the other For the Pope saw the Epistle of Ibas to bee orthodoxall and to be approved by the Councell of Chalcedon he saw in that Epistle Theodorus to be called a a Quorum unus est beatus Theodorus veritatis praedicator et doctor Ecclesiae Epist Jbae in Conc. Chal. Act. 10. pa. 113. b. Saint a Preacher of the truth a Doctor of the Church Now it had beene an exceeding incongruity to see a condemned Saint an accursed Saint an hereticall or blasphemous Saint It was not for the Popes wisedome to see such a Saint and therefore at all such sights up with the eyes locke them fast that they see none of those ugly and offensive sights nothing of the condemning of the accursing of the heresies and blasphemies of Theodorus So bewitched was the Pope with Nestorianisme at this time that it had the whole command of his heart of his eyes of his sense of his understanding it opened and shut them all whensoever it listed 40. I have stayed too long I feare in examining this first Chapter touching Theodorus but I was very loath to let any materiall point passe without due triall or before I had shaken asunder every joint and parcell of the Popes Constitution in this cause and fully manifested how erronious his Apostolicall decree is as well
in doctrinall as personall matters That Theodorus was dead is personall but that none after death may bee condemned for an heretike is doctrinall yea an heresie in the doctrine of faith That Theodorus dyed in the peace of the Church is an errour personall but that Theodorus therefore dyed in the peace of the Church because he was not in his life time condemned by the expresse sentēce of the Church or that any dying in heresie as Theodorus did doe die in the peace of the Church are errours doctrinall That Theodorus was not by the former Fathers and Councels condēned is a personall error but that Theodorus by the judgement of the Fathers Councels ought not after his death to be condemned is doctrinall even a condemning of the Councels of Ephesus and Chalcedon as guilty of beleeving and teaching an heresie So many wayes is the Popes sentence in this first Chapter erronious in faith of which Baronius most vainely pretendeth that it is no cause of faith no such cause as doth concerne the faith 41. There now remaineth nothing of Vigilius decree concerning this first Chapter but his conclusion of the same And although that must needs of it selfe fall downe when all the reasons on which it relyeth and by which onely it is supported are ruinated or overthrowne yet if you please let us take a short view of it also rather to explane than refute the same His conclusion hath two branches the former is that in regard of the foresaid reasons nostrâ b Vig. Const nu 179 eum non audemus damnare sententia wee dare not condemne Theodorus by our sentence wee dare not doe it saith Vigilius 42. Oh how faint-hearted pusillanimous and dastardly was the Pope in this cause Cyrill the c Sanctissimorum Episcoporum hic coactorum caput Cyrillum c. Epist Synod Ephes to 4. Act. Conc. Ephes ca. 8. head of the generall Councell Proclus a most d Cyrill epist ad Acat in Con. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 543. a. Dominus meus sanctissimus Episcopus Proclus holy Bishop whose Epistle as Liberatus e Lib. ca. 10. saith the Councell of Chalcedon approved Rambulas the piller of the Church the religious Emperours Theodosius and Valentinian the Church of Mopsvestia the Councels of Ephesus of Armenia of Chalcedon the whole Catholike Church ever since the Ephesine Synod both durst and did condemne Theodorus and besides these Baronius and Binius two of the most artificiall Gnathonizing Parasites of the Pope even they durst and did even in setting downe the very Constitution of Vigilius cal f Rursumque haereticus blasphemus c. Bar. an 553. nu 120. et seq et Bin. pa. 595. et seq Theodorus more than forty times an heretike a craftie impious madde prophane blasphemous execrable heretike onely Pope Vigilius hath not the heart nor courage hee onely with his sectators dare not call him nor cōdemne him for an heretike we dare not condemne him by our sentence 43. And yet when Vigilius saw good hee who durst not doe this durst doe a greater matter he durst doe that which not any of all the former nay which they all put together never durst doe Vigilius durst defend both an heresie and a condemned and anathematized heretike he durst commend forged and hereticall writings under the name of holy Fathers hee durst approve that Epistle wherein an heretike is called and honoured for a Saint he durst contrary to the Imperiall and godly Edict of Theodosius contrary to the judgements of the holy generall Councells defend Theodorus honor his memorie yea honor him as a teacher of truth while he lived as a Saint being dead These things none of all the former ever durst doe in these Vigilius is more bold and audacious then they are all 44. Whence thinke you proceeded this contrariety of passions in Vigilius that made him sometimes more bold then a Lyon and other times more timerous then an Hare Truely even from hence As Vigilius had no eyes to see ought but what favored Nestorianisme so hee had not the heart to doe ought which did not uphold Nestorianisme If a Catholike truth met him or the sweet influence thereof hapned to breath upon him Vigilius could not endure it the Popes heart fainted at the smell thereof but when the Nestorian heresie blew upon him when being full with Nestorius he might say agitante calescimus illo not Ajax not Poliphemus so bold nor full of courage as Pope Vigilius As the Scarobee or beetle g Pier. Hierog lib. 55. is said to feed on dung but to dye at the sent of a Rose So the filth of Nestorianisme was meat and drinke to the Pope it was vita vitalis unto him but the fragrant and most odoriferous sent of the catholike truth was poison it was even death to this Beetle So truly was it fulfilled in him which the Prophet saith h Jer. 9.3 they bend their tongues for lyes but they have no courage for the truth we dare not condemne Theodorus by our sentence 45. The other branch of the Popes conclusion is Sed i Vig. Const nu 179 nec ab alio quopiam condemnari concedimus neither doe wee permit that any other shall condemne Theodorus Nay we decree k Vig. Const nu 208 that none else shall speake write or teach otherwise then we doe herein As much in effect as if the Pope had definitively decreed wee permit or suffer no man whatsoever to teach or beleeve what Cyrill what Proclus what the whole generall Councells of Ephesus and Chalcedon that is what all Catholikes and the whole Catholike Church hath done taught and beleeved we permit nay we command and by this our Apostolicall Constitution decree that they shall be heretikes and defend both an heresie that no dead man may be condemned and condemned heretikes in defending Theodorus yea defending him for a Saint and teacher of truth This we permit command and decree that they shall doe but to doe otherwise to condemne Theodorus or a dead man that by no meanes doe we permit or suffer it to bee lawfull unto them 46. And as if all this were not sufficient the Pope addes one other clause more execrable then all the former for having recited those threescore hereticall assertions which as we have declared were all collected out of the true and indubitate writings of Theodorus he adjoynes l Vig Const nu 173. Anathematizamus omnem wee accurse and anathematize every man pertaining to orders who shall ascribe or impute any contumely to the Fathers and Doctors of the Church by those forenamed impieties and if no Father then not Theodorus for those may be condemned See now unto what height of impiety the Pope is ascended for it is as much as if hee had said We anathematize and accurse Saint Cyrill Saint Proclus Saint Rambulas Saint Acatius the Synode of Armenia the generall Councells of Ephesus of Chalcedon of Constantinople in the time of