Easter of the Year past if that of the present is not exactly known Two Councils of Carthage in the Year 408. THE former of these Councils is of the 14th of June 408. All that is said of it in the Two Councils of Carthage ccccviij African Code is That Fortunatianus was made Deputy against the Heathens and the Hereticks The latter is of the 12th of October There they deputed the Bishops Restitutus and Florentius to Court to ask for Succor against the Heathens and Hereticks at the same time that Severus and Macarius were Executed and Theasius Evodius and Victor were Murthered upon their Account The Council of Carthage in the Year 409. THIS Council assembled upon the 13th of June is not a general Council but Council of Carthage ccccix a particular one There it was declared That one Bishop alone could not give Judgment The Council of Carthage in the Year 410. UPON the Twelfth of June 410. a Council assembled at Carthage deputed Five Council of Carthage ccccx Bishops to the Emperor upon occasion of a Law of Valentinian which granted Liberty of Conscience that it might not prejudice the Laws made against the Hereticks of Africa The Council of Ptolemais ANDRONICUS Governour of Pentapolis guilty of great Oppression and Injustice Council of Ptolemais in ccccxi which he exercised in that Province was Excommunicated by a Synod of Bishops held at Ptolemais There Synesius made a Speech against him But this Governour having ask'd Pardon and promised to behave himself otherwise the publishing of the Sentence of the Synod was suspended There is an Account of this Matter in the Abridgment of the 57th 58th and 72d Letters of Synesius Mention is made also of Assemblies of some Bishops in the 67th Letter of the same Author The Conference at Carthage THE Catholick Bishops had often demanded ever since the Year 403. a Conference with Conference of Carthage in ccccxi the Donatist Bishops to examine the Reasons which these pretended for their Separation from the Church in an amicable manner The Donatist Bishops had constantly refused it till the Year 406. and then consented to have one They caused this Design to be authorized by an Order of the Emperor Honorius dispatched at Ravenna the 14th of October 410. Count Marcellinus was nominated President and for the Execution of that Order Two Rules wer made the one to appoint the Day of the Conference and the other to fix the manner of Proceedings and to oblige the Bishops of both sides to declare whether they accepted of it The Conference began at Carthage upon the First Day of June 411. The Donatist Bishops met there to the Number of 278. and the Catholicks were 286. Marcellinus ordered That Seven Bishops of each Party should be chosen to speak of whom the chiefest of the Catholicks were St. Augustin and Alypius and that besides these Seven should be named to assist as Councellors and Four to over-look that the Notaries should faithfully set down what should be said He commanded also That every one should set his Hand to what he asserted and that whatsoever was done should be communicated to the People He ordered That the Thirty Six deputed Bishops should be admitted into the Place of the Conference But the Donatists would be all there and the Catholicks were contented that their Eighteen Deputies only should be present The First Day was spent in personal Contests concerning the Bishop's Qualifications Marcellinus confessed at First That it was above his capacity to be a judge of that Cause and that it should rather be decided by those of whose Disputes he undertook to judge He caused the Emperor's Letter to be read whereby he was appointed to be Judge He promises them not to judge of any thing that should not be clearly proved by either Party He gave the Donatists leave to chuse one to be judge with him of that Cause Nothing Remarkable was done in the Second Meeting on the 3d. of June The Donatists having desired time to examine the Acts of the First Marcellinus granted it to them and adjourned the Conference to the Eighth Day of that Month. An Accident happened about the manner of their Session Marcellinus having desired the Bishops to sit down the Donatists pretended That it was forbiden by Scripture The Catholick Bishops would not keep their Seats while the Donatist Bishops were standing Marcellinus out of Respect to the Bishops caused his Seat to be taken away In the Eighth Day of the Third Session the Donatists disputed long about the Qualities of Opposers and Defenders But at last St. Augustin obliged them to come to the main Question which was Where was the Catholick Church The Donatists confessed That that was it which was spread throughout the whole Earth and so they had only now to examine Which Party was united with the Churches of other Parts of the World And in this Point the Catholicks had the upper hand To divert the Question the Donatists desired That the Acts which they had in their Hands might be read And so they entered upon the Examination of Caecilian's case They presented a Memorial wherein they affirmed That the Fâ—ults of every particular Member infected a whole Community and consequently that Caecilian being guilty the Catholicks were in the wrong for keeping with him and that they had a sufficient Reason to divide from him This was the Point in Question St. Augustin answered it fully proving out of Holy Scripture that the Church upon Earth will always consist of good and evil Members He confirmed that Proposition by St. Cyprian's Authority and urged the Donatists Example against themselves alledging their Behaviour towards the Maximianists After this St. Augustin concludes That though Caecilian had been guilty yet that argued nothing against the Cause of the Church Yet Marcellinus would have it examined Whether he was really Guilty His Innocence was proved as well as that of Felix of Aptungis who ordained him by Acts of the Judgments given in their behalf whereby they had been pronounced guiltless of the Crimes lay'd to their Charge The Fourth Conference being ended and the Bishops of both sides withdrawn Marcellinus gave Judgment for the Catholicks whom he declared Conquerors and the Bishops being called in he read it to them The Council of Cirta or Zerta THIS Council was assembled at Cirta or rather Zerta in June 412. The Council writ a Council of Cirta in ccccxâ—j Synodical Letter to refute the false Rumours which the Donatists had spread abroad concerning the Conference at Carthage This Letter is the 141st amongst St. Augustin's Letters The First Council of Carthage against Coelestius COELESTIUS came from Rome to Carthage with a Design to be there ordained Council I. of Carthage against Coelestius in ccccxj Priest in the Year 411. But his Error being discovered by Paulinus the Deacon who formerly had been a Reader in the Church of Milan he was put off to a Council of
the Greeks owned it for such but the Latins rejected it It made 102 Canons In the 1st It approves all that was done in the first Six General Councils condemns the Errors and the Persons they had condemned and pronounces Anathema to those that hold any other Doctrine than that they have Established In the 2d The Bishops of this Council deliver the number of Canons which they received which are the Constitutions attributed to Clemens the Canons of the Councils of Nice Ancyra Neo-Caesarea Gangra Antioch Laodicea Constantinople Ephesus Chalcedon Sardica and Carthage The Canons made in the time of Nectarius at Constantinople and in the time of Theophilus at Alexandria the Canons of Denys and Peter of Alexandria of Gregory Thaumaturgus of S. Athanasius S. Basil S. Gregory Nyssen S. Gregory Nazianzen of Amphilachius Timothy and Theophilus of Alexandria S. Cyril Gennadius of Constantinople and the Canon of S. Cyprian and his Council which is only observed in Africk according to their custom The 3d Canon is concerning those of the Clergy Presbyters or Deacons that had Married two Wives They declare that those that would not leave that custom shall be deposed but as to those whose second Wives are dead or who have left them they shall keep the honour and place of their Dignity being forbidden only to perform the Functions of it it being not fitting say they that he that ought to heal his own wounds should bless others As for them who had Married Widows or had Married being Priests Deacons or Subdeacons they ordain they shall for a time be suspended from their Functions but they grant them the power of being restored when they leave their Wives upon condition that they shall not be raised to a superior Order And Lastly they Ordain That for the future all those that have been Married Twice after Baptism or have had Concubines shall not be made Bishops Priests Deacons or Clergy-Men as also those that have Married Divorced or Prostituted Women or Slaves or Stage-Players The 4th Canon inflicts the punishment of Deposition upon such Ecclesiastical Persons as shall company with a Virgin Consecrated to God and of Excommunication upon Lay-Men The 5th Renews the Canon which forbids Clerks to have with them Women not related to them except those which the Canons allow them to dwell withal It extends this prohibition to the Eunuchs The 6th Forbids those that are in Orders including the Subdeacons to Marry after their Ordination The 7th forbids 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 down before 〈◊〉 Presbyter unless they represent the Person of the Pâ—â—riarch or Metropolitan The 8th ordains That a Synod shall be kept at least once a Year in each Province The 9th forbids Clerks to keep a Tavern or to resort thither The 10th forbids them to lend upon Usury The 11th forbids them having any Commerce or Familiarity with the Jews The 12th â—yes the Bishops of Africk and Lybia to the Law of the Celibacy The 13th probits the Separation of Presbyters Deacons or Sub-deacons from their Wives or binding them to Continenoy before they be ordained The 14th renews the Canon ordaining That he who is made a Priest shall be 30 Years old at least and a Deacon 25. The 15th decrees That he who is ordained Sub-deacon be at least 20 Years old The 16th declares That the seven Deacons spoken of in the Acts of the Apostles were but Ministers of common Tables and not of Altars and thereby rejects the Canon of the Council of Neo-caesarea which by the Authority of this Place had ordained that there should be but seven Deacons in every Church The 17th forbids Clerks to go out of their Churches without dimissory Letters from their Bishops The 18th enjoyns those who were forced to withdraw because of the Incursions of the Barbarians or for any other Cause to comeback again as soon as they can The 19th enjoyns those who govern Churches to preach to those committed to their Care the Doctrine of the Church and to expound the Scripture agreeably to the Sentiments of the Fathers The 20th forbids Bishops to preach in a Church which is out of their Diocess The 21st gives permission to Clerks deposed if they repent of their Fault to wear short Hair like other Clerks But if they lead a secular Life it binds them to wear long Hair like other Laymen The 22d ordains That they shall be deposed that have been ordained for Money The 23d prohibits exacting Mony for the distribution of the Holy Communion The 24th forbids Clerks to be present at the Shews of Stage-players The 25th ordains That Country-parishes shall belong to the Bishop who had them in possession 30 Years ago and if before 30 Years possession any will prove them not to belong to them the Matter shall be examined in the Provincial Council The 26th renews the Prohibition made to a Priest engaged in an unlawful Marriage to execute his Function The 27th forbids Clerks to wear any other Garb than such as belongs to their Order and separateth for a Week those that do The 28th forbids distributing with the Oblation the Grapes offered at the Altar by reason the Oblation ought to be given to the People for the Sanctification and Remission of Sins whereas Fruits are only blessed and distributed for Thanksgivings The 29th ordains That according to the Council of Carthage the Mysteries shall be celebrated Fasting not excepting Holy Thursday itself The 30th ordains That the Bishops of Churches in barbarous Countries if they will leave their Wives shall dwell no longer with them The 31st forbids Clerks to baptize or to celebrate the Mysteries in Chappels of private Houses without the Bishop's Consent The 32d condemns the Practice of the Armenians who put no Water into the Wine which they did consecrate The 33d rejects another Custom of the same Armenians who admitted none into the Clergy but those of a Sacerdotal Race and made them Clerks and Readers without cutting their Hair The Council does not allow that regard should be had to the Race of those that are ordained but only to their Merit and forbids the Readers to read publickly in the Church without their Hair cut and without receiving the Blessing of the Pastor of the Church The 34th decrees the Penalty of Deposition against caballing Clerks The 35th forbids a Metropolitan to seize on the Estate of a Bishop deceased or on his Church and appoints that they shall be in the Keeping of the Clerks till there be another Bishop unless there be no Clerks in which case the Metropolitan shall keep them for the Successor The 36th renews the Canons of the Councils of Constantinople and Chalcedon concerning the Authority of the See of the Church of Constantinople and grants to it the same Privileges as to the See of old Rome the same Authority in Ecclesiastical Affairs and the 2d place the 3d to that of Alexandria the 4th to that of Antioch and the 5th to that of Jerusalem The 37th preserveth to the Bishops ordained
but that he cannot be oblig'd to serve there and that he cannot be promoted to a superior Order by any other Bishop 16. That no general Council ought to be held without his Order 17. That no Book can be Canonical without his Authority 18. That his Judgment ought to be corrected by none and that he can correct the Judgments of all other Persons 19. That no Person ought to Judge him 20. That no Person whatsoever dare to Condemn him who appeals to the Holy See 21. That the Cognizance of the most material Causes of all Churches belongs to him 22. That the Church of Rome has always been and will always be Infallible according to the Testimony of the Scriptures 23. That the Pope of Rome ordain'd Canonically becomes unquestionably HOLY by the Merits of S. Peter according to the Testimony of Ennodius Bishop of Pavia approv'd of by several Saints and as it is recorded in the Decretals of Pope Symmachus 24. That by his permission 't is lawful for Inferiours to accuse Superiors 25. That he can depose and re-establish Bishops without calling a Synod 26. That he who does not agree with the Church of Rome is no true Catholick 27. That he can declare the Subjects of wicked Princes absolv'd from the Oath of Alliegance which they have taken to them This Piece has no relation to the Letter which preceeds it nor to that which follows it and we have not the least proof that it was made in the Council of Rome in the Year 1076. as Baronius pretends Nor is it probable that it belongs to Gregory VII For tho' there be in this Collection several Propositions which have relation to what he wrote in his Letters yet there are a great many which he never advanc'd nor approv'd of There are likewise some of them that are equivocal others express'd in odious Terms and others Intolerable They are almost all of them drawn up so ill that one cannot say Gregory VII who had a good Genius was the Author of them This is what inclines me to believe that 't is the Work of one who was an Enemy to Gregory who was minded to render his Doctrin odious by comprehending it in these Seven and twenty Propositions drawn up at random which bear some resemblance to the Genius and Manners of that Pope If this Conjecture be not agreeable to some we may say that 't is the Work of some Roman bigotted to the Maxims of the Court of Rome who suppos'd he might deduce these Propositions from the Letters of Gregory VII and made this Collection of them which has been since inserted in the Register of that Pope Let the Case be how it will one cannot say without injustice to Gregory that 't is his Piece nor maintain all these Propositions without doing injury to the Holy See 'T is to be observ'd that the Commentary upon the Seven Penitential Psalms ascrib'd to Gregory the Great was compos'd in the Time of Gregory VII because the Author of this Commentary speaks in three places viz. in Psal. 5. v. 9 26. and in Psal. 27. against an Emperor of his Days whom he accuses of renewing Simony in the Church of having disturb'd it by a dangerous Schism of having a Mind to make it his Slave of having seiz'd upon what belong'd to it of making himself Master of the Church of Rome and of having Other Writings of Gregory VII begun to exercise his Power against it This has inclin'd many to believe that 't is the Work of Gregory VII which his Name made others think that it belong'd to Gregory the Great But the Style of this Piece does not seem so elegant as the Style of that Pope However perhaps he might be more remiss in a Work of this Nature There is in England a Commentary upon S. Mathew in Manuscript which is ascribed to Gregory VII and which they say he compos'd whilst he was only a simple Religious But it has never yet been Publish'd CHAP. VI. An Account of the Church of Rome and of the Popes who Succeeded Gregory VII to the end of this Century AFTER the Death of Gregory VII the Cardinals and the Clergy of Rome had their Victor III. Eyes upon Didier Abbot of Mount Cassin to advance him to the Popedom Some Authors say that Gregory VII had recommended him to them before he Died. He was descended from a noble Family of Benevento and had spent all his Life in the Monastery of Mount Cassin He at first refus'd the Dignity which was offer'd him so that the Holy See remain'd Vacant for almost a whole Year In the mean time Guilbert the Anti-pope became Master of one part of the Churches of Rome and would fain have been acknowledg'd for lawful Pope The Cardinals and Bishops who acknowledg'd Gregory to prevent Guilbert's design came to Rome about Easter in the Year 1086. with the Prince of Salerno and Duke Roger to proceed to the Election of a Pope When they were there they renew'd their Importunities to Didier to engage him to accept of the Popedom but he would never expresly consent to it However they Elected him and having taken him by force carry'd him to the Church of S. Lucia to proclaim him Pope under the Name of VICTOR III. But when they were about to put on him the Pontifical Robes he made so great a Resistance that they could not put his Albe on him but only cast a red Chappe about his Body Four Days after he left Rome and when he came to Terracina threw off all the Ensigns of the Pontificate and retir'd to Mount Cassin where he liv'd privately and could by no means be prevail'd upon to be Ordain'd But the Year after in a Council held at Capua during Lent he yielded to the Intreaties of Duke Roger of the Prince of Capua and of the Bishops reassum'd the Purple and the Pontifical Cross and after he had spent the Easter Holidays in his Monastery was Conducted to Rome by the Princes of Salerno and Capua who having taken the Church of S. Peter by force from Guilbert caus'd Victor to be Ordain'd by the Bishops of Ostia Frescati Pavia and Albania and plac'd him on the Papal Chair May the 9th in the same Year This Election was not only oppos'd by the Favourers of Guilbert but also by Hugh who from the Bishoprick of Dia was translated to the Arch-bishoprick of Lions and pretended to the Popedom by the Arch-bishop of Aix and by Cardinal Richard Abbot of Marseilles who were underhand supported by the Cardinal Bishop of Ostia who had himself likewise some Votes on his side The Arch-bishop of Lions was the greatest opposet of Victor's Ordination and wrote The Letters of Hugh Arch-bishop of Lions against him two Letters to the Princess Matilda to hinder her from acknowledging and assisting him Accusing him of holding correspondence with the Emperor Henry But these Letters made no impression on the Mind of that Princess on the contrary she came
as two different Sacraments He speaks of the Eucharist as of a Sacrament wherein the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ is received and which requires great Purity and great Preparation to be worthily received He establishes the matter of this Sacrament but he urges the necessity of mingling Water with the Wine with too much heat He is the firâ—â— that talked largely of Penance and of the Power of the Priesthood to bind and unbind He zealously demonstrates how necessary it is towards Salvation to be within the Church He discourses very advantageously of the Bishop of Rome and looks upon the Bishop of that See to be the Superintendent of the first Church in the World But then he was of Opinion that he ought not to assume any Authority over the rest of the Bishops that were his Brethren or over their Churches That every Bishop was to render to God an account of his own Conduct That the Episcopal Authority is indivisible and that every Bishop has his Portion of it That in case of neoessity all Bishops may assist their Brethren with their Counsels though they are not under their ordinary Jurisdiction That Causes ought to be determined in the respective Provinces where the Accusers and Witnesses are to be found That Councils or Assemblies of Bishops are extremely useful That the Keys were given to the whole Church in general in the Person of St. Peter to denote Unity It may be proved out of his Writings That they used to Offer Sacrifice for the Dead in his time That they were perswaded that the Saints interceded for us and that Sacrifices were Offered in Honour of their Memory That they made use of Holy Water that they had Virgins who made Profession of Virginity and that this condition was mightily honoured amongst the Christians I take no notice of abundance of other points of Discipline and Morality which may be observed in the Abridgment we have made of his Works where the Reader as he peruses them may collect them for himself and indeed they are of great importance to all People The first Edition of St. Cyprian which appear'd a little after the Invention of Printing neither bears the name of the Printer nor of the City where it was Printed It is more Correct and freer from Faults than the following ones The second Edition is that of Spire by Wendelinus in the Year 1471 in Folio It is mighty full of Errors In the Year 1512 Remboldus caused this Author to be Printed at Paris and was the first that divided the Letters into several Books Afterwards Erasmus having review'd and Corrected it Printed it with a Preface and some Annotations in the beginning in 1520 and 1525 for Frobenius It was likewise Printed the very same Year at Colen Afterwards at Paris for Langelier in 1541. At Antwerp in Octavo in the Year 1542. by Crinitus and for Frobenius in 1549. At Lyons for Gryphius in Octavo in 1544 and 1550. At Basil according to Erasmus's Edition in Folio for John Hervagius in 1558. Gravius caused it to be Printed with some Notes at Colen and it was also Printed at Lyons in 1535. 1543 1549 and 1556 in Octavo At Venice in the same Volume in 1547. After these Editions which are none of the most Correct Manutius caused it to be Printed at Rome Corrected by several Manuscripts in 1563 in Folio in a very neat Character and augmented with a fifth Book of Letters Morellus's Edition at Paris in the Year following is larger and more accurately done It was Printed too at Geneva in the Year 1593. with the Notes of Goulartius and Pamelius Pamelius after he had taken pains with Tertullian set himself to Publish a more exact Edition of St. Cyprian's Works He is the first that disposed the Letters according to the Series of Time distributing them as we have done into five Classes but he has not been very exact in distributing those of the same Class in their natural Order He likewise writ St. Cyprian's Life and has made large Observations upon this Author wherein he applys himself more to confirm the Doctrine and Discipline of our Times than to explain the difficulties of his Author Pamelius's St. Cyprian has been Printed twice at Antwerp in 1568 and 1589. And at Paris in 1607 1574 1616 1632 and 1644. These Editions are compared with several ancient Manuscripts and the former Editions In imitation of him Rigaltius after he had Published Tertuillian undertook St. Cyprian and without making the least alteration in the Order observed by Pamelius he only Corrected the Works of this Author upon the different Readings of two Italian Manuscripts which Monsieur de Monchal Archbishop of Tholouse had Copied in the Margin of his St. Cyprian and made some Notes to explain the most difficult places and some Observations to enlighten the Discipline that was in vigour in this Saint's Time Some of these Observations seem to be bold and he endeavours to excuse himself for them in his Preface This Edition was Printed at Paris for Dupuis in 1648. In the Year 1666 Dupuis Reprinted the Works of this Saint as he did those of Tertullian that is to say he added to the Trxt which is conformable to the Edition of Rigaltius the entire Notes and Observations of that Learned Man together with some choice Observations of Pamelius and joyn'd to this Author Minutius Felix Arnobius Firmicus and the Instruction of Commodianus In the Year 1681. Frederic Reinard a Minister in Germany put out St. Cyprian's Letters at Altdorf There is nothing particular in this Edition but the great number of Manuscripts with which it was compared Monsieur Lombert having Translated the Works of St. Cyprian into French and follow'd Pamelius's Method in his Translation has reformed some part of this Method in his Preface and has given us by the assistance of several judicious Men a more accurate order of the Letters and Treatises of St. Cyprian than that of Pamelius He is quoted with great respect by the Bishops of Oxford and Chester in the Oxford Edition of this Father's Works After all two English Bishops not long since put out a new Edition of St. Cyprian which is more correct and exact and larger than all the former The Text is here Printed in a very fine Character Revised upon four new Manuscripts and several different Readings Copied out of other Manuscripts by very able Men. The Margin is all along charged with a very short and clear Summary of all that is contained in the Text. Just under the Text the different reading of the Manuscripts and Editions are set down At the bottom of the Page are placed the Notes some of which are borrowed from Rigaltius and Pamelius and the rest which are new are made by the Bishop of Oxford Most of them are Theological His Tracts precede the Letters in this Edition and are disposed according to the Order wherein they are supposed to have been written The Letters likewise are distributed after a new
Letter attributed to Soter is full of Passages borrowed from Ithacius St. Leo and the Vulgar Latin and the Consuls there mentioned held the Consulship some Years before Soter was Bishop of Rome The Second Letter attributed to the same is a Miscellany taken out of the Council of Laodicea and out of Gelasius Martin the First and St. Leo. It speaks of Monks of Palls c. Besides the Date of the Consuls does not agree with the Years of this Pope's Pontificate The Epistle of Eleutherus treats of Ecclesiastical Judgments in favour of the Court of Rome The Author of it pretends That all Causes relating to the Church ought to be determined there and that they cannot be tried in the Province a Practice contrary to all Antiquity He follows the Vulgar Latin in his Quotations of Scripture and cites a Text out of St. John which he attributes to St. Paul He copies several Passages out of the Popes St. Leo Felix the Third Anastasius Adrian the First Victor of Carthage Hilary the Deacon the Fourth Council of Carthage the Sixth Council of Toledo and the Theodosian Code Lastly The Date of the Consuls is false The Inscription of the First Epistle attributed to Victor plainly discovers the falsity of it 1. It bestows upon him the Quality of Archbishop of the Universal Church a Title which the Ancient Popes never gave themselves 2. It is directed to Theophilus of Alexandria who lived almost 200 Years after Victor 3. The Author of this Letter speaks of the Judgments of Bishops and Appeals to Rome according to the Pretensions of the Bishops of Rome in the latter Ages Lastly He uses the Testimonies of St. Leo and Isidore The Second Letter attributed to the same Pope is full of Passages borrowed from St. Leo and the Vulgar Latin The Third and Fourth published by Johannes de Bosco and taken out of the Library of the Abby of Fleuri are written in a Stile that manifestly discovers their Novelty The Scriptures there cited follow the Vulgar Latin The First is directed to Desiderius Bishop of Vienna now we don't read that there was ever any Bishop of that Name in Vienna before the time of Pope Gregory the Great The First Letter of Zephirinus is composed of several Passages taken out of St. Leo St. Prosper Vigilius St. Gregory Martin the First Adrian the First the Theodosian Code Anianus and Sixtus the Pythagorean 2. We find in it the Names of Patriarch and Primate 3. It treats about the Decisions of Bishops and Appeals to the Holy See 4. The Consul Gallicanus is named there now there was none of that Name in the time of Zephirinus Lastly The Author of it supposes that the 70 Disciples were chosen by the Apostles The Second Letter attributed to the same Pope is yet more visibly spurious 1. The Author of it very impertinently cites the Imperial Laws in favour of the Bishops 2. He speaks of the Apocrisiarii 3. He heaps together the very Thoughts and Words of St. Prosper Adrian and Paul of Constantinople 4. He cites the Canons of Pope Adrian as Ancient Statutes And at last he says that there were false Brethren in Africk that plundered and spoiled the Bishops Which cannot possibly be true for there was no Persecution in Africk in the time of Pope Zephirinus The First Epistle attributed to Calistus is filled with Passages taken out of the Nicene Council the Fifth Council of Rome St. Prosper Gelasius Symmachus Isidorus Anianus and Sixtus the Pythagorean He speaks of Ember-Weeks that were instituted long after the time of this Pope The Second is likewise full of Passages drawn out of the Council of Antioch the Fourth Synod of Carthage Simplicius St. Austin St. Gregory Adrian and Sixtus the Pythagorean We find several new Constitutions there The Author of the Epistle attributed to Urban gives large Commendations of a Life where all things are held in common He speaks of Vows and the Revenue of the Church he uses the Thoughts and Words of St. Prosper Eusebius the Council of Paris Gregory the Fourth the Theodosian Code and the Vulgar Latin The Two Letters attributed to Pope 〈◊〉 are made up of Passages taken out of the Vulgar Latin St. Gregory St. Jerome Sixtus the Pythagorean The rest is written in a barbarous Stile The Author of the Epistle attributed to Aâ—… speaks of a Bishop of Ephesus named Felix but unknown to the Ancients and places one Eusebius amongst the Bishops of Alexandria who is not to be found in the Catalogue of the Bishops of that See 〈◊〉 Touching the Translation of Bishops he establishes some things contrary to the Determinations of the Councils of Antioch Sardica and Chalcedon And besides he cites the Words of St. Jerome Siricius Ennodius St. Gregory Isidore Martin the First and Sixtus the Pythagorean The Author of the First Epistle attributed to Fabian supposes that Novatus came to Rome in his Papacy though it was in Cornelius's time according to the Testimony of St. Cyprian Eusebius and St. Jerome Secondly he borrows several Passages out of Ruffinus St. Leo St. Gregory Adrian the First and Boniface of Mentz In the Second Epistle attributed to the same Pope we read 1. That disobedient Clerks ought to be delivered up to the Secular Arm. 2. That the Holy Chrism must be made Yearly 3. We find some places in it that are Copied out of the Second Council of Carthage the Fifth of Rome the Council of Antioch Siricius St. Jerome St. Augustine Innocent Zosimus Celestine Proclus St. Gregory Isidore and Adrian The Third is full of Passages drawn out of the Letters of Pope Adrian the Theodosian Code Anianus Felix the Third St. Gregory the Second Council of Carthage the Council of Toledo and other Publick Monuments later than Fabian The first Letter attributed to Cornelius is full of Errours 'T is there said First That the Bodies of St. Peter and St. Paul were removed out of the Catacombs which appears to be false by the Testimony of St. Gregory who tells us in the third Letter of his third Book That the Body of St. Paul lay always near the Porta Ostia and St. Peter's in the Vatican Secondly Some Passages are to be found in this Letter taken out of the Epistles of Martin the First and St. Leo. The Second is a Collection of several things out of the Constantinopolitan Council under Flavian the First and Third Council of Carthage the Council of Chalcedon the Fifth of Rome St. Ambrose St. Jerome and Boniface of Mentz but nothing shows the Imposture of these two Letters more palpably than the difference of Stile from those that truly belong to Cornelius which are to be seen in St. Cyprian with the Fragment of one in Eusebius There is another Letter of his besides to Lupicinus Bishop of Vienna which is writ in a Stile as different from that of the true Cornelius as any of the rest we find the word Mass in it which was unknown to the Authors that lived in
we do not honour the Water as the Father and the Son St. Basil answers That this Objection is ridiculous and that those who make it are mad That 't is not the Water that Baptizes us but the Spirit That the Water indeed is joyned with the Spirit as the Sign of the Death and Burial of the Old Man but that 't is the Spirit who gives a New Life That Baptism is administred by dipping three times into the Water and by invoking the Trinity three times to signify our dying to Sin and the giving of Life That the Baptism of Jesus Christ is very different from that of St. John which was only the Baptism of Water whereas that of Jesus Christ is the Baptism of the Holy Spirit and of Fire Last of all he says That the Martyrs who suffer'd Death for Jesus Christ needed not the Baptism of Water in order to their receiving the Crown being baptiz'd in their own Blood He speaks also in this place of the Fire of the Day of Judgment which he calls the Baptism of Fire that shall try all Mankind In the 17th and 18th he shews That the Holy Spirit is joyn'd to the Father and to the Son as a Person equal and not as one inferiour To prove this he uses the Rules of Logick having to do with an Adversary against whom he must use these Arms. In the 19th he proves That we should celebrate the Glory and Praises of the Holy Spirit as we do those of the Father and of the Son and that we should give him the same Honours In the 20th he refutes the Opinion of those who say That the Holy Spirit is neither a Lord nor a Servant but that he is Free He shows that this Opinion is very absurd for either he is a Creature or not if not then he is God or Lord and if he is he must be a Servant for all Creatures have a Dependance upon God In the 21st he shows by many Testimonies of Scripture That the Holy Spirit is there called Lord. In the 22d he proves his Divinity by many Passages of Scripture In the 23d he alledges the Miracles attributed to the Holy Spirit to prove that he is God In the 24th he shows That we should Glorify the Holy Spirit as we do the Father and the Son In the 25th he answers those who object That the Scripture never uses this Expression The Father and the Son with the Holy Spirit and he shews that to say The Father and the Son with the Holy Spirit signifies nothing else but the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit That the erroneous way which they would have us use is not to be found in the Holy Scripture Glory be to the Father by the only Son in the Holy Spirit That the Particle in has the same Sence in this place as the Particle with That the Fathers made use of the Particle with as being most proper to oppose the Errors of Arius and Sabellius and that 't is less capable of an ill Sence That notwithstanding he is not ty'd up to this Expression provided we be willing to render Glory to the Holy Spirit In the following Chapter he goes on to explain with much subtlety the Difference between the Particles in and with In the 27th he proposes this Objection We ought to receive nothing but what is in the Holy Scripture But these Words are not to be found Glory to the Father and to the Son with the Holy Spirit In answer to which he First sends his Adversaries back to what he had said in Ch. 25. Afterwards he adds That in the Church there are some Opinions and Practices founded upon the Testimonies of Scripture but then there are also some which are founded only upon unwritten Tradition That the Scripture and Tradition have an equal Authority for the establishing of Piety and Truth and that none who follow the Ecclesiastical Laws resist them That if we should reject all Customs that are not founded on Scripture we shall greatly prejudice Religion and reduce it to a superficial Belief of some particular Opinions 'T is easy says he to give Examples of this and to begin with that which is most common Where find we it written that we must make the Sign of the Cross upon those who begin to Hope in Jesus Christ What Book of Scripture teaches us that we must turn to the East to make our Prayers What Saint has left us in his Writings the Words of Invocation when we Consecrate the Bread of the Eucharist and the Cup of Blessing For we do not content our selves with pronouncing the Words set down by the Apostle St. Paul and the Evangelists but we add several Prayers both before and after which we consider as having much Efficacy upon the Sacrament and yet we have them not but by Tradition We Consecrate the Water of Baptism the Oyl of Unction and him also who is to be baptiz'd Where is this written Is not this a Secret Tradition Is it not Custom which has taught us that we must Anoint him who is to be baptiz'd Where has the Scripture taught us that we must use three Dippings in baptizing We must say the same of the other Ceremonies of Baptism as of Renouncing the Devil and his Angels Who has oblig'd us to do these things Whence have we Learn'd them Have we them not from the Tradition of our Fathers Who observed them without divulging or publishing of them being perswaded that Silence kept up a Veneration for the Mysteries What necessity was there of putting that in Writing which it was not lawful to reveal or to explain to those who were not yet baptiz'd Afterwards he gives the Reason of some Usages which he had mentioned He observes also That Christians pray to God standing from Easter to Whitsunday That they kneel and afterwards rise up He gives Mystical Reasons for these Customs which are so forc'd that 't is easy to perceive there is no better Reason to be given than Custom and Practice Lastly he concludes That since there are so many things which we have by Tradition we ought not to reprehend one simple Particle which the Ancients made use of This he proves in the 29th Chapter where he alledges the Authorities of St. Irenaeus St. Clemens Romanus the Two Dionysii Eusebius of Caesarea Origen Africanus Athenogenes Gregory Thaumaturgus Firmilian and Meletius besides the Prayers of the Church and the Consent of the Eastern and Western Churches Towards the end of this Chapter he complains of the hardships which his Calumniators make him suffer In the last he describes the miserable State of the Church He compares it to a Fleet of Ships tost with a great Tempest which is the cause of Shipwrack to many of them and Points out the Troubles and Miseries wherewith the Church was afflicted very admirably This Chapter alone is sufficient to show that this Book is undoubtedly St. Basil's He proves also the Divinity of the Holy
of Jesus Christ with their sacred Mouth Qui Christi corpus Sacro ore conficiunt In his Commentary upon Zephaniah he seems to doubt whether wicked Priests consecrate it But 't is probable that he speaks thus rather to terrifie them than to establish a Proposition whose Consequences would prove very dangerous I add an excellent Passage of this Father concerning the Sacrament of Penance taken out of his Commentary upon these Words of the 16th Chapter of S. Matthew Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever ye shall loose on Earth shall be loosed in Heaven Some saith he Priests and Bishops of the New Law understanding not the sence of these words doe imitate the pride of the Pharisees by ascribing to themselves a power to condemn the Innocent and to absolve the Guilty But God doth not so much consider the Sentence of the Priest as the Life of the Penitent And as the Levites did not cleanse the Lepers but only separated those that were cleansed from those that were not by the knowledge which they had of the Leprosie Even so the Bishop or the Priest doth not bind those that are innocent and loose the guilty but having heard the difference of Sins he knows whom to bind and whom to loose in the discharge of his Ministery In this place we may take notice 1. Of the Custom of declaring Sins to the Priest 2. The Power which Priests had to Absolve 3. The use Priests were to make of the Keys and the care they were to take not to Absolve but such as were truly penitent * After what has been already said of S. Jerom one can hardly esteem him a Person upon whose Authority Points of Doctrine or Matters of Discipline can safely be established He may however give the Sence of the Church in his own time in Matters wherein he personally was not concerned in which we have Reason to think that he gives a faithfull Account of things And therefore since we have no Cause to disbelieve what he says of the Eucharist and of what the Church of Rome calls the Sacrament of Penance but on the contrary may reasonably suppose that he spake the Sence of the Church The Passages themselves are to be examined Of those concerning the Eucharist we are to consider 1. That he keeps himself to the Language of the New Testament in his Answer to Hedibia's Question and only confutes the Millennaries but says nothing of the Modus of the Presence of the Body and Blood of Christ in the Sacrament 2. That his Interpretation of those Words in S. John My Flesh is Meat indeed and my Blood is Drink indeed of the Spiritual and Divine Flesh of Jesus Christ shews that he understood them Allegorically for he distinguishes that from the Flesh of Jesus Christ which suffered upon the Cross Now there is equal Reason to believe that what our Saviour says in the 6th Chapter of S. John concerning Eating his Flesh and Drinking his Blood is literally to be understood as what he says in the Institution of the Sacrament of the Eucharist And if one is Allegorically to be interpreted then they are both 3. That the Mysteâ—â—â—s of Religion were as nicely examined in that Age as in any since Jesus Christ declared it to the World and when every thing else that was Mysterious was controverted this single Article of the Real Presence as defined by the Council of Trent which is contrary to that Reason that the other Disputes concerning the Trinity and the Divine Decrees are properly above was never debated This is so strange if we suppose the Doctrine of the Church of Rome to have been then receiv'd that it is incredible especially when we consider 4. That the generality of the Fathers at that time interpreted every thing in Scripture Allegorically to which they could not assign a convenient Literal sence This the People were used to This was S. Jerom's practice very often and he had learnt it of Origen whom he seems sincerely to have follow'd till he quarrelled with Rufinus So that we have great Reason to think that Men so accustomed to Allegories as the Teachers and the People were in this Age would not be at a Loss to interpret our Blessed Saviour's meaning in any of his Words which Literally interpreted would contradict and do Violence to that Reason by which they were capacitated to understand any part of his Law The Passage produced in favour of Auricular Confession proves nothing less S. Jerom says That after the Priest had heard the difference of Sins he knew whom to bind and whom to loose that is very true but that is no Reason for Men to reveal all their Sins to the Priest because the Church in that Age put Men under Penance only for publick Sins those that had committed private ones of such a Nature as would if discovered have made them unfit to come to the Sacrament were exhorted to put themselves under a voluntary Penance and if they did so they were obliged to declare why they did it that so the time of their Penance might be regulated but this seems to have been left to themselves which makes it quite another thing from the practice of the Church of Rome S. Jerom's Works were published by Erasmus and printed in six Volumes at Basil from the Year 1516 to the Year 1526. In 1530 they were again printed at Lions by Gryphius and at Basil by Froben in 1553. The First Edition of Marianus was at Rome by Manutius in the Years 1565 1571 and 1572. The Second at Paris by Nivelle in 1579. The Third at Antwerp in 1579. The Fourth at Paris with Gravius his Notes in 1609. The Fifth is of 1624 at Paris The Last was printed in 1643. These are the Collections of all this Father's Works There are several of them printed by themselves as the Letters in Octavo printed at Rome by Manutius Dr. Cave mentions an Edition of S. Jerom's Works at Frankfort in 1684 in 12 Volumes in folio with all the Scholia Censures Index's and Collections of all sorts that had been printed till that time upon S. Jerom which are all comprized in the three last Volumes in 1566 at Antwerp in 1568 with Gravius's Notes and at Mentz in 1470 at Venice in 1476 at Paris in 1583 at Dilingen in 1565 at Louvain in 1573. The Book of Famous Men at Louvain and Helmstad in 1611 at Colen in 1580 at Lions in 1617 at Antwerp in 1639. The Epistles to Theophilus at Paris in 1546 and 1589. The Book of Virginity at Rome in 1562. The Treatise of Hebrew Names at Wirtemberg in 1626. I say nothing of the Editions of the Chronicon because they were mentioned in the Account of Eusebius his Works The Benedictines of the Congregation of S. Maura will soon undertake a new Edition of S. Jerom There is reason to hope that it will not be inferior either in Beauty or Exactness to those of S.
which St. Augustin held in the City of Tubursica with some Donatists in the Year 397 or 398. as it is proved in the Preface to the Letters In the first he produces the Judgments that were given against the Donatists He justifies Caecilian's Innocency and shews that those who condemned him were suspected Judges and that the Authors of the Donatist Schism were guilty of the Crime which they charged upon others He adds That it was to no purpose to impute to the Church the pretended Crimes of the dead since the Church may tolerate wicked men without ceasing to be a Church That the Donatists themselves suffer among them very disorderly Persons that Maximianus had caused Primianus to be condemned as Majorinus had formerly procured a Sentence against Caecilian by caballing and Intrigue That the Sect of the Donatists being limited within Africa and having no Communion with the Churches that were dispersed throughout the VVorld cannot be the Catholick Church In this Letter there is that famous Sentence concerning the Authority of Councils Let us suppose that Pope Miltiades and the other Bishops who gave Judgment with him have not judged right then we may have recourse to a Plenary Council of the whole Church in which the cause of the Donatists ought to be debated again with those that judged it and their Sentence reversed if it shall be found that they have given a wrong Judgment The Second Letter contains a particular Conference of St. Augustin with Fortuniusa Donatist Bishop which was spent in Reproaches on both sides for the Villainies that were committed on both sides without medling with the main Question of the Schism St. Augustin requested that the Dispute might be ended in a greater Assembly and in what place they pleased where Christians of all Parties might meet In this Letter there is an Account of a Letter of the false Council of Sardica of Eastern Bishops which Fortunius quoted because it was directed to Donatus St. Augustin not knowing the Story was perplexed but finding that St. Athanasius was condemned in that Letter he did not mind it The Forty fifth Letter is a Note to Paulinus written a Year after the foregoing in 398. The Forty sixth from Publicola to St. Augustin contains several Cases of Conscience which this Lord proposed concerning the Oath whereby they obliged the Barbarians to swear by their Gods That they would preserve the Fruits of the ground faithfully which they would not otherwise have preserv'd had they not been bound by that Oath About the use of Meats and other Things offered to Idols and concerning the killing of one that assaults or robs us In the next St. Augustin endeavours to decide the Qustions proposed by Publicola concerning those Matters Upon the first he saith That that Oath ought not to be required of the Barbarians but that use may be made of them after they have taken it and he that uses their Service hath no share in the Oath that those that swear by false Gods are doubly guilty if they keep not their Oath both of an abominable Oath and of Perjury As to things offered to Idols he answereth Publicola upon several Particulars as that there is no danger in making use of the Meats offered to them when it is not known and it is too nice a scruple to forbear the use of those things which have been applyed to prophane uses if it be not done with respect to that To the Last Query he saith That no man ought to kill any Man upon any Account whatsoever except perhaps says he Soldiers or such as are obliged to it by the Duties of some publick Office But that we are not forbidden to secure our selves against the Violences of others by making use of VValls and That if a Thief be killed or wounded with the VVall falling upon him or he falling from the VVall the thing is not to be imputed to him that built the VVall. This Letter was written before the Temples of Idols were quite demolished in 399. In the Forty eighth Letter to Eudoxius Abbot of a Monastery in the Island of Capraria St. Augustin exhorteth both him and his Monks to make good use of the Quiet they enjoy'd that so they might be ready to leave it whensoever the Church should have need of them This Letter is supposed to have been writ in the Year 398. In the 49th He asketh of Honoratus a Donatist Bishop a Reason Why the Catholick Church which ought to be Universal over the whole Earth came to be limited to Africa and was no where to be found but among the Donatists The time of this Letter is not very certain The â—0th Letter to the Principal Persons of the Colony of Suffectum is a Complaint upon the account of a Murder of 60 Christians whom they Massacred because their Hercules was taken away He jests upon them promising to have another made for them But he concludes with these upbraiding words But do you also restore to us that great number of our Brethren whose Lives you have taken away for if we restore to you your Hercules it is reasonable you should restore theâ— to us Baronius thinketh that this Massacre happened upon occasion of an Edict made against Idolatry in 399. But the Translator of St. Augustin's Letters affirms That this is none of his for two Reasons First Because he thinks it is Impertinent Secondly Because it is not written in St. Augustin's Stile I am much of his mind as to the Second Point but I cannot allow the First for though this Letter does not seem to be grave enough for such a Subject yet the Rallery is sharp which sometimes is more effectual than a Pathetical Discourse However it is ancient and of St. Augustin's time In the 51st Letter St. Augustin objects to Crispinus a Donatist Bishop at Calama the Dissention between the Primianists and the Maximianists as an Answer to what the Donatists urged against the Church It was written after the Death of Optatus Gildonianus in 399 and before that of Praetextatus who died in 400 when St. Augustin wrote his Books against Parmenianus In the 52d He exhorts Severinus his Kinsman to forsake the Donatists and to come into the Catholick Church It may be of the same time with the foregoing The 53d is written in St. Augustin's Name and of two of his Collegues Fortunatus and Alypius to Generosus a Catholick of Constantina and contains an Answer to a Letter written by a Donatist Priest to this Man to seduce him wherein he pretends to have received an Order by an Angel from Heaven to oblige him to embrace the Donatist's Party St. Augustin proves in that Letter That the Donatist's Party cannot be the true Church 1. Because they have no Succession of Bishops from the Apostles To prove this he produces the Succession of the Bishops of Rome from St. Peter to Anastasius 2. He quoteth the Acts of Minutius Felix which shew That Silvianus the Predecessor of a Donatist Bishop
Vienna The 10th Letter to the Bishops of that Province is about the difference between Hilarius Bishop of Arles and S. Leo. For the full understanding of which we must observe 1. That there had been a Contest a long time between the Bishops of Vienna and the Bishop of Arles about the Rights of the Metropolis in the Province of Vienna 2. That the Council of Taurinum to appease this Quarrel had ordain'd That whosoever of the two could prove that his City was the Civil Metropolis should enjoy the Right of the Ecclesiastical Metropolitan of all the Province but that in the mean while each should have for Suffragans the Bishops which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishop 〈◊〉 That the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 which belongs to the Province of Nâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of that Province 4. That Hilarius Bishop of Arles desitous to maintain the Right of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 given to his 〈◊〉 went 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and light upon a Bishop called 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I 〈◊〉 to a Widow and who had had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Bishop went 〈◊〉 Rome and there 〈◊〉 of the Iudgment given against 〈◊〉 by 〈…〉 5. That 〈◊〉 Bishop of Arles followed him and after he had 〈◊〉 the Church of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and S. Pâ—â—l 〈◊〉 pâ—ay to these Apoâ—… there he went to S. Leâ— and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 him not to trouble the Churches He made his Complaints concerning the French Bishops who after they had been deservedly conâ—… in France 〈◊〉 notwithstanding allowed to assist at the Holy Sacrament in the City of 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 desâ—…d 〈…〉 to his Preâ—…sions declaring to him at the same 〈◊〉 That he was not 〈◊〉 to accuse 〈◊〉 â—â—versary but â—…ly to make his Protestations and 〈◊〉 and that did not please 〈◊〉 he would would home as 〈◊〉 really did when he saw That S. Leo called a Synod to bâ—ing the Maâ—… to Tryal 6. That after his Departure S. Lâ—â— absolved and restored him to his See Upon this occasion and in this juncture of Affairs did this Pope write in 445. to the Bishopâ— of the Province of Viâ—â—nâ— this better of which we are speaking He begins with an 〈◊〉 of the Apostolick Seâ— and says That he had been consulted very often by the French Bishops and had disannulled and confirmed their Judiciary Sentences which had been â—â—â—ught to him by appeal He complains That Hiâ—â—ry had disturbed the Peace and Union of the Churches That he had endeavour'd to make the Bishops of the Seven Provinces subject to his Authority without submitting to S. Peter's whom he had resisted and â—essen'd being puff'd up with a Spirit of Pride He 〈◊〉 That having examined the Cause of Celidonius he found him really Innocent of what he was accused and therefore had made void the Sentence which had been given against him which nevertheless he would have ratifâ—ed if what was alledged had been true He speaks afterward of the Cause of another Bishop of the Province of Vienna named Projectus He complains That Hiâ—â—â—y would have ordained in his Place a Person who had been chosen neither by the People nor Clergy nor Nobility He demands why S. Hilary did intermeddle with the Ordinations of another Province He reproves his Departure from Rome and at length declares That he had ordained that Projectus should remain in his See He then commands the Bishops to ordain Canonically in pursuance of the Election of the People or Clergy and that every one of them keep within their own Bounds He condemns Hilary for carrying along with him armed Men in ordaining or driving out Bishops He forbids him the calling of Synods and declares him deprived not only of his Right of Primacy which he had pretended to but also of the Right of Metropolis in the Province of Vienna which he had usâ—â—ped He will not have him ordain and declares him fallen away from the Communion of the Apostolick See He brings here an excellent Rule about Excommunication We must not saith he easily excommunicate any nor ought it to be inflicted upon any at the Humor of every peevish Bishop but we ought to use that Means to punish a great Crime He adds That none may be Excommunicated but the Guilty not they that have no Part in the Action He exhorts the Bishops to whom he wrote to put in execution what he had commanded He makes them take notice That he did not assume to himself the Ordinations of their Churches but preserved them from the Encroachments of Hilary Lastly He forbids them calling a Synod of more than one Province without the Consent of Leontius an Ancient Bishop he doth not tell us of what see but in the Life of Honoratus written by Hilary Bishop of Arles there is one Leontius Bishop of Frejus Forum Julâ—â— a City in Provence spoken of S. Leo by this gives him the Primacy for a Time upon the account of his Age but yet wholly by the Leave and Approbation of the Bishops of France si vobis placet and without diminishing the Rights of the Metropolitans It remains that we observe That neither Hilary Bishop of Arles nor the Bishops of France did give place to S. Leo and that this Pope continued firm to his Opinion although Hilary sent Two Deputies to him to appease him This is evident by the Letter of Auxiliaris Governour of Rome recited by Hâ—noratâ—s in which he tells this Saint That he hath spoken with Pope Leo and Adds In reading this you will be stirr'd for you are always the same and in the same Resolution He advises him to soften his Terms because saith he Roman Ears are tender Upon this account it was that the Pope labouring with all his Might to have his Decrees put in execution obtained an Edict of the Emperor Justinian which he sent after this Letter by which the Emperor declares That the Primacy of the Apostolick See ought not to be lessen'd being built upon the Merits of S. Peter and confirm'd by the Authority of the Councils He blames Hilary Bishop of Arles for having arrogated the Ordinations to himself that did not belong to him and having deposed Bishops unjustly He commands That the Sentence given against him by the Holy See which ought to take place without the Imperial Authority be executed that no Man oppose it and that there be no Disturbances in the Churches for the future He ordains That for ever hereafter neither the French Bishops nor the Bishops of other Provinces shall undertake any thing hereafter without the Authority of the Bishop of Rome That all that he orders shall be acknowledged for a Law and that the Bishops
says That he had been admonished of his Duty long before and reproved for his Disorders but not reforming in the least he was obliged to accuse him before the Synod of Bishops that he might grow better upon their Advice and that instead of hearkening to them he desired that they would be Judges of the difference between him and his Metropolitan That these Judges had condemned him and he acquiesced at first in their Sentence but afterward being sollicited by the Bishops of the Provinces of Lotharius and Lewis of Germany required his Restoration That upon the Letters that the Pope had Written he was set at Liberty and they would send him to Rome but they did not think it fit to Restore him because he was unworthy and his disorders being so publick they could not do it without Scandal That if his Holiness would restore him he would quietly submit to his Decision but he took himself obliged to let him know the Crimes of that Bishop of which if he were well informed he could not believe that he would Disanul the Judgment given against him especially since he chose the Judges himself and according to the Council of Carthage it is not allowed to Appeal from the Sentence of those Judges a Person hath chosen himself He insinuates that according to the Council of Sardica the Pope ought not to have the first Hearing of the Causes of the Bishops nor Judge them at Rome but they ought first to be determined in their own Province and in case of Appeal the Pope must send his Commissioners to the places He adds That if he that hath been Condemned at the first Tryal be Restored the latter Examination ought not to hurt the Persons of the first Judges nor ought they to be reproved for it unless it appears that they have Condemned him out of Enmity Coverousness or Partiality In fine That if the Pope Annuls the Judgment passed upon Rothadus he would render all the Judgments of the Bishops of France ever after contemptible As for himself he would never concern himself to Judge or Condemn any Man but if they would not amend upon Admonition send them to Rome And this he shall be obliged to do to avoid the Menaces of Excommunication which the Pope hath so often repeated to him altho' it is the Opinion of the Fathers that Excommunication ought rarely to be used and that in case of great Necessity Lastly He implores him that his Compassion for Rothadus should not make him over-look the Rules of Discipline and give an ill Example of Impunity to the Church These Maxims he confirmed by the Canons of the Councils and the Ancient and Genuine Writings of the Popes Hincmarus also in this Letter assures the Pope that they had sent their Deputies to Rome in their stead not to accuse Rothadus but only to satisfy him that the Bishops of France intended no manner of disrespect to the H. See in Judging him and to certify the Pope that that Bishop was condemned by those Bishops whom he chose for his Judges But tho' Hincmarus had promised in the Name of the French Bishops to send their Deputies to Rome nevertheless they did not go and pretended for an Excuse that it was told them that the ways were not open and they should be stopped in their Journey if they went Wherefore Rothadus went alone and having waited almost Eight Months for his Accusers he presented a Petition to the Pope in which he complains That he had been Deposed in contempt of his Appeal to the H. See He maintains that he never desisted from his Appeal nor did choose or demand any other Judges He accuseth Hincmarus of Compulsion and Deceit He complains of his ill usage which he had received from him and prayed the Pope to Try him Nicolas who had entertain'd him civilly and dealt with him as a Bishop declared himself wholly for him and made an Oration in S. Mary's Church upon the Eve of the Nativity 865 in which Pope Nicolas's Letters in favour of Rothadus he pleaded Rothadus's Cause and maintains That having Appealed to the H. See he could not choose any other Judges nor be Judged at another Tribunal that he had not done it And lastly Since if he had not Appealed they could not have Deposed him without acquainting the Bishop of Rome with it because the Canons reserve the Knowledge of such Causes as concern the Bishops to the Holy See He declares him Innocent and Disannuls the Judgment given against him and restores him to his Dignity And after he had done it with great noise upon a Solemn Day he makes it known to the Clergy and People of Rome in a Letter on purpose He sent also an Express to Carolus Calvus in which he much blames the proceedings of Hincmarus in derogation of the Right which he pretended to belong to the Bishop of Rome without whose Cognizance they could not Judge a Bishop He complains of the delays which they had made for above two Years keeping Rothadus from Rome and neither sending their Deputies Witnesses nor Accusers He declares Rothadus innocent and desires the King Charles the Bald to see him restored to his Dignity and Estate At the same time he wrote a Letter to Hincmarus in which after he had upbraided him with the same Dealings he commands him to submit to the Judgment he had given in favour of Rothadus and to Execute it or come himself to accuse him upon condition nevertheless that Rothadus should be first restored to his Dignity and Revenues In conclusion he says That if he did not do one of them he Pronounced him by Virtue of his Apostolick Authority Deposed from his Priestly Dignity and separated from the Communion of the Church without hopes of Restoration He wrote also a large Letter to all the Bishops to oblige them to receive Rothadus and approve the Judgment he had given in his favour and taking this occasion to greaten his Authority he claims as his due that all Causes of the Bishops should be brought to the H. See He upholds this pretence by the false Decretals which he vouches to be Genuine Ancient and very Authentick and because the Causes of the Bishops are the greatest Causes whose Cognizance belongs to the Bishop of Rome according to the Constitutions of the Popes He proves that Rothadus made no Choice of his Judges because he Named none in particular but had only Written to some Bishops that they would undertake his Defence that he never renounced his Appeal nor indeed could he because having once Appealed to a Superior Tribunal he can't be Judged at an Inferior Nevertheless he declares that he will do no Injustice to any Man and gave them free Liberty to accuse him before the H. See upon condition they should first restore him and put him in the same Quality he was before their Sentence passed upon him He wrote also to the Clergy and People of Soissons to Congratulate the Restoration of their
examined He speaks the same things to Hincmarus in his Letters written to him at the same time but more especially blames his Carriage and Administration in many sharp reflexions and concludes telling him That he takes it ill that he makes use of the Pall on such occasions as were not allowable In a third Letter he thanks King Charles the Bald for the satisfaction he had given him in making the Bishops of France unanimously join in the Restoration of those Clerks but could not blame Hincmarus Lastly In his fourth Letter he Congratulates Wulfadus and the other Clerks for their Restoration and Exhorts them to be subject to Hincmarus and tells them That he would allow them a Years time to prosecute that Affair at Rome if they thought fit These four Letters bear Date Dec. 7. 866. These Letters of Pope Nicolas are extant Tom. 8. of the Councils p. 268. and 480. They are also Printed with a Collection of his Epistles Published at Rome 1542. Fol. By what has been said it is evident that the Bishops of France would not bring these Causes The Carriage of the Bishops of France to Rome nor be obliged to appear there themselves to maintain the Justice of their Sentence nor would endure it to be Disanulled or blamed in the least the contrary to which Pope Nicolas pretended to do He required that the Councils which Judged any Causes at the first Hearing should be called by his Authority That both the Accused and the Accusers had liberty of Appealing to Rome before and after their Sentence That all Synods should give him a large and full Account of their Proceedings before they passed Sentence That in case of Appeal the Holy See might put the Condemned into the Places and Condition they were formerly in conditionally and then the Judges should be obliged to come or send their Deputies to Rome to maintain their Judgment where the Cause shall be Examined a-new as if it had never been decided From this time the Bishops of France who were most Learned and best Skilled in the Canons to evade the Pretensions contrary to the Canons which tended directly to the utter ruining of the Episcopal Authority and overthrow of all Church Discipline and that without quarrelling with the H. See Judged all Ecclesiastical Causes that came before them in their Synods and that their Judgment might be of greater Authority they caused the Contending Parties to choose their Judges because according to a Maxim of Law It is not Lawful to Appeal from the Sentence of those Judges whom they had Elected Lastly They caused that Judgment to be Executed and in case the Persons Condemned referred themselves to Rome they would send the Pope their Reasons and require his Confirmation or rather Approbation of their Judgment but tho' often cited never would go to Rome nor send their Deputies with a Commission to act in their Names to call any Matter in Question but left it to the Pope to do as he pleased without opposition And if it so happened that they were obliged eitheir for the good of the Church or for Peace sake or in Obedience to the Will of that Prince to do as the Pope would have them they protested that it was without any Abrogation of their Sentence which was Valid and Just but only to shew Mercy to the faulty Thus they behaved themselves in this Cause Hincmarus first of all caused those Clerks to present their Petition in Writing and to leave it to the Synod of France He then made them choose their Judges by agreement after he had withdrawn from the Tryal After the Judgment was passed he had it executed and confirmed by the Pope but at last Nicolas I. being solicited to it by Wulfadus and being desirous to have that Cause re-examined in a Synod Hincmarus ordered the matter so that not only their Decree was kept in force but was confirmed without any offence to the Pope who had resolved to restore these Clerks or to the Emperor who favoured Wulfadus For he perswaded the Bishops not to deal so rigorously with Wulfadus and his Fellows as in Justice they might and to consent to their Restoration if the Pope desired it This shewed a great deal of complaisance to the Pope in leaving the thing to his dispose in respect to the H. See but it was not what the Pope desired He would have had the Synod which he called to have quite Disanulled what was done at Soissons and himself to be made Judge in that Affair and upon an Appeal both Parties should have come to Rome to Contest about it And for this Reason it was that he would not determine the Matter definitively but satisfied himself to Restore Wulfadus and the Clerks Ordained by Ebbo conditionally Before Nicolas's Letters were brought by Egilo Charles the Bald who had so great a favour for Wulfadus and would have him Ordained Archbishop of Bourges by all means whatsoever sent Wulfadus Ordained Archbishop of Bourges his Son Carolomannus Abbot of S. Medard to have him Ordained and Installed which was done in September by some Bishops who were not very well Skilled in the Laws of the Church which Wulfadus had provided and Carolomannus had scared into it It was Aldo Bishop of Limoges who Consecrated him and some have said that that Bishop in the midst of the Ceremony was taken with a Fever of which he Died soon after Egilo being returned with four Letters from Pope Nicolas in the Year 867 Charles the Bald called a Council at Troyes at which were the Archbishops The Council of Troyes of Reims Tours Rouen Bourdeaux Sens and Bourges with those 14 Bishops who were present at the Council of Soissons the Year before in which some Bishops favouring Wulfadus to please Carolus Calvus would encounter Hincmarus but he defended himself so well that they only resolved to satisfy the Pope to send a Synodical Epistle containing a large Relation of what had passed in the Deposition of Ebbo his pretended Restoration and the Ordinations of Wulfadus and others who had been Consecrated after his Deposition In it they relate how the Children of Lewis the Godâ—y would have deprived him of his Estate and for that end had made use of Ebbo and some other The Letter of the Council of Troyes to the Pope against Ebbo Bishops who having obliged that Prince to confess some forged Crimes had put him in a State of Penance and deprived him of his Authority How afterwards when Lewis the Kind was again restored by the Authority of his Bishops Ebbo had left his See and fled how he was Apprehended and carried to the Emperor by Rothadus Bishop of Soissons and by Ercaraus Bishop of Chalons how he had himself Signed and Approved the Restoration of Lewis the Kind and owned that he was unjustly and contrary to the Canons put to Penance after which manner having acknowledged his fault in Writing at the Council in Thion-ville held 835 in which
it belongs to the Pope and Bishops of Italy to Consecrate the Emperour so it is chiefly their Right to call and choose him In the 156th he Comforts the Duke of Beneventum for the loss he had sustained by the Agarenians The 157th is only a Letter of Complement and Thanks to a Bishop that was very zealous for the Roman Church and had enquired of his Health and Condolance for the Death of his Brother Here end the Letters of the eleventh Indiction and those of the twelfth begin The six first Letters contain nothing very remarkable being chiefly about Civil Matters In the 163d he forbids certain Bishops to Excommunicate the Person that brought the Emperour's Letters Patents till his Cause were examined In the 165th he Excommunicates a Count and his Wife for taking a Nun out of his Monastery till they restored her In the 174th 189th 192d Letters he exhorts Michael King of Bulgaria to submit himself to the Church of Rome In the 181st and 182d he sharply reproves Anspert Arch-Bishop of Milan for not coming to the Synod at Rome after he had been thrice Summoned and threatneth to proceed against him if he come not this fourth time He forbids his holding any Assembly with any of the Kings of France that shall come into Italy In the 188th to the Bishop of Limoges he decides That a Man ought not to be parted from his Wife because he had Baptized his Child himself in a Case of Necessity In the 190th written to the Bishops of Dalmatia he exhorts them to acknowledge the Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Rome and to send thither their new chosen Bishop to be Consecrated and Receive the Pall from him The 191st is to the Arch-Bishops of Arles Narbonne and Aix He orders them to conser with the Bishop of Nimes to oblige him not to molest the Monks of a certain Monastery and gives them power if he does not do as he desires to suspend him from all his Priestly Functions till he comply or appear at Rome to give an account of his Conduct In the 194th he Exhorts a Sclavonian Lord to continue in the Faith of the Roman Church and live in its Obedience He saith he hath written to Arch-Bishop Methodius who was Ordained by Pope Adrian his Predecessor because he had heard he taught other Doctrines than what he had professed in Presence of the Holy See The following Letter is to this Methodius Titular Arch-Bishop of Pannonia he commands him to come to Rome and justifie his Doctrine Forbids him to Celebrate Mass in the Sclavonian Tongue but only in Latin or Greek as saith he the Church of Jesus Christ dispersed over the whole Earth practiseth in all places The 196th is to Anspert Arch-Bishop of Milan about his refusing to come to the Synod at Rome The Pope had suspended him from Celebrating Divine Service till he came to Rome to justifie himself but not regarding of that Suspension he continued to do all Episcopal Functions The Pope peremptorily commands him to come to Rome or send his Legates In the 197th he thanks King Lewis for his good will and invites him to come speedily to Rome promising to do his utmost to make him to be declared Emperour The 198th Letter is to Herard Arch-Bishop of Auch and to the Bishops of Comminges Conserans and Bigores concerning the Disorders in their Dioceses which they could neither restrain by Exhortations nor Excommunications They had written to the Pope to joyn his Authority to theirs to put a stop to them The Pope writes to them to use their utmost Endeavours to rectifie the Disorders of the People committed to their charge And because the greatest were in the Marriages of Kindred he saith 't is not permitted to Christians to marry their Kindred so long as they can make out any Relation He declares all those that are so married and will keep their Wives or those that shall so marry for the future to be subject to the Churche's Anathema by Apostolick Authority and forbids all Priests to give them the Sacrament till they have done Penance He also declares it unlawful to have two Wives to forsake one Wife and marry another for no cause whatsoever or to have a Wife and a Concubine at the same time He forbids the Laity to meddle with the Church Goods He orders Priests and Clerks to submit to their Bishops and to do nothing without their consent and that the Laity do obey their Bishop under pain of Excommunication The following Letters concern the Affair of Photius which we have spoken of in the History of the Eighth Council In the 204th Letter he writes to the Empress Engelberga who had desired him to Absolve Anspert Arch-Bishop of Milan and humbly represents to her That he could not do it without the consent of his Brethren the Bishops with whose concurrence he had Excommunicated him That he must either come or send Deputies to the Synod to be held the eleventh of October at Rome to answer such things as are laid to his Charge and after Satisfaction given he will Absolve him and Receive him into his Communion He saith he will Celebrate the Anniversary of the Emperour her Husband and that he prays for the Soul of her Brother Suppo that God would forgive his sins The four following Letters are concerning the Troubles about the Election of Landulphus to the Bishoprick of Capua The 216 Letter is written to King Charles whom he saith he hoped to raise to the Dignity of Emperour that therefore he was come to Ravenna That he hoped he would labour all he could to Re-establish the Honour and Dignity of the Roman Church and subdue its Enemies That at his Return he found its Enemies more violent having not only seized and carried away the Possessions but the Persons that belonged to the Church of Rome He desires him to send him three Persons before he comes that he may concert with them concerning what belongs to the Honour and Good of the Holy See In the next Letter he prays the same Prince to protect the Church of Rome against its Enemies The 218th is addrest to the Arch-Bishop of Ravenna he wonders he had not recourse to the Holy See to redress the Injury done him he intimates that he had sent a Prudent Person to Ravenna whom he Impowred to inform himself of all had been done to him he orders him to be at Rome by the beginning of October at the Synod and promises all manner of Assistance but finds fault with his quitting his Church to live elsewhere In the 219th he orders him to refer it to the Bishop of Pavia whom he had Commissioned to Excommunicate those that deserve it The 221st Letter is to the Clergy of Milan whom he orders to proceed to the Election of a new Arch-Bishop instead of Anspert whom he had deposed in his Synod and tells them that he sends the Bishop of Pavia and Rimini to joyn with them in this Election This
966. he came into France where he purchas'd Lands and bought the Abbeys of S. Amand of Aumont and of Alne in the last of which he dy'd in the year 972. This Bishop has compos'd several Treatises a great part whereof hath been recovered and publish'd by Father Dachery in the second Tome of his Spicelegium The first has a very fantastical Title 'T is entitul'd A Treatise of the Perpendiculars of Ratherius Bishop of Verona or the Vision of a Thief hang'd among several others It is dedicaed to Hubert Bishop of Parma and he therein reprehends that slight which the Clergy put upon the Canons The Work is divided into two parts In the first he complains that he had formerly been turn'd out by the Clergy of his own Church who could not endure that he should concern himself with the distribution of the Ecclesiastical Revenues of his own Diocess tho it was part of the Pastors Duty and who were not willing he should exercise himself in any other Function than that of consecrating the Chrism and of confirmation Being harass'd by their continual Rebellion he undertook in this Writing to shew that their Attempt was a manifest Contempt of the Canons and for the proof thereof he began by collecting those Canons which related to the Authority of Bishops and which granted to them the Administration of the Goods belonging to their own Churches Afterwards he made it appear by an Argumentation that Bishops not being only oblig'd to feed their Flocks spiritually but also corporally they had a right to take cognizance of the state and distribution of the Church Revenues so as to divide them among the Clergy according to justice and equity He shews that this equity had been perverted in the distribution which was made in the Church of Veronae because the most powerful ran away with the greatest share thereof and enrich'd themselves at other mens costs and that the Priests and Deacons kept all to themselves without parting with any to the rest of the Clergy He adds that these latter in whose behalf he spoke did not much concern themselves about it upon two accounts First because they were very glad they had this pretence to excuse themselves from doing the Church any service Secondly because they hop'd hereafter to have the same advantage Whereas they objected that the custom of the Church of Verona was quite contrary he maintains that they ought not to prefer an evil custom to the Intention of the Canons and to the Laws of the Church It was again objected to him that it was a reflection upon a Bishop to degrade himself so far as to distribute amongst the Clergy and to appoint each their Allowance of Corn of Wine and of Money He reply'd to this that it was not at all requisite that the Bishop should do this himself but that he might do it by his Priests and Deacons if he could find any among them whom he could trust which way was authoris'd by the example of the Apostles who made use of Deacons to distribute the Alms which were collected by their Order and by the practice of S. Sixtus who committed the distribution of the Treasures of the Church to S. Lawrence upon which he makes this remark that St. Lawrence speaking to S. Sixtus told him that he had disposd of his Treasures calling the Treasures of the Church the Treasures of the Bishops because the Bishop is as it were the Husband of the Church He proves the same things out of the Civil Laws which gave the Bishops a power of treating about the priviledges of the Church He afterwards invieghs against that general contempt which all sorts of Christians from the meanest Laick to the Pope himself cast upon the Canons and Laws of the Church and he with a great deal of heat declaims against the irregular Lives of the Ecclesiasticks of his time who made no scruple of violating the Canons openly in matters of moment as well as in small things He reproves very smartly and charges them with several Disorders which he describes in a plain and naked dress He speaks against those persons of Quality who were mark'd out for Church Preferments and advanc'd thereto by all manner of contrivances how unfit soever they were for such an employ He calls them Thieves false Shepherds whose blessing turn'd to a curse persons excommunicated by the Canons a thousand times over who render the Authority of Bishops contemptible and were the cause why men set so slight by their excommunications and absolutions In the Second part of his Treatise Ratherius more particularly falls upon the Immodesty of the Clergy which was at such a heighth in his time that one could scarce says he find a man fit to be ordained a Bishop or any Bishop fit to ordain others He takes notice that of all the Nations in Christendom the Italians were the persons who had the least regard for the Canons and the least esteem for the Clergy * This is likewise one great reason of that general Contempt which our modern Clergy labor under and which will in all succeeding Ages cast a scorn and 〈◊〉 reproach on all such irregular Clerks of what Church or Nation soever they be The reason he gives for it is that the Ecclesiasticks of their Country were the most irregular in their Conduct the most Immodest in their outward behaviour and the most remiss in the discharge of their Duty He reckons up several horrible Stories and charges them chiefly with an Infamous Converse with Women In the conclusion he gives them to understand that they had still place left for Repentance and earnestly exhorts them thereto This Work was compos'd by Ratherius some time after he was last re-established in his Bishoprick of Verona by the Emperor Otho about the year 962. The Second Treatise is intituled A Deliberative Determination made at Liege He there alleges forty reasons why he thought himself obliged neither formally nor tacitly to renounce the Government of his Flock nor to abandon it to those who had robb'd him of it These Reasons are strong and short and are of the Nature of Aphorisms In the conclusion he says that he formerly made use of them for the Bishoprick of Liege but that the Sixteen first were likewise applicable to that of Verona He ends with an Imprecation against those who persist to harass and disturb him This Work was written at that time when he sollicited his re-establishment in the Bishoprick of Verona The third Treatise is intituled Qualitatis conjectura cujusdam He therein exposes under an unknown Name all that his Enemies laid to his charge and how they construed all his actions in a wrong sense 'T is a continu'd piece of Rallery on their Spite and Malice and wrote about the end of his Life when he had taken up his resolution to retire for he therein observes that it was forty years ago since he began to aspire to Greatness and Authority without being ever able
to take Orders In the CCXXXIId to Hildebert Bishop of Mans he maintains that a Man who had been too familiar with his Wife's Mother before his Marriage ought not to be Divorc'd from his Wife but upon good proof of his having been carnally joyn'd to the Mother In the CCXXXIIId to Henry Abbot of St. John d' Angeli he declares that he adheres to the opinion of the Popes Gregory and Urban touching Investitures given by Lay-men and believes that they who allow them the power of bestowing Church-preferments are Schismaticks nor is he affraid of hereby offending Pope Paschal who has own'd in several Letters to him that what he had done with Relation to the Investitures he had been constrain'd to do by the violence of others but was still in his heart of another opinion In the CCXXXIVth he perswades William Abbot of Marmoutier to end his quarrels with Ralph Arch-Bishop of Tours and in the CCXXXVth he tells that Arch-Bishop he is glad that the Bishops of Mans and Anger 's Labour to procure Peace between him and the Abbot The CCXXXVIth Letter is written in the Name of Daimbert Arch-Bishop of Sens and his Suffragans to John Arch-Bishop of Lions who had summon'd them to a Council call'd at Anse near Lions to consult about matters of Faith and the dispute of Investitures They assure him though they have a great respect for him yet they will not go beyond the limits set them by their Ancestors and that the Holy Fathers allow'd no Authority to the Bishop of the Chief See to call the other Bishops to any Council out of their peculiar Provinces unless by the Express command of the Holy See or that upon some Controversy which could not be Terminated within the Province any of the Bishops of it should appeal to the Primate As to the matter of Investitures propos'd to be Treated of in this Council they tell him it cannot be done without discovering the nakedness of their Father the Pope and besides 't would be needless to have any thing prov'd against persons they dare not pass Sentence upon that the Pope may be excus'd for granting Investiture since he did it only by force and in cases of necessity that 't is foolishly done of some to bestow the name of heresie upon Investitures since heresie can be only in matters of Faith not in the Practice and Discipline of the Church or at most those only can be reckon'd guilty of error who suppose some Sacrament or Grace conferr'd by the Investiture if ever any were so weak as to think so that however Investitures are an Invasion upon the Rights and Liberties of the Churches and ought to be abolish'd in all places where it may be Effected without endangering a Schism The CCXXXVIIth is the Arch-Bishop of Lions's answer to the foregoing Letter wherein he protests he did not mean to force them out of their Province to a Council but only desir'd to Confer with them and ask their advises about the State of the Church not but that the Church of Lions has such Authority over the other Churches of France As to the persons he would have Treated about he says there is not one of them but ought to submit to the pleasure of a Council even Kings and Emperors being subject to the Authority of the Bishops that he did not design to uncover but to hide the nakedness of their Father the Pope that no dangers nor obstacles ought to hinder them from courageously defending the cause of the Church that those who approve of Investitures remaining in the hands of the Laity are Hereticks in their hearts that he will not usurp any undue Authority over the Diocess of Sens but prays them to-remember 't was always Subject to the Primacy of the Arch-Bishop of Lions In the CCXXXVIIIth Letter to Pope Paschal Ivo endeavours to disswade him from constituting a Bishop over the Church of Tournay and exempting it from the Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Noyon it has been under these 400 Years least his Holiness by so doing create a misunderstanding between the King and the Clergy and raise such a Schism as hapned in Germany In the CCXXXIXth he Compliments King Loüis le Gros upon his intended Marriage with a Niece of the Earl of Flanders In the CCXLth he warns a certain Monk of the Scandal he occasions by his too great familiarity with a Nun. In the CCXLIst he writes to Humbaud Bishop of Auxerre not to suffer a Cause already determin'd in the Ecclesiastical Courts to be brought again before the Earl or any Secular Judge In the CCXI IId to Owen Bishop of Eureux he explains himself concerning his having given his opinion that a Free-man who had Married a Slave without knowing her to be such ought to be Divorc'd from her and adds that this is not dissolving a Lawful Marriage but only declaring that 't is unlawful for them to live together any longer their Marriage being Null by Law In the CCXLIIId to Gualon Bishop of Paris he says that a Marriage concluded on by the Parents between two Children in their Cradles is of no force The CCXLIVth is written to Pope Paschal in favour of Hubert Bishop of Senlis accus'd by some of his Clergy to the Metropolitan of selling Holy Orders He had met with hard usage from the Bishops of his own Province and therefore appeals to the Pope to whom Ivo recommends his Case The CCXLVth is to Hugh Earl of Troyes who having Listed himself for the Holy Land design'd to put away his Wife and live in Celebacy Ivo commends his Resolution but advises him to do it with his Wife's consent and to lead a Regular Life In the CCXLVIth to Lisiard Bishop of Soissons he declares that 't is not allowable for a Man to Marry two Sisters successively though the Marriage with the former of them were not consummated In the CCXLVIIth to John Bishop of Orleans Ivo highly blames him that upon a quarrel between the Earl of Orleans and Ralph Lord of Baugency he and his Church had consented that they should decide it by single Combat And In the CCXLVIIIth he advises the latter to carry himself respectfully towards the Earl of Orleans In the CCXLIXth to Gilbert Arch-Deacon of Paris he affirms that those who had been assistant and consenting to an Adultery cannot be receiv'd as witnesses against the Adulteress In the CCLth he intercedes with Pope Paschal that he will grant to Ralph Bishop of Rochester Elected to the See of Canterbury the Confirmation of that Dignity and also the Pallium which he is not able to come and ask in person of his Holiness In the CCLIst to Manasses Bishop of Meaux he tells him he did well to refuse administring the Viaticum or last Sacrament to a dying person who was troubled with a constant vomiting In the CCLIId he writes to Ralph Arch-Bishop of Rheims that he thinks it unreasonable that a Woman suspected of Adultery by her husband should undergo the
leaves his Bishoprick to retire into a Monastery 10. The Oppositions made against his Promotion to the Dignity of an Abbot remov'd by Ives Bishop of Chartres ibid. The Hospital of Chateaudun put under the Protection of the Church of Chartres 2â— Hubert Bishop of Senlis Letters written by Ives Bishop of Chartres in favour of that Bishop when accus'd of certain Crimes 20. Hugh Archbishop of Lyons the Remonstrances made by Ives Bishop of Chartres to procure the Legateship of France for that Metropolitan 12. The Rights claimed by him in Quality of Legate 7. These Rights disputed by Ives Bishop of Chartres 7. Hugh Bishop of Grenoble his Canonization 148. Hugh Count of Troyes the Advice given him by Iâ—es Bishop of Chartres concerning the King's Marriage 18. And about Celebacy 20. Hugh Vicount of Chartres his Contest with Count Rotroc 15. Hugh Lord of Puiset Excommunicated for oppressing the Church of Chartres 12. The Restitutions which he made ibid. I. JErusalem the Rights of the Patriarchs of Jerusalem and there Jurisdiction 35. Jesus Christ his Divinity clearly maintain'd in Scriptures 85. And prov'd against the Jews 170. That the Body of Jesus Christ was real and true 185. Ignorance sins of Ignorance 75. Images the Use and Worship of them 141. The Immutability of God in what it consists see God Incarnation the Incarnation of the Son of God known to the Prophets 76. And to the Angels ibid. A Treatise of the Incarnation by the Master of the Sentences 196. Incendiaries Punishments to be inflicted on them 206. Indulgences granted to those that visit the Tombs of the Apostles 29. Injunctions and Dispensations of their differeâ—â— kinds and obligations see Dispensations Investitures their Original Progress and Ceremonies with an account of the Contests about them 31. 32. The use of Investitures in England and among other States 33. The Claim to this Right by the Kings of France vindicated by Ives Bishop of Chartres 7. The Opinions of the said Ives of Chartres and some other Bishops of France concerning the Investitures 19. They are oppos'd by Geffrey Abbot of Vendôme 134. 135 Maintain'd by Pope Paschal 36. And condemned in the Council of Guastalla 25. The Emperor Henry IV. claims 'em with respect to the Pope 25. His Right to 'em is disputed by Pope Paschal ibid. The Arguments produc'd on both sides 26. Proposals made by the Emperor to the Pope relating to the Investitures and accepted by the later ibid. The Bishops of Germany oppose that Treaty ibid. The Pope's Bull set forth to oblige 'em to accept it 27. The Pope being taken Prisoner grants the Investitures to the Emperor ibid. The Cardinals declare the Popes Proceedings to be void and of none effect ibid The Council of Lateran revokes 'em ibid. Several Councils do the same thing and condemn the Emperor Henry 28. A second Council at Lateran disannuls all the Pope's Transactions relating to the Investitures ibid. Proposals for an Accommodation as to the Affair of the Investitures 29. They are rejected in the Council of Rheims ibid. The Conclusion of the Treaty about the Investitures between the Pope and the Emperor made at Worms 30. Confirm'd in the Council of Lateran 31. 37. The Emperor Lotharius endeavours to cause the Investitures to be re-establish'd 38. John Archbishop of Lyons his Claims oppos'd by Ives Bishop of Chartres in the Name of the Arch-bishop of Sons and of his Suffragans 19. The Rpplies made by the Archbishop of Lyons 19. John Bishop of Orleans his Intrigues in aspiring to that Bishoprick 6. 8. Which he obtains by causing Sanction his Predecessor to be depos'd 8. He is ordain'd notwithstanding the opposition made by Ives Bishop of Chartres 8. 9. A Contrast between him and Ives of Chartres about an Excommunication which the latter had publish'd against certain Diocesans of the Bishoprick of Orleans 9. St. John Du Val-Abbey its Foundation 21. Judicature Ecclesiastical When the Administration of Ecclesiastical Judicature began to be committed to Officials 217. It ought to be administred Gratis 216. Litigious Suits and Evasions in Ecclesiastical Courts condemn'd 68. That Kings and Princes have Power to Judge Clergy-Men in consulting the Bishops 206. Judicature Civil forbidden to be administred by Clergy-Men 214. Ives Bishop of Chartres Constituted Superior of the Regular Canons of St. Quentin at Beauvais 〈◊〉 Afterwards made Bishop of Chartres in the room of Geffrey depos'd 1. Consecrated by the Pope after having receiv'd a repulse from the Arch-bishop of Sens 2. Being summon'd to a Council and refusing to appear his Ordination is revok'd 2. He Appeals from the Judgment of this Council to the Pope 2. 3. His endeavours to hinder the Marriage between King Philip and Bertrade 3. His Imprisonment for opposing the said Marriage 3. The Means he rejects and those that are propos'd by him for his Liberty 3. Remonstrances made by him to the King concerning his Marriage 4. The Reasons that engage him not to repair to the Court 4. Nor to appear in the Council of Rheims where he had been summon'd 5. He resigns the Provostship of St. Quentin at Beauvais into the Hands of the Bishop of that Diocess 4 He dissuades the Pope from giving Absolution to King Philip Excommunicated by reason of his being Marry'd to Bertrade 6 He refuses to take an Oath of Fidelity to the Count of Chartres and Blois without his City 6. The Controversies between him and King Lewes the Gross 12 The time of his Death 2 K. KEys the Sentiments of the Ancient School-Men concerning the Power of the Keys 203. Kings The Conduct that ought to be observ'd with respect to 'em 58. What Liberty is to be taken in speaking to 'em 58. That they ought not to be Excommunicated 34. Knights divers Orders of Knighthood 218. The Institution of that of Knights Templars 74. L. LAy-Men that they are capable according to Peter of Cluny of-receiving Tithes and Ecclesiastical Revenues 61. 62. Legates of the Pope their Authority 7. They are not always impower'd to call Councils 6. Disorders committed by Legates 62. Lepers a Church and Priest granted to 'em 209. Lewes the Gross King of France a Manifesto to justifie the Coronation of that Prince 17. The cause of his Displeasure against Ives Bishop of Chartres 11. The same Prince reprov'd by Ives Bishop of Chartres concerning a Present which he demanded of that Prelate 17. 18. Livings see Parsonage Logick a Prohibition of it 96. Lord's Prayer whether it ought to be said therein Our daily Bread or Our Supersubstantial Bread 96. Love of God divers sorts and degrees of it 74. Lyons the Primacy of Lyons own'd by St. Bernard 6. M. MAccabees why they only of all the Saints of the Old Testament have their Festivals Solemniz'd by the Church 51. Manasses II. his Promotion to the Archbishoprick of Rheims 6. Manasses Bishop of Meaux his Election approv'd by Ives Bishop of Chartres who likewise consents to his Ordination 12. Means propos'd by Ives Bishop of Chartres to put
of Eugenius and the Election of Foelix because many Persons of Probity and Authority doubted whether his Suspension and Deposition and the Election which follow'd upon it had been done justly canonically and lawfully and whether at such time as this was done the Congregation did sufficiently represent the Universal Church to do so considerable Acts as these which concern the whole Church therefore the King not being sufficiently inform'd about these things did still persevere and remain in the Obedience of Eugenius but if he should be inform'd of the Truth of this Cause by the Oecumenical Council or by another General Council or even by a more numerous Assembly of the Gallican Church with its Dukes Barons and other Lords or in an Assembly of all the Christian Princes that then having known and examin'd the Truth he would adhere to it and therefore he pray'd That Pope Eugenius would call together and celebrate a Council and that he would be there himself in Person Thirdly That he would consider what was to be done at a convenient time and place about the Embassy of Mayence Fourthly That as to the Pragmatick Sanction he would have it to be inviolably observ'd That if any thing in it appear'd too rigid to the Council of Basil it might be moderated He advis'd also the Ambassadors of the Council of Basil That they would endeavour the Celebration of another future Council This Answer was given in the Assembly of Bourges in the presence of the King assisted by Charles Duke of Anjou and the other Princes of the Blood on the 2d of September 1440. and accompanied with a Discourse which the Bishop of Clermont made wherein the King testifies his Displeasure against the Heats and Animosities which were between the Pope and the Council That he should have been glad if it were in his Power to favour the Duke of Savoy who was his Kinsman but that he could do nothing against Justice that How Christendom stood affected towards Eugenius and Foelix he exhorted the Fathers of the Council to seek after Peace and not to trouble his Subjects with Censures Lastly That he hop'd the Duke of Savoy would accommodate this Affair by his ordinary Prudence The Deputies of Basil were not well satisfy'd with this Answer which lower'd the Expectations of Foelix's Party but they were rais'd again by the Letter they receiv'd in October from the King of Arragon wherein he gave the Title of General Council to the Council of Basil by the Letter from the Queen of Hungary Sigismund's Widow to Pope Foelix and yet The Resolutions of divers Assemblies of States about the Difference between Foelix and Eugenius more by the acknowledgment of Albert Duke of Bavaria and Albert Duke of Austria Kinsmen to Frederick Foelix to make himself more Creatures depending upon him created Eight Cardinals in the Month of October and Six others that were French-Men in November among whom was John of Segovia and Nicolas Archbishop of Palerma The University of Paris the Universities of Germany and that of Cracovia wrote in Defence of the Authority of the Council above the Pope and acknowledg'd Foelix He was also own'd by the Carthusians and by a Party of the Order of Friars Minors Many Prelats and Princes of Germany favour'd also his Party but in the Assembly which was held at Mayence in April 1441. the Deputies on both sides being heard no other Resolution was taken but that a General Council should meet the next Year in the Month of August in another place than Basil and Florence and in a City of Germany or France and that the Emperor should invite the Competitors to be there present But this Proposal had no Effect for the Emperor referr'd the Affair to the Assembly of Frankfurt which was held in the Month of May the next Year where the Emperor was present in Person and having heard the Deputies of the Council and Eugenius confirm'd the Resolution that was taken to call a Council and in the mean time to remain in the Neutrality In pursuance of this he sent Ambassadors to Eugenius and the Council to persuade them to yield to the Celebration of a Council and he himself came to Basil. The Fathers of the Council agreed upon the Translation of the Council and to name many Cities whereof the Emperor should choose one But Eugenius after he had consulted a long time made answer in the Year 1445 That it was no ways necessary to call a New Council since there was one already call'd That in the mean time to satisfie the Emperor assoon as he should come to Rome he would call together in the Palace of the Lateran whither he had translated the Council a great number of Prelats with whom he would consult whether it were expedient to call another The Emperor Frederick seeing that neither the Fathers of Basil nor Eugenius would consent to what he desir'd wrote a Letter to all Christian Princes in June 1443. wherein he desires their Consent for a General Council which he would appoint and prays them to send their Ambassadors to the Diet which was to be held at Nuremburg at the St. Martin that they might there consult together of the Means for putting an end to the Schism This Assembly was not numerous Foelix sent thither his Legats but there was no treating about this Affair which was put off to another time In the mean time Alphonsus King of Arragon the Venetians the Florentines the Siennese and the other People of Italy sollicited the Emperor to consent That a General Council should be held in the Church of St. John of Lateran and some time after the Emperor also sent Aeneas Sylvius to Pope Eugenius to promise him to take off the Neutrality England had no great share in the Transactions at the Council of Basil there being no Prelats in the Council from that Nation The Council had sent Deputies into this Kingdom before the Election of Foelix to whom the English gave almost the same Answer with the French That they honoured the Council and approv'd its Decrees except those which had been made against Eugenius whom they acknowledg'd for lawful Pope The Fathers of the Council sent thither also other Deputies after the Election of Foelix to whom some hopes were given but they had no positive Answer Scotland except some Lords declar'd for Eugenius and the Prelats of this Kingdom being Assembled in a Provincial Council Excommunicated Foelix and the Fathers of the Council of Basil. Poland promis'd to acknowledge Foelix if he would give to their King the Title of King of Hungary and remit to the Lords the Mony which had been gather'd by Indulgences granted for the Union of the Greeks No Body thought that he had Power to grant these Desires yet this prov'd favourable to Foelix and the King of Poland forbad any to obey Eugenius Italy continu'd firm to Eugenius except Piemont and Savoy The Duke of Milan begun a Treaty with Foelix and seem'd to
the Processes made against Peter de Luna in the Council to shew that he is Perjur'd Schismatical one that gives Scandal to the Church of God and is suspected of Heresie and that as such he ought to be depos'd In the last Piece he examins this Proposition Whether the Sentence of a Pastor tho' it be unjust ought to be observ'd and he maintains That it is false erroneous suspected in Matter of Faith He explains also this other Proposition Unjust Sentences are to be fear'd that is that they may sometimes be the occasion of fear with respect to timerous Consciences but not that they are in themselves formidable The Treatise of the Incarnation which follows consists of two Parts in the first he treats of the Natural Incarnation of Jesus Christ and in the second of the Eucharist In the former he speaks of the immaculate Conception of the Virgin of the Perfections and Graces which she receiv'd from Jesus Christ who gave her all those which he in his Wisdom thought convenient but not all those which he could have given her As for instance he gave her not the perfect use of her Reason immediately after her Conception or Birth which would be a rash Assertion In the second Part he treats of the actual Reception of the Body of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist he examines what we ought to think of the Spiritual Sentiments of Love and the Tenderness which some of the Faithful feel and shews that they are not necessary that often times they are Illusions that when one gives himself up to them he is liable to fall into Extravagances and Errors John Rusbroek had fallen into this Excess in the third part of his Book about the Ornament of the Spiritual Marriage where he advances many Propositions about the Union of the Contemplative Soul with God Gerson refutes him in the Letter which he wrote to a Carthusian wherein he shews how dangerous it was to make use of new Terms to express the more sublime Truths of Divinity and that those who have not studied the Doctrins of Religion how contemplative soever they may be ought not to meddle with Teaching or talking of speculative Truths because they are liable to fall into dangerous Errors or at least to advance many Propositions that are false and ill-express'd which give occasion to the common People to fall into Error John Schonhow wrote a Piece to defend the Treatise of Rusbroek to which Gerson answer'd in a second Letter wherein he shews that these Novelties cannot be excus'd nor maintain'd This Piece of John Schonhow and the Answer of Gerson follow the first Letter whereof we now speak The two Lectures upon St. Mark are Discourses wherein he handles divers Questions of Morality and Discipline as about the Validity of Confessions made to Friars Mendicants the Reiteration of Confession the literal Sense of the Scripture the Causes of Errors c. He shews in a Piece about the Communion of the Laity under both kinds that though the Scripture is the Rule of Faith yet it may admit some Interpretations and that it belongs to the Church to explain it In the second Part of this Piece he opposes the Error of those who maintain'd That it was necessary to Salvation for the Laity to communicate under both kinds and relates the Reasons for justifying the taking away the Cup from them The two next Treatises are very useful for establishing such genuine Principles whereby we may distinguish true Doctrin from that which is false The former is entitled The Tryal of Spirits and the latter The Examination of Doctrins In the former he gives Rules for distinguishing false Revelations from true in the latter he lays down the Maxims by which we may know to whom it belongs to examine a Doctrin and what Rules they are to follow in this Examination A General Council is the Sovereign Judge of Doctrins of Faith after it the Pope whose Authority nevertheless is not infallible and each Bishop in his own Diocess whose Decision is different from that of the Pope so that the Authority of the first extends to the whole Church whereas the two last can oblige only those that are subject to their Jurisdiction The Doctors also have an Authentick Judgment in Matters of Doctrin and each Person instructed in Scripture and Tradition may also give his Judgment and teach even the Pope and Prelats those Truths which he knows The same is to be said of those who have the Spirit of Discretion and Understanding The Rules which we are to follow in judging of a Doctrin whether it be sound or no are these First That it be agreeable to Scripture and Tradition Secondly That he who Teaches have Authority to do it and be worthy of Credit upon which account the Visions and Revelations of Women are commonly suspected because they may be easily seduc'd Thirdly That we ought to examine the Design of him that publishes a Doctrin whether he be acted by Pride Interest or Pleasure In the end of this Treatise he relates the Example of a Woman in a Town of Bresse who persuaded many Persons that she had deliver'd Souls out of Hell by feigning Extasies and wonderful Things and by using extraordinary Abstinence and who being taken confess'd that she seign'd all these things to get a Livelihood He adds afterwards other Rules very useful to preserve us from these ways of Seducing He makes an Encomium of St. Bonaventure in a Letter written 1426 to a Frair Minor at Lyons and in another Letter written 1424. to Oswald a Carthusian In the Letter address'd to the Students of the College of Navar he gives his Opinion about the Studies a Divine ought to follow As to the Schoolmen he advises them to read William Auxerres St. Bonaventure Durand Henry of Gandavo and St. Thomas chiefly in his 2d of the 2d He blames these Authors and the like only for one thing That they have handled Questions purely Physical Metaphysical or even Logical in Theological terms As to Morality he advises them to read Matters of History the Dialogues of St. Gregory the Conferences and Lives of the Fathers the Confessions of St. Austin and the Legends of the Saints As to Preaching the Mystical Expositions of the Fathers such as the Morals and Pastoral care of St. Gregory the Commentary of St. Bernard upon the Canticles and some Works of Richard of St. Victor and of William of Paris As to the Works of Prophane Authors he would not have a Christian give his Mind wholly to them but only look into them and curiously run them over like a Traveller to pick up their moral Sentences to form a Style and to render himself moderately skill'd in History and Poetry In a Letter written to the same he gives them Instructions and exhorts them not to oppose the Re-establishment of the French Preachers in the University of Paris but to favour it Gerson being consulted by a Carthusian if he might quit his Convent or
a Spiritual Sence of a State of Righteousness and Holiness In the Homily upon the Words of the Proverbs Give no sleep unto your Eyes publish'd by Cotelerius St. Basil exhorts to Watchfulness and the Practice of Good Works His Homilies upon the Psalms are written in the same Stile but they are more fill'd with Morality He departs sometimes from the Literal Sence and does not always apprehend the true Sence of the Prophet Yet he does not make use of obscure and forc'd Allegories but all that he says is Intelligible Natural Useful and Pleasant The Commentary upon Isaiah is not so lofty nor so full of Morality but 't is very Intelligible and very Learned The Five Books against Eunomins are a most compleat Work of Controversy he recites the Arguments and Words of this Heretick and refutes them very solidly and very clearly In the Two first Books he refutes the principal Arguments which this Heretick used to prove that the Son was not like to his Father He answers them very clearly and discovers the Falshood of this Heretick's Reasonings In the Third he answers the Objections which he made against the Divinity of the Holy Spirit In the Fourth he proves that the Son of God is not a Creature but is truly God And Lastly in the Fifth he proves the same thing of the Holy Spirit He handles the most intricate Matters of Theology in a manner very Learned and Profound and yet without perplexing and entangling them with the Quirks the Difficulties and Terms of the Schoolmen He proves also the Trinity of Divine Persons and their Equality in the 16th Homily upon the Beginning of the Gospel of St. John and in the Book against the Sabellians He particularly Establishes the Divinity of the Holy Spirit in the Treatise of the Holy Spirit address'd to Amphilochius He compos'd it upon occasion of a Complaint that some Persons had made against him that at the Conclusion of his Sermons he had said Glory be to the Father and to the Son with the Holy Ghost instead of saying as some do In the Holy Ghost Amphilochius had ask'd him the proper Signification of these Terms and the Difference between the one and the other Expression St. Basil commends him for this Exactness and observes that 't is very useful to search out the proper Sence of the Terms and Expressions which we use In the 2d Chapter he makes this Observation That those who will use different Terms in Glorifying the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost do it for no other End but to conclude from thence the Dissimilitude and Inequality of the Three Persons of the Trinity In the 3d. Chapter he shews That the difference of these Terms of whom by whom in whom have no place but in Philosophy and we ought not to use them when we speak of the Three Divine Persons In the 4th he shows That this Particle of whom signifies in Scripture the Efficient Cause since 't is said that all things are of God In the 5th he shows That the Scripture says of the Father by whom and of the Son of whom and that it uses the same Expressions when it speaks of the Holy Ghost In the 6th he answers those who affirm That we cannot say the Son of God is with his Father because he is after his Father St. Basil maintains that the Son of God is not at all inferiour to the Father neither in respect of Time nor in respect of the Place he holds nor in respect of Honour and Glory being Eternal as the Father Infinite as the Father and having a Glory and Majesty equal to that of the Father In the 7th he proves That this Expression with the Son is not New That the Church has used it to denote the Majesty of his Divine Nature as she has also used that other by the Son to signify the access which we have to God the Father by his Son and therefore we ought to use the former Expression when we sing the Praises of God and the latter when we thank him for the Favours he has done us He explains this Distinction in Ch. 8. and there he recites many Names of Jesus Christ. In the 9th he explains his Judgment concerning the Divinity of the Holy Spirit which he received by Tradition and which is agreeable to the Doctrine of the Holy Scripture He proves that the Holy Spirit is a Spiritual Person Eternal Infinite Unchangeable c. who strengthens us and gives us Life by his Gifts In the 10th and 11th he refutes those that would not joyn the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son He proves the contrary by the Institution of Baptism and accuses those that would not add the Holy Spirit to the Father and the Son Of Violating the saving Sacrament of Baptism Of Prevaricating in the Vow which they had made and of Revolting from the Religion which they had once professed In Chapter 12. he answers the first Exception of his Adversaries who said That Baptism given in the Name of Jesus Christ was sufficient St. Basil answers First That the Name of Jesus Christ denotes the whole Trinity because it signifies the Anointed of the Lord. Now he says that the Word Anointed designs him that does Anoint and him by whom he is anointed Secondly That Faith is inseparable from Baptism because Faith is perfected by Baptism and Baptism supposes Faith That the Profession of Faith precedes Baptism which is as it were the Seal of it Lastly He maintains that 't is not sufficient to Baptize in the Name of Jesus Christ but that we must invoke the Three Persons of the Godhead according to Inviolable Tradition and that we ought to add nothing to nor take any thing from this Invocation In the 13th he refutes a Second Answer of his Adversaries who say That tho' the Holy Spirit were oftentimes in Scripture joyn'd to the Father and the Son yet it would not follow from thence that he was equal to them since the Angels are there sometimes joyn'd with God St. Basil answers That there is a great Difference between the manner in which the Scripture speaks of Angels and of the Holy Spirit because it considers the former merely as Ministers whereas it considers the Holy Spirit as the Fountain of Life and joyns him with the Father because of the Unity of Essence In the 14th he resolves also a third Difficulty It was objected to him That tho' Men be baptiz'd in the Name of the Holy Spirit yet it does not follow that the Holy Spirit is equal to the Father and the Son since 't is also said in Scripture That they were all baptiz'd into Moses in the Cloud St. Basil answers That this Expression of St. Paul signifies only that Moses and the Cloud were the Figure of the Baptism of Jesus Christ but that the Truth is much more Excellent than the Type In the 15th he answers a fourth Sophism We are baptiz'd in Water said the Hereticks and yet
has plainly owned it to be false when he says in Heres 75 that Prayers for the Dead could expiate some Sins tho' they could not blot out great Crimes The Fifth Dogm of the Church which Soultetus opposes by St. Epiphanius is the Vow of Continence But the Passages which he alledges are so far from opposing it that they plainly discover that it was used in the time of this Father and that the Church punish'd those very severely who violated it The last is about Baptism administred by Women St. Epiphanius in Heres 76 says that it was not lawful for them to baptize Do not we say so also But does it follow from thence that their doing of it in a case of necessity is not valid This is what Scultetus should prove but it is not the Question of St. Epiphanius These are the false Consequences which Scultetus urges to oppose the Doctrine of the Church But he does so grosly calumniate us by charging upon us the detestable Opinions of some Hereticks that he must have renounced all kind of Modesty to affirm such manifest Untruths with so much boldness First of all He accuses us of making Women the Ministers of Baptism as the Marcionites did But where is it found that Women do Administer Baptism in our Churches They never do it but in great necessity And 't is no Heresy to say That in this Case all Sorts of Persons may Administer it 't is no part of the Error of the Marcionites or the Collyridians Secondly He charges us with trusting to Revelations and Miracles as the Nazarenes did But is it an Error to believe that there have been and that there may be Revelations That Man must have no Religion who says the contrary The Hereticks are to blame for reigning false Miracles but the Catholicks are not to blame for Believing true ones Thirdly He compares Transubstantiation to the Enchantments of Marcus who having put white Wine into a Glass made one part of the Liquor appear Red as Blood another of a Purple colour and a Third of a Blew But what Affinity is there between our Holy and Sacred Mysteries and the Diabolical Actions of these Ministers of Daemons What Relation has our Doctrine to these Impieties The other Accusations of Scultetus are no less Calumnious For do we offer the Sacrifice of the Mass in honour of the Virgin as the Collyridians did Do we teach that Concubinate is lawful as Aëtius did Do we adore Idols The Images to which we pay a bare External Respect are they the Images of Simon and Helena and other Hereticks Are they not the Images of Jesus Christ and the Saints to whose Persons only all our Worship is referred Do we condemn Marriage and the use of Meats as Tatian and the Encratites did Do we believe that the Souls of the Wicked may be delivered out of Hell In short Is there any Similitude between all the Errors of the Hereticks related by St. Epiphanius and the Doctrines of the Church Do not we Believe what the Church Believed in his Time Do not we Practise what she Practis'd On the contrary are not they the Innovators of our Time who take part with the Hereticks of that Time against the Church Do not they deny with Aetius the distinction of Bishops and Presbyters Do not they find fault with Prayers for the Dead and the Honour which is given to Saints Do not they condemn the Celibacy of Priests the Vow of Virginity the Monastick State the Ceremonies the Sign of the Cross the Solemn Prayers These are the Errors which St. Epiphanius condemns in the Hereticks of his Time and which he refutes by the Practice and Tradition of the Church And therefore that may justly be charged upon the Sect of Innovators which Scultetus has unjustly charged upon Us That their Doctrine is a Garment patched together and made up of many Pieces and many Shreds Who is most in the right Scultetus or our Author will not be hard to judge to any one who is acquainted with undisguised Popery I say undisguised because Mr. Du Pin goes upon the palliating Principles laid down by the Bishop of Meaux There is no question but the Seeds of those Corruptions began to spring up in St. Epiphanius's Time which afterwards grew so high in the Church yet tho' they honoured the Dead who died in the Lord and prayed for those who were Guilty of lesser Sins they neither called upon the former nor believed a middle State for the latter if St. Epiphanius's Authority be decisive in those places which are faithfully urged by Scultetus In the case of Images in Churches Mr. Du Pin gives it up because St. Epiphanius says expresly that it was against the Word of God Contra auctoritatem Scripturae In the Matter of the Real Presence our Author and Petavius before him lay great Stress upon a Passage in the Anchoratus Sect. 57. wherein speaking of the Sacrament as Christ's Body he says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that does not Believe it to be the real Body of Christ as he said himself is fallen from Grace and Salvation Now to know the full meaning of St. Epiphanius in these Words we are to go back to the beginning of Sect. 55. There he raises a dispute of the meaning of Adam's being created after the Image of God since there is so great disparity between their Natures And he finds that this cannot be Physically understood because to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are very different things yet since it is said in Scripture we ought to believe it Now to prove this Assertion he urges the Institution of the Lord's Supper Our Saviour said says he of the Bread This is my Body and yet it is not like Flesh in the least so as to resemble Christ's Humane Nature nor like the invisible Godhead so as to resemble his Divinity But because he has said it we must not dispute it since if we should dispute it we should fall away from Grace and Salvation This Illustration therefore cannot in reason be carried farther than the Original Question which it was designed to illustrate wherefore seeing that St. Epiphanius confessed that when we say that Man is created after the Image of God we do not mean that he is created after the Nature of the Invisible Incomprehensible and Spiritual God it is plain that his illustration of the Eucharist is equally figurative as this Expression of Man's Nature which he is now explaining But it is needless to run through all the rest of the Articles here particularly named St. Epiphanius's Authority is decisive of neither side if it were we must believe that Divorces are lawful for other Causes besides Adultery and that such Divorces perfectly dissolve the Marriage Bond for this was his Opinion as appears from Heres 59. Sect. 4. of ancient Heresies The Stile of St. Epiphanius is neither beautiful nor lofty on the contrary it is plain
than Sermons S. Chrysostom does not inlarge so much upon Moral Topicks as to give the sence and understanding of the Text. He follows the Version of the LXX but he often hath recourse to the differences of the Ancient Greek Versions and quotes even the Hebrew Text in some places to clear difficulties There are some Psalms upon which we have no Homilies of S. Chrysostom as the first and second but there are upon the third and following to the 13th upon the 41st and 43d and so on the 117th and from the 119th to the last which make in all sixty Homilies which certainly are S. Chrysostom's To these may be added the Homily upon the thirteenth Psalm and two others upon the fiftieth which have likewise S. Chrysostom's Style Those upon the 51st 95th and 100th are more doubtfull yet I see no reason that we should reject them It is not so of the Commentaries upon the 101st Psalm and upon the six that follow which are Theodoret's The Commentary upon the 119th belongs to some modern Greek that speaks against the Iconoclasts and takes out of Theodoret's Commenâ—aries part of what he writes There are also four Sermons upon particular passages of the Psalms but they must not be joined to the rest because they are not Explications of the Text of the Psalms but Sermons upon distinct Subjects These are a Discourse upon these words of the 44th Psalm The Queen standeth at thy right hand preached in Constantinople some Days after Eutropius his Disgrace who had retired into the Church but was gone out again He speaks in his Preface of the Advantage of reading the Holy Scripture He describes afterwards how the Church was beset when Eutropius had taken Sanctuary there He relates what he had done to help him and with what sincerity he had spoken without fearing the Threatnings uttered against him He observes that he was taken by his own fault for the Church had not forsaken him but he had quitted it But yet it was no wonder that he reaped no greater benefit from that Sanctuary because he entred not into it with a Christian heart That when any Man flies into the Church to take sanctuary there he ought to go in with his Mind as well as with his Body because the Church is not made up of Walls but of an Holy Union among the Members of Jesus Christ. Upon occasion of this Eunuch's Disgrace he shews how little Solidity there is in the goods of this World and draws a fine Picture of the Instability of Riches and then concludes with an excellent Description of the Church Nothing says he to his Auditors is stronger than the Church Let it be your Hope your Haven and Refuge It is higher than the Heavens of a larger extent than the Earth She never waxeth old but still retaineth her strength and vigour for this cause the Scripture calleth her a Mountain to shew her stability a Virgin because she cannot be corrupted a Queen because of her Magnificence and Splendour and it gives her the Name of Daughter by reason of her Union with God c. Both the Sermons upon these words of the 48th Psalm Be not thou afraid when one is made rich were likewise preached in Constantinople In them he recommends Alms-deeds and Hospitality and he toucheth upon the Necessity of being present at Divine Service The Homily on these words of the 145th Psalm My Soul bless thou the Lord is a Sermon for the Holy Week called then the great Week The reason of that Name S. Chrysostom gives in the beginning of his Discourse which is this This Week says he is called the great Week because Jesus Christ wrought great Mysteries at this Time He delivered Man from the Tyranny of the Devil he overcame Death bound the strong armed Man blotted out Sin But as this Week is the great Week because it is the first of Weeks for the same reason Saturday is called the great Day and for this cause many of the faithfull do upon this Day double their Exercises some fast with greater Austerity others watch continually others bestow much on the poor some apply themselves with greater Zeal to the Practice of good Works and by their Piety bear witness to the Mercy of God Emperours themselves honour this Week they grant a Vacation to all Magistrates that so being freed from worldly Care they may spend these Days in the Worship of God They give honour also to this Day by sending Letters every where to command the Prison doors to be opened Let us also have regard to these Days and instead of Palm-branches let us offer him our Hearts Then he explains the Psalm My Soul praise thou the Lord. The royal Prophet says he cries out Praise the Lord O my Soul why does he direct his Discourse to the Soul to teach us that the Soul should apply her self to the words that are uttered For if he that prayeth doth not understand his own words how would he have God to give ear to him God often doth not grant our Petitions but that is for our good he deferrs some time not to deceive us with vain hopes but to make us more zealous and diligent for the fervency of Prayer 〈◊〉 ceaseth when we have what we desired so that to keep up our Devotion God is pleased to with-hold his Gifts He observes in this Sermon that the Righteous after Death live with us pray with us and are amongst us c. S. Chrysostom writ a Commentary upon Isaiah but we have only part of it from the beginning to the eleventh Verse of the eighth Chapter Both the historical and spiritual Sence is set forth with much solidity and clearness There are also five Homilies of his upon these words of Isaiah ch 6. I saw the Lord â—pon an high Throne and one concerning the Seraphim spoken of in the same place they are moral 〈◊〉 upon various Subjects and especially of the reverence due to sacred things and of the dignity of the Priesthood there is a very remarkable passage concerning the Ecclesiastical and the Civil Power Uzziah saith he went himself into the Holy of Holies to offer Incense 〈◊〉 being King he would usurp the Priesthood I will said he burn Incense for I am worthy to do it Oye Princes keep within the Limits of your own Power The bounds of Ecclesiaâ—tical power differ from those of secular Government The King rules over earthly things the Churches Jurisdiction relates to heavenly goods God hath committed to Kings the things of the Earth and to me those of Heaven when I say to me I mean to Priests So that though a Priest prove unworthy of his Office yet for all that you ought not to despise the dignity of the Priesthood God hath made the Body subject to Kings and the Soul to Priests The King pardons corporal Offences but the Priest remits Sins The one compels the other exhorts the one imposes a law the other gives counsel one uses spiritual
the Divine Nature is so high and unsearchable that it is not possible to comprehend it and pursues this Reasoning so far that he sticketh not to say that Seraphims and Angels themselves do not see the Substance of God but only an Emanation of his Divine Light This passage Ib. Orat. 1 hath made some modern Greeks suppose that the Saints do not see the Substance of God but only a Corporeal Light such as they say appeared upon Mount Tabor This also hath exercised the Subtilty of our Divines who constitute Happiness in the Vision of the Substance of God And yet S. Chrysostom hath respect in this passage neither to that Light of the Modern Greeks not to the Disputes of the Schoolmen his only design is to shew against Aetius that the Divine Nature is not to be comprehended and that evident Reasons of the Mysteries are not to be given It is not necessary to inlarge upon the Opinions of S. Chrysostom concerning the Mystery of the Trinity it is certain that he maintained the Faith of the Council of Nice and that he proved the Divinity both of the Son and of the Holy Ghost yet it ought to be observed that he was of Meletius's opinion concerning the Signification of the word Hypostasis and that he owned Three Hypostases and one Nature in God As to the Mystery of the Incarnation tho' he was equally contrary to the Errour Ep. ad Caesarium Homil. de Consub in lib. Quod Christus sit Deus V. Theodor. in Dialog of those who distinguished two Persons in Christ and that of those who confounded the two Natures and their Properties yet he in several passages of his Writings declared against the latter Opinion very eagerly In his Panegyricks of the Saints he ascribeth to them all manner of Felicity Homil de B. Philog Hom. de S S. Homil. 39. in ep 1. ad Cor. Hom. 28. in ep ad Hebr. Hom. 29. Matth. he places them in Heaven in the same Rank with Angels and Archangels of Prophets and Martyrs and yet in other places he seems to affirm that their Happiness is referred to the Day of Judgment but these may agree well enough if we say that he spake in the latter of a perfect and consummated Happiness Angels if we believe S. Chrysostom are so called because they declare the Will of God unto Men for which cause the Scripture representeth them with Wings Homil. 3. de Incompreh Hom. 3. in ep ad Coloss. Hom. 14. in ep ad Hebr. They take care of Men are present at Divine Services and every Christian hath his Guardian Angel The Devil is not wicked of his own Nature but is become such by Sin God permits him to tempt Men for their good It is a Childish thing to believe that Hom. de Diabolo tentatore Hom. 22. in Genesim those are Angels which the Scripture calleth the Children of God in Genesis and of whom it is said that they conversed with the Daughters of Men since they are of a spiritual and incorporeal Nature He Confesses in several places that the Fall of the first Men was prejudicial to the whole Race which ever since is become subject to Pains Sicknesses and Death from which it was free before Sin He acknowledgeth that an inclination to Evil and Lusts are Consequences of the first Man's sin but he seemeth not to have owned Original sin after the same manner that S. Austin doth at least it cannot be denied that he hath given another Sence to those places of S. Paul which seem to prove it most As for Example when he expoundeth that famous passage Rom. 5. 12. By One man sin entred into the World c. He understandeth of Death what S. Paul saith of Sin because it is the Wages of Sin and upon those other words of the same Chapter As by the disobedience of one many are become Guilty c. This Sentence saith he seems to have much of Difficulty for how can it be that one only Man having sinned many should be made guilty by his sin We may easily conceive that the first Man being become mortal it was necessary that his Off-spring should be mortal likewise but what Likelihood and what Reason is there that a man should be a Sinner because of anothers disobedience ... What then signifyeth the word Sinner In my Opinion it signifyeth nothing else but a condemned Man subject to Pain and Death This is a way of speaking which does not agree with S. Augustin's Doctrine Tho' it is not hard to defend S. Chrysostom by saying That tho' he spake thus yet he admitted all that Divines own concerning Original sin For what is Original sin according to them It is either a Privation of Original righteousness or Lust with the guilt of Sin or pain and Guilt together But S. Chrysostom acknowledges all these for in the first place he Confesseth that by the first Man's sin all men were deprived and spoiled of the State of Innocence that they are become not only mortal and subject to Pain and Grief but also inclined to Evil. Thus in his Opinion Lust is an effect of the first Man's sin and that Concupiscence in men makes them unworthy of eternal Life if the Grace of Jesus Christ saveth them not by Baptism He ascribes much to the strength of Free-will He always speaks as if he believed that it depends upon our selves to do good or evil and affirms that God always gives his Grace to those De verbis Jer. Hom. 1. Hom. 2. in 1. ad Cor. Hom. 41. in Genesim Hom. de tribus pueris Hom. 12. in ep ad Hebr. 8. in ep ad Phil. 19. ibid Hom. 17. in Joan. Hom. 18. in ep ad Rom. 12. in ep 1. ad Cor. In Matth. Hom. 83. Hom. 45. in Joan. In orat de S. Pelagia Serm. de Zachaeo Hom. 34. in Matth. Hom. 80. in ep ad Rom. Hom. 16. 18. in ep ad Rom. Hom. de obscur Prophet Serm. 5. de Lazaro Hom. 45. in Matth. who on their side doe all they can That we must begin and God makes an end That he followeth the motions of our Wills and giveth them their Perfection yet he owns the necessity of Grace to do good but submits it still to our Will So that according to him We are to will and chuse the good and God gives us the necessary Grace to fulfil the same he prevents not our Will that our Liberty may not be prejudiced he worketh good in us but that is when we are willing when our Will is determined he draweth to himself but only those who do all their endeavours to come near to him Those Principles about foreknowledge and Predestination agree very well with these Conclusions God did not predestinate men but as he foresaw their merits foreknowledge is not the cause of the event of things but God foresaw them because they shall happen He calls all men Jesus Christ died
they have stuck to S. Augustin's Principles whereupon they erected their Theological Opinions After this no Man needs wonder that his VVorks were so much looked after formerly and so many times published since Printing was invented The Edition of St. Augustin's VVorks was one of the first considerable Things that Printers committed to the Press Amerbachius undertook it in 1495. This Gothick Edition was followed by that of Basil in Nine Volumes in the Year 1506. and by that of Paris in 1515. with long Lines published in 1528. and in 1526. which is the fairest for its Character The Editions of Guillard and Chevallon which came out not long after are likewise pretty fair ones In 1571. Two came out the one in Paris by Morellus and the other at Lions The Doctors of Louvain having carefully Revised St. Augustin's VVorks caused them to be Printed at Antwerp in 1577. The following Editions are only new Impressions of this The first and the fairest was done at Paris 1586. and was followed by those of the Years 1609 1614 1626 1635 1652. not to mention that at Venice in 1584. that at Colen in 1616. and the last Edition at Lions Now they having Printed from time to time several Treatises of St. Augustin that were not in the former Editions Father Vignier thought fit to collect them into a Body that might serve for a Supplement to all the Editions of St. Augustin He joyned to it the imperfect Treatise against Julianus and some Sermons which had not been Printed before and published them all in Two Volumes in Folio at Paris in 1655. This Labour becomes useless by the last Edition of St. Augustin which excelleth and effaces all the fore-going Editions ZOSIMUS POpe Innocent I. dying the 12th of March 417. Zosimus was promoted into his Place upon the 18th of the same Month. Though he sat but One Year Nine Months and some Zâ—simus Days in the Roman See yet he very much exerted his Authority in the Disputes which he had with the Bishops both of Africa and Gaul This appears by his Letters which we are now to discourse of according to the Order wherein they ought to be placed To understand those which concern Africa we are to know That Coelestius Pelagius's Disciple having been condemned in the Council of Carthage assembled in 412. thought it convenient to appeal to the Pope contrary to the Order and Custom of that Time The Africans did not much trouble themselves about that Appeal neither did he much value it himself for without taking it out he went to Ephesus where he found means to be Ordained Priest Some Years after he came to Constantinople from whence he was Expelled by Atticus who discovered his Error and writ against him to Thessalonica to Carthage and into Asia That happened at the same time that Zosimus was raise to the Popedom Coelestius being informed of it came immediately to Rome to prepossess this new Pope and to ingratiate himself with him by making him a Judge in his Cause And indeed Zosimus finding this a fit Opportunity to promote his Design of Encreasing his Authority and drawing to himself the Appeals of Causes judged in other places he failed not to hearken to Coelestius and to admit him to justifie himself He left all other Businesses to stick particularly to this He made Coelestius appear in St. Clement's Church examined the Heads of the Accusation that was formed against him He caused him to make a Confession of Faith whereby he disowned the Errors which Heros and Lazarus had laid to his Charge He enquired after the Qualifications of those Accusers whom he found as he saith to have been wrongfully Ordained Expelled out of their Bishop-ricks and separated from the Communion of the rest Zosimus though much prepossess'd in Coelestius's behalf yet durst not give Judgment in his Case without writing to the African Bishops but he did it after such manner as sufficiently discovered how much he favoured him For after he had writ all this that we have said he declares That if Coelestius's Accusers came not to Rome within Two Months to Convict him of maintaining other Opinions than those which he then professed he should take it for granted that he was Innocent At the latter end he declares all these Questions to be only vain Subtilties and unprofitable Contests which rather destroy than edifie and are Effects of an imprudent Curiosity and of too great an itch of Speaking and Writing This Letter was written about July in the Year 417. After the writing of this Letter Zosimus received one from Prailus Bishop of Jerusalem in Coelestius's behalf with Pelagius's Confession of Faith This News the Absence of the Accusers and the Silence of the Africans who returned no Answer to his Letter confirmed him in the Judgment which he had made of Coelestius's Doctrine He deals with their Accusers as with most unworthy Persons He upbraids Lazarus as one that made it his practice to accuse the Innocent and as one that had been condemned by Proculus Bishop of Marseilles in a Synod at Turin for having falsely and calumniously accused Britius Bishop of Tours He adds That having been Ordained Bishop of Aix some time after by the Favour of Constantine the Tyrant he retained the Shadow of the Priesthood so long as the Power of that Tyrant lasted As for Heros he reproacheth him for following the same Party and for doing Violence Afterwards he tells the African Bishops That they were to blame in being so easily persuaded upon the Word of those Accusers and makes no scruple of declaring Pelagius and Coelestius Innocent seeing their Accusers had not appeared Zosimus's First Letter was carried by Basiliscus a Subdeacon who cited Paulinus to the Pope's Tribunal but he did not concern himself to appear And the African Bishops were not at all moved by Zosimus's Pretension on the contrary they stood by the Judgment which they had given firmly which also had been confirmed by his Predecessor They told him plainly That this Cause being born in Africa and judged there Coelestius could not Appeal nor he take Cognizance of it Lastly They made a Protestation to prevent Zosimus pronouncing Judgment by default in the behalf of Coelestius and Pelagius Yea they went further for without waiting for the Pope's Judgment they confirmed what they had done and condemned the Doctrine of Pelagius and Coelestius a-new Having taken this Precaution they writ again to Zosimus and sent him all the Acts of what had been done in Africa against Coelestius shewing him at the same time That it was not enough to oblige Pelagius and Coelestius to approve in general what was in Pope Innocent's Letter but that they ought to be made to acknowledge particularly all the Catholick Truths that were contrary to their Errors Zosimus having received these Letters with the Advertisements of the Africans who had likewise written to Court about the business durst not go any further and was contented to assert his Authority by
the consent of their own That if they appeal from this Judgment it must be to the Council of Africa and it Excommunicates those that shall make their Appeals to Judges beyond the Seas The Tenth contains an Exception from that Prohibition of veiling a Virgin before the Age of Five and twenty when being in danger of Death she desires it or her Parents for her Lastly That they might not too long detain the Bishops out of their Diocesses they chose three out of each Province and gave them Power to order all things with Aurelius who is desired to Subscribe the Canons and Rules now mentioned which were also Subscribed by all the Bishops Of the Council of Tella or Zella and of some other Councils of Africa AMong the African Councils is reckoned one held the 22d of February in the Year 418. at Council of Telia or Zella c. in ccccxviâ—j Tella or Zella whereof a Decree is produced which confirms the Fourth Letter attributed to Pope Syricius and under whose Name some Canons are found in the Collection of Ferrandus the Deacon They do not agree about the Name of the place where this Council was celebrated It is said in the beginning That it was Assembled at Tella some think that it should be Zella instead of Tella because some Canons are quoted under that Name by Ferrandus Sirmondus thinks that we should read Telepta because Donatianus of Telepta presided yet all Editions constantly call this the Council of Tella and we read in the Notitia of the Pro-consular Province of Africa that there was a City called Tella in that Province which was a Bishops See This City differs from Telepta and from Zella which were in the Province of Byzacena And though Ferrandus citeth Canons under the Name of a Council of Tella and Zella yet it doth not follow that he believed it to be the same Council on the contrary it is probable that the Canons Registred in his Collection under different Names were made by different Councils But it is very likely as Father Quesnel hath observed That both the Council of Tella and the Canons Registred in Ferrandus under that Name are Supposititious For First Tella being a City of the Proconsular Province what likelihood is there that a Council of the Province of Byzacena should be called there and that Donatianus the Metropolitan of Byzacena should Preside in it Secondly Is it credible That a numerous Council should be Assembled in February at a time that a General Synod of Africa was Summoned for the Month of May Thirdly Wherefore do they suppose that the Legates of the Proconsular Province should assist at a Council of the Province of Byzacena Fourthly This Council is supposed to have been Assembled to receive the Fourth Letter of Pope Syricius This Letter is Spurious as we have shewed and though it were not How unlikely is it that the Africans would go about to confirm it so late Is there any Example of their so doing What reason had they to do it Why should they make use of the Pope's Letter written several Years before to make Regulations by In the Fifth place Some of the Canons in Ferrandus's Collection under the Name of the Council of Tella do not suit with the African Customs That in the 6th Ch. forbids ONE Bishop alone to ordain another Bishop except the Bishop of Rome The African Bishops had been far enough from approving this Exception so contrary to the Canons and to Custom The others are taken out of Syricius's Epistle against the African's pertinaciousness who did not own the Canons of other Churches except those of the Council of Nice and such as had been made in African Councils As for the other Canons cited under the Name of the Council of Tella or Zella they may be true and it is probable that they are of another Council namely Those that are in the 3d. 16th 65th 68th and 218th Chapters The others are in the 4th 6th 30th 138th 174th Chapters There is mention in this Council of another Council held at Thisdry under whose Name there are two Canons in Ferrandus the Deacon's Collection Ch. 76th and 77th In this Collection there are likewise some Canons of other African Councils of which we have no other knowledge The Learned Baluzius collected them in his new Collection of such Councils as were omitted in the preceding Collections Vol. 1. Page 366. and 367. Councils of Carthage in the Years 418. and 419. Concerning the Cause of Apiarius URbanus Bishop of Sicca a City of Mauritania Coesariensis and formerly St. Augustin's Disciple Councils of Carthage concerning Apiarius in ccccxviij ccccxix did both degrade and excommunicate Apiarius a Presbyter as one that had been unlawfully ordained This man repaired to Pope Zosimus who received him kindly and admitted him to the Communion This Pope's action contrary to the Rules of the Church that forbid Bishops to receive those Clerks that are excommunicated by their Brethren amazed the African Bishops But Zosimus seeking an opportunity to extend his Dominion and increase his Authority would not let this occasion slip Wherefore he sent Legates into Africa a Bishop called Faustinus and two Priests Asellius and Philip not only to cause Apiarius to be restored but also to make them admit of the Canons of the Council of Sardica concerning the Appeals of Bishops to the See of Rome and the Judgments of Clerks The Africans seeing that the Pope undertook to protect Apiarius judged it more convenient to accommodate the business and so they found this Medium to put him out of the Church of Sicca and give him leave to do the Functions of his Order any where else But before they came to a conclusion suspecting that Zosimus's Legats were not come into Africa without some Design they urged them to give an account of their Commission At first they would have made some Proposals of their own but the Africans without hesitation desired to see the Writings of their Commission and so they were obliged to read the Memorial of their Instructions which contained four Heads The First was touching Appeals to the See of Rome The Second To hinder Bishops from going to Court The Third That Priests should be permitted to have their Causes examined by Neighbouring Bishops By the Fourth they were commanded either to Excommunicate Urbanus Bishop of Sicca or to cite him to Rome except he retracted what he had done The Second Head admitted no Dispute because the African Bishops had already enacted That neither Bishops nor Priests should go to Court They answered the Fourth by composing the business as we have said so that only the First and the Third remained to be decided and they were of great consequence The Pope's Legates alledged to support their Pretensions the Canons of the Council of Sardica which allow Appeals to the See of Rome for Bishops condemned by a Provincial Synod and permit a Clerk condemned by
Canons of the First Council of Orange the Second of Arles and Anjou where only Deacons were obliged to Continence for the Decnee of the Council of Orange was only for the future It cost a great deal of Trouble to bring the Deacons to a Submission to that Law seeing that the Bishops were forced to renew it often It was afterwards enlarged to the Sub-Deacons in some Churches as appears by the Councils of Venice and Agatha but that Discipline was not general in all Churches of France as we learn by the Letter of Lupus of Troyes Tricassinus and Euphronius of Autun Augustodunensis â—o Thalasius Bishop of Anjou In the Fourth he declares That a Clergyman who gives his Daughter in Marriage to one that hath a Concubine ought not to be treated as if he had given her to a Person already married because Concubines cannot be counted lawful Wives nor the familiar Commerce with them Marriage at least they are not free endowed nor joyned together by publick Marriage In the Fifth he saith That the Daughters of those Parents who have married them to Persons that have Concubines do not sin in dwelling with those to whom they are married In the Sixth That it is not the Sin of Adultery but a vertuous Action for a Man to cast off his Concubine that he may live only with his Wife The Concubines which are spoken of in this Place are Slaves with whom Men lived as with their Wives without having any Commerce with others although they were not solemnly married to them In the Seventh he saith That they are much to be blamed for their Negligence I who attend Dying Persons to require Repentance of them but do not insist upon it when they are returned to Health again That they ought not to give over wholly their Design but bring them by frequent Exhortations to perform that which Necessity obliged them to require because we ought to despair of no Man so long as he is in this World and it often happens that Men do that in their riper Age which they have deferr'd through Distrust In the Eighth That those that die after they have undergone their Penance without being reconciled ought to be left to the Judgment of God and no signs of Communion be allowed them This Practice was contrary to that of the African French and Spanish Churches In the Ninth he speaks of those who having demanded Penance when Afflictions lay upon them would not undergo it when they were mitigated He saith That it may be this Dispâ—sition doth not proceed from a Contempt of Repentance but from a fear of Sinning and that it must not be deny'd them if they request it a second Time In the Tenth he saith That a Penitent ought not to go to Law before the Sâ—cular Judges but before the Ecclesiastical only because he ought to abstain from such Things as are permitted In the Eleventh he saith That although it is nothing but the Nature of Gain that excuseth oâ— condemneth Trading yet it is most convenient for a Penitent wholly to forbear it because it is hard to avoid Sin in Commerce either on the part of the Seller or on the part of the Buyer In the Twelfth he observes That it is contrary to the Laws of the Church to become a Soldier after a Man hath done Penance In the Thirteenth he says That he could wish that those who have done Penance when they were Boys would not marry yet he excuses young Men who do it when it is to avoid Incontinency In the Fourteenth he orders That the Monks who have married or listed themselves for Soldiers should be made to do Penance because they cannot leave that Profession without Sin when they have once embraced it but are obliged to perform their Vows In the Fifteenth he condemns the Virgins who married after they had voluntarily put on the Habit of Virgins and imbraced Virginity although they were not yet consecrated In the Sixteenth and Seventeenth he affirms That they must be baptized anew who have not any Proof that they have been already baptized although they remember that they have been heretofore in the Church In the Eighteenth he saith That it is sufficient to lay Hands upon and call upon the Holy Spirit over those that do remember that they have been baptized but know not in what Sect. In the Nineteenth and Last he saith That those Infants who after Baptism have Lived among the Heathen ought to be put to publick Penance if they have worshipped Idols or committed Sins but it is sufficient to purge them by Imposition of Hands and Fasting before 〈…〉 It 〈…〉 of these Questions haâ—e been determiâ—â—â— by the 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which 〈◊〉 Bishop of 〈◊〉 was Presidâ—â—t 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That 〈◊〉 Bishopâ— of 〈◊〉 who was evil affâ—cted to that Bishop â—â—d rather â—ave 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishop of Rome than to the Councils of his Province but thâ—se Decisions of S. Leo 〈…〉 the Customâ— of the Church of France as we have â—â—â—served 〈◊〉 may be 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of those Councils The Third Letter of S. Leo is directed to the Bishops of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 and other Proâ—â—nces Daâ—ed October the 〈◊〉 in the Year 443. S. Leo Observes in the beginning of this Letter That as the Order of the Churches was a Joy to him so he was troubled when any thing was done contrary to the Canons and Discipline of the Church He adds That if the Bishops did not restrain the disorders with all possible diligence since they are appointed to watch 〈◊〉 the Flâ—ck of Jesus Christ they are inexcusable tâ— suffer that the Body of the Church which they ought to keep in Purity should be deâ—â—â—ed and corrupted with Dissentions is a great 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 annexâ—s to this Adâ—…ion these following Canons In the First he forbids That such Persons be not received into the Clergy as are Slaâ—es as also Farmers oâ— Suâ—…s or any other who depend in any manner soever upon Masters at least that thâ—se upon whom they depend do not require it He gives Two Reasons for this Prohibition The First Because the Sacred Ministry is as it were made Contemptible by such sole of Persons And the Second is Because it doth an Injury to their Mistresses Pope 〈◊〉 allows the contrary in respect of the Farmers in his Ninth Epistle In the Second Caâ—â—n he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Ordinations of Persons that have been twice Married and commands by virtue of his Apoâ—â—â—lical Authorities that they be hindred from doing the Offices of their Ministry reserving to himself the Cognizance of the Cause of such as bring some 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in and that no Man might pretend Ignorance altho 't is not sufferable for a Bishop to be Iâ—…ant of what is ordered by the Canons he tells them He had sent this Letter by Three Bishops which may be a reason to think that it was written in a Synod The Third and Fourth Canons are against Usurers
These are the first which forbid Usury 〈◊〉 Lay Men. In the last Canon 〈◊〉 declares That those that will not Obey these Decrees shall be deprived of their Dignities and they that will not Conform to the Discipline of the Church of Rome shall have no part in her Communion Lastly He commands them to keep the 〈◊〉 and Ordinances of his 〈◊〉 but especially of Pope Innocent Those saith he which have been prâ—â—â—lged about the Order of the Church and 〈◊〉 Disâ—ipline Quâ— de Ecclesiasticis ordinibus Canonum promulgata sunt disciplinâ—s For so it ought to be read as it is in the MSS. and noâ— Ordiâ—â—â—â— as it is in some Editions Hinomaâ—us reads promulgata and mâ—th Amplifies this passage in Opusâ—â—â—â— 33. Ch. 10. This Letter was sent to the Bishops of It al subject to the Church of Rome as their Meâ—â—opolis and therefore 't is no wonder if S. Leo speaks to them with so much Authority The Fourth Letter to 〈◊〉 Bishop of Thessalonica is taken out of the Acts of the Council of Rome under 〈◊〉 II which is to be found in Hâ—â—â—â—â—nius's Collection In this Letter S. Leo makes Anastasius his Deputy in Illyria imitating therein the Example of Sâ—â—â—cius who had first granted that 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 and he exhorts him to imitate his Predecessor and â—o have a 〈◊〉 of the Churches which he committed to his charge Above all he recommends to him That he cause the Canons about the Ordination of Bishops to be observed and that he oppose the Election of Persons who have been Twice Married especially when they have Married the first Wife before Baptism He would not have him suffer the Metropolitans of Illyria to Ordain any Bishop without his apprâ—â—ation nor themselves to be 〈◊〉 but by himself He charges the Bishops to come to the Synods which he shall call to Judge in common what concerns the Discipline of the Church and deâ—â—res him That if there happen any cause of great consequence which they could not determine he would give him an account of it that the Holy See might decide it according to the Ancient Custom Whereupon he Observes That he entrusted him with his Authority in such manner nevertheless as that he reserved to himself those Causes which could not be ended in the Province or in which there should be an Appeal to the Holy See He Admonishes Anastasius to make known all these Orders to all the Bishops that they may have no ground of Excuse if they did not put them in practice and that he had written to the Metropolitans that they ought to acknowledge him the Deputy of the Holy See In the conclusion he reproves the fault of some Bishops who Ordain'd Priests and Deacons upon other Days than Sundays an Usage which he says was contrary to the Canons and Tradition of the Fathers This Letter is Dated January the 11th 444. The Fifth Letter which is directed to the Metropolitans of Iâ—â—yrin is that which he mentions in the foregoing S. Leo Exhorts them to take care that the Canons be not broken and tells them That he had made Anastasius Bishop of Thessalonica his Deputy that they might Obey him in those things which concern the Discipline of the Church He sends them at the same time some of the Rules which he wrote in the foregoing Letter and repeats them in this The Sixth Letter is superscribed to a Bishop of Aquilcia his Name is not found in any MSS. nor in the more Ancient Editions In the latter Editions the Name of Nicetas is put before it without any other reason but only because there is another Letter of S. Leo's that bears the Title of Nicetas Bishop of Aquileia But since there is also one to Januarius Bishop of the same See there is nothing that can determine to which of these Two this Letter belongs but only the time when it was written That which is directed to Nicetas bears Date in the Year 458 and that to Januarius in 447. This of which we are now speaking is not far from 447 for S. Leo therein speaks against the Pelagians whom he opposed in the beginning of his Pontificate at the same time when he attacked the Manichees as the Author of the Book of Predictions and Promises attributed to S. Prosper shews in Chap. 6. Now it is certain that it was in 444 that he set upon the Manichees And consequently it must be to Januarius and not Nicetas to whom this Letter was written In it S. Leo tells film That he had heard by the relation of Septimius that some Priests Deacons and other Ecclesiastical Persons who had been engaged in the Heresie of Pelagius or Coelestius had been admitted to the Communion of the Church in their Province without being required to condemn their Error expresly Insomuch that while the Shepherds slept the Wolves have entred into the Fold of Jesus Christ without laying aside their Cruel Disposition That they had likewise done a thing which the Canons and Constitutions of the Church do not allow the most Innocent in leaving the Church where they had been admitted Clerks to go to other Churches That their design was by this means to corrupt many Churches by hiding the Heresie with which they were infected under the shew of Communion to which they had been received without being obliged to any Profession of Faith To remedy this disorder he enjoins the Bishop to whom he wrote To call a Synod and to compel all his Clergy to Condemn openly the Authors of their Heresie and to make a Confession in writing That they do firmly hold all the Synodical Decrees made for the Extirpation of that Heresie and confirmed by the Authority of the Apostolick See He adds That great care ought to be had that they make use of no obscure or ambiguous Terms because he knows them to be so deceitful that if they can avoid the Condemning any Branch of their Errors by that means they will put themselves under any disguise That One of their principal Artifices is when they pretend to condemn all their Doctrines and renounce them sincerely to slide in this pernicious Maxim That Grace is given according to Deserts That that Opinion is contrary to the Apostles Doctrine who Teaches us That Grace which is not given without Merit is not Grace and that the disposition to Good-works is also an effect of the Grace of Jesus Christ which is the beginning of Righteousness the Source and Original of our Merits That when they say on the contrary that Natural Industry must go before it their design is to insinuate by it that our Nature hath not been impaired by Original Sin Then he Exhorts Januarius to beware least his People raise new Scandals by obliging them to purge themselves from all manner of suspicion upon pain of being driven out of the Church He Admonishes him also about the end That he should not suffer the Priests Deacons or other of the Clergy to pass from one Church to
assuring them that the Eastern Bishops would rather separate than condemn the Memory of Theodorus Whereupon S. Cyril wrote to Proclus That though he believed the Works of Theodorus to be full of Impieties and Blasphemies yet he thought it more convenient for Peace sake and to prevent a separation of the Eastern Bishops not to speak of him chiefly because he dyed in the Communion of the Church Proclus wrote on his part to Maximus that he disapproved his Carriage that he ought to be obedient to his Bishop and not trouble the East and that he would send his Deacon back again when his Writing is Signed and the Propositions annexed at the end of it be rejected John Bishop of Antioch and the Eastern Bishops could not hold their Peace seeing the Memory of a Bishop who was of so great reputation among them to be assaulted Being assembled therefore at Antioch in 436 or 437 they wrote three Letters for the defence of Theodorus the one to the Emperor Theodosius the other to Proclus Bishop of Constantinople and the third to S. Cyril In the Letter to Theodosius they humbly represent to this Emperor that it is unjust and prejudicial to the Church to quarrel at the Writings or Memory of Theodorus that this great Man Facund l. 2. c. 2. for five years together was a professed Enemy and Opposer of Heresie That he was commended admired by all the World and highly esteemed by Theodosius the Great That he was the Scholar of Flavian and S. Chrysostom That having Written a great deal it is likely he may have Ibid. l. 8. c. 3 5. l. 11. c. 14. some Expressions which may give some ground for the Accusations brought against him That the Ancient Fathers have used the same Modes of speaking which are reproved in the Works of Theodorus Lastly That those who bring this Accusation are troublesome Persons who are delighted in nothing but disturbances and confusion In the Letter to Proclus they commend his Book blame those that were the Authors of the Division who accuse their Bishops and not content to raise Sedition against the Living desire to do it against the Dead and make their attempts to condemn Theodorus Theodorus who in his Life-time never received any reproof who was always commended and esteemed by the Emperor and Bishops who ever opposed himself against the Heresies and wrote 10000 Volumes to confute them They conclude this Letter by maintaining that we may find an infinite number of such like passages as those of Theodorus in Ignatius Eustathius S. Athanasius S. Basil Flavian Diodorus S. John Chrysostom S. Ambrose and Atticus From whence they infer that if we condemn Theodorus we must also do the same to them because there is none of them out of which the like passages may not be taken especially if we sever them from what goes before and follows after as they have done in those that are extracted from the Writings of Theodorus Lastly in the Letter to S. Cyril they say that being Assembled upon the account of Proclus's Letter they thought it needless to enter into a new contest concerning the Writings of Theodorus Fac. l. 1. c. 1. l. 8. c. 4 5. l. 11. c. 1. 8. all things being at peace That it is possible that there may be in the Works of that Author some places which are capable of an ill sense but there were others where he delivers his Judgment plainly in a very Orthodox manner That we may meet with the like Expressions in the Holy Fathers particularly in S. Athanasius Theophilus and Proclus's Letter That it is very dangerous to blemish the Memory of a Man who served and defended the Church for several Years and so much the more because by condemning him we must involve several of the Fathers in the same Fate That 't was this that made the Defenders or Nestorius so victorious who were amazed to see themselves cursed with the such Bishops as dyed in the Communion of the Church and in so great esteem That Theodorus having opposed the Hereticks was obliged to reject their Errors more plainly and to make use of such terms as might seem to favour the Opposite Errors The Emperor made answer to John and his Synod That he had heard by Proclus what a stir some Persons began to make in the East and exhorts him to provide for the Peace and encounter Collect. of Lupus c. 29. those who are the promoters of the Disturbance That his Intention is that all those that are under his Gouernment should live in Peace and chiefly the Church That they might be confident of this and therefore be more active to further and secure the Peace of the Church Proclus also gave them a very civil Answer declaring to them That when he wrote his Book he had no design to condemn Theodorus That his Deacon Theodorus had no Order to do it and Facund l. 8. c. 22. that he was contented to reject these Propositions which seemed to him False or Erroneous without naming the Authors Lastly Although S. Cyril openly declared himself against the Writings of Theodorus of Mopsuesta yet he wrote to John Bishop of Antioch as he had before done to Proclus That he approved that for the Peace of the Church they should content themselves to condemn the false Propositions taken out of the Books of Theodorus without meddling with his Memory This Letter is recited in the Fifth Council where it is accused of Falshood because they pretend that it doth not Act Conc. 5. Coll. 5. agree with the other Letters of S. Cyril but if they consider them well they are not contrary to this In it he condemns the Writings of Theodorus and Diodorus and reproves those that commend the Doctrine of these Authors but he doth not pronounce Anathema against their Persons on the contrary in his Letter to Proclus he is of the same Opinion as in this It cannot be proved that he changed his Judgment or that he ever was against the Peace in which he had engaged himself We would here make an end of the Council of Ephesus but before we pass to the History of the Council of Chalcedon it is necessary to add something by way of Illustration upon such points of the History as do admit of some difficulty And first It is demanded who it was that called the Council of Ephesus It is evident that it was Theodosius the Younger The Cardinals Baronius and Bellarmine both agree in this but they pretend that this Emperor did it by the Pope's Authority and following his Judgment and Advice This supposition is groundless and indeed it is easie to prove by the course of the History that it was impossible that the Emperor should take the Pope's Advice when he called the Council Saint Caelestine having examined the Cause of Nestorius referred to his Council by both Parties wrote to S. Cyril that he should certifie Nestorius That if he did not change his Opinion within ten
Cabals which are us'd for the Election of a Pope contrary to the Order of this Council and that if he who shall discover them had a hand in them he shall not be molested These Canons were read by a Notary and approv'd by the reiterated Acclamations of all the Fathers of the Council Anastasius or the Author of the Pontifical which goes under the Name of Damasus make mention of a second Council of Rome under Symmachus in which they pretend that this Pope was acquitted by 115 Bishops and that Peter of Altinum who was nam'd Visitor was Condemn'd together with Laurentius who had been Symmachus's Competitor But we have no Monument of this Synod neither is it probable that there was such a one since there is no mention made of it in the Synod which we are now about to speak of nor in the Apology of this Synod compos'd by Ennodius wherein he would never have fail'd for the Defence of Symmachus to alledge the first Judgment that was given in his favour The Synod which is now reckon'd the third was call'd by the Authority of King Theodoric in the Year 501 to judge of the Accusations charg'd upon Symmachus The Bishops of Emilia Liguria and of the Country of Venice went to Ravenna and enquir'd of the King for what cause he call'd them together He answer'd them That it had been reported to him that Symmachus was accus'd of many horrible Crimes and that he thought it necessary to examin the matter and determine in a Council whether he was guilty of them or no. The Bishops remonstrated that he who was accus'd should have call'd a Council himself because they were perswaded that the Merit and Primacy of St. Peter and the Decrees of the Holy Councils had appropriated to his See a supereminent Power and that it was never heard that the Bishop of Rome submitted to the Judgment of his Inferiors The King said That the Pope himself had consented to the Calling of a Council and caus'd the Letter to be shown them wherein he signified that he desir'd it This Conference is as it were the first Session of this Synod When the Bishops were come to Rome the Pope came the first time to the Assembly and having testify'd his Obligation to the King for Calling this Synod he demanded in the first place that the Visitor who had been appointed for his Church contrary to Order should withdraw and that all things should be restor'd to him of which he had been depriv'd The Synod found his Demand just but durst not decide any thing without knowing the Will of the Prince Whereupon a Remonstrance was sent to him but he would not look upon it and order'd that Symmachus should first justifie himself before his Patrimony and his Churches were restor'd to him The Synod being assembled a third time in the Chappel of the Palace it was desir'd that the Libel might be receiv'd which contain'd the Articles whereof Symmachus was accus'd but here the Council found two Difficulties The first was That therein it was alledg'd that the Crimes whereof Symmachus was accus'd had been prov'd before the King which could not be since he had order'd them to judge of them The second was That in this Libel it was desir'd that Symmachus should be condemn'd to give up his Slaves that so he might be convicted by their Depositions of of the Crimes wherewith he was charg'd This Proposition appear'd contrary to the Canons of the Civil Laws since Slaves were not permitted to accuse any Man in a Court of Judicature These Difficulties retarded the progress of this Affair but on the other hand the Pope press'd the Decision of it and said That he was set upon as he came by a Multitude who had abus'd him as appear'd by his Wounds and that he should have been kill'd if the King's Officers had not reliev'd him This Session pass'd in confusion without being able to do any thing 'T was resolv'd to go again and wait upon the King and inform him how the matter stood The Deputies at the same time told him That the Pope had declar'd that hitherto he was willing to offer himself to the Judgment of the Synod but at present it was not safe for him to come thither after he had been in so great danger of his Life That the King might do what he pleas'd in this Case but the Synod could not force him to come thither according to the Canons of the Councils The King made Answer That it concern'd the Synod to consider what they had to do for his part he would not interpose in Ecclesiastical Affairs but only show all due respect to the Determinations of the Bishops that he would leave the Bishops at their liberty to decide this Cause or let it alone provided they restor'd Peace to the City of Rome The Bishops having receiv'd his Orders thought that they had nothing more to do but exhort the Romans to Peace And for this end they sent Deputies to the Senate which was against Symmachus and remonstrate to them the dangerous consequences of urging Pope Symmachus to Extremities and exhorted them to re-unite themselves unto him After which they declar'd in a fourth and last Session That Pope Symmachus the Bishop of the Holy Apostolical See against whom many Articles of Accusation had been propos'd should be acquitted and discharg'd from these Accusations in regard of Men for with respect to God the Judgment of them was left to him and that he shall freely perform his Office in all the Churches of his Jurisdiction and that in consequence of the Prince's Declaration they exhorted all the Faithful to return to his Communion and embrace Peace reserving the Judgment of the Justice of this Cause to God As to his Clergy who had separated from him and made a Schism 't is ordain'd That upon their making satisfaction to him he shall pardon them and restore them to their Offices but that those who for the future should dare to Celebrate in any place without communicating with him should be Excommunicated and treated as Schismaticks This is what is contain'd in the Acts of this Council after which follow the Monuments which concern the Council The first is a Letter of Theodoric to the Council written after the second Session dated the ninth of August The second is another Letter to the same Bishops written the 28th of the same Month The third is the Relation of the Council after the third Session when the Pope had declar'd that he would come no more to the Council The fourth is the Answer of Theodoric wherein he exhorts them to determine the Pope's Affair but leaving them at liberty to do in it as they should think fit provided they restor'd Peace to Rome This Letter is dated the last of September The last is a Memorial of Instructions given to him whom the King sent in his Name to the Council The Dates of these Monuments serve to fix the Epocha's of the four
wherein he ordains the Celebration of Sunday exhorts the Bishops and Clergy to do their duty and to lead an exemplary Life advertises the Judges to punish severely the Breakers of these Laws and particularly the Ecclesiasticks who are oblig'd to live regularly The third Council of Toledo THe King Beccaredus order'd the Bishops of Spain to meet at Toledo in the beginning of the Month of May in the Year 589 to restore the Catholick Faith and Discipline After he had made a short Harangue to them he caus'd to be read the Confession of Faith the Creeds of the Councils of Nice and Constantinople the Decision of Faith made by the Council of Chalcedon sign'd by himself and the Queen There were also read the Declarations of the Bishops and Priests of the Nation of the Goths which contain'd the condemnation of the Errors of the Arians and the Approbation of the Creeds of the Councils of Nice and Constantinople and the Decree of the Council of Chalcedon After they had thus re-establish'd the Faith the Council renewed the ancient Discipline restor'd the ancient Canons and the Synodical Letters of Popes in their vigor and forbad to promote those who are excluded by the Canons to holy Orders This is contain'd in the first Canon of this Council The second ordains that the Creed of Constantinople shall be repeated in all the Churches of Spain The third forbids Bishops to alienate the Possessions of their Churches yet it leaves to Monasteries and Churches what had been given to them and permits them also to provide for the Necessities of Strangers and the Poor The fourth permits the Bishop to erect a Parish in a Monastery The fifth renews the Law of Celibacy for Priests and Deacons The sixth is in â—â—vour of Slaves set at liberty The seventh ordains Bishops to cause to be read the Holy Scripture at their Table The Council of Narbo in the year 589. The eighth forbids with the consent of King Reccaredus to demand any Persons belonging to the * Familia fisci signifies the meeting of those who took care of the Affairs of the Church and manag'd its Revenue Labbee Tom. 5. p. 1025. Familia fisci that were given to the Church The ninth ordains that the Churches of the Arians shall belong to the Bishop in whose Territory they are situate The tenth leaves Widows and Maids at liberty to marry or keep Celibacy and excommunicates those who shall hinder them from observing their Vow of Chastity The eleventh Canon is against an Abuse which begun to spread in Spain concerning Penance The Christians desir'd to be reconcil'd every time and as often as they sinn'd The Council renews the ancient Discipline about Penance and ordains that Penances shall be impos'd according to the ancient Canons that the Penitent shall be excluded Communion and receive oftentimes Imposition of Hands That he shall not be restor'd to Communion until the time of making Satisfaction be expir'd And lastly That those who relapse shall be sentenc'd according to the severity of the ancient Canons The twelfth ordains That the Priest shall grant no Penance until he has cut off his Hair who desires it if he be a Man or if it be a Woman till she has chang'd her Habit. The thirteenth forbids Clergy-men to drag their Brethren before Civil Magistrates The fourteenth forbids Jews to have Wives or Concubines that are Christians and to keep Slaves that are Christians The fifteenth ordains That if the Emperor's * Servi fiscales were such Slaves as were part of the personal estate of the Emperor Id. Ibid. Slaves shall cause Churches to be built and endow'd the Bishop shall endeavour to get this Donation confirm'd by his Authority The sixteenth enjoyns Judges to hinder Idolatrous Practices The seventeenth is against the Fathers or Mothers who put their Children to death The eighteenth ordains That every year a Council of the Province shall be held and that the Receivers of the Treasury shall be oblig'd to be present there that so the Bishops may examin whether they burden the People too much The nineteenth forbids to build a Church and to keep in their own hands the management of the Possessions given to it The twentieth forbids Bishops to domineer and tyrannize over the Clergy and Priests of their Diocese The one and twentieth is against Judges and Receivers who burden the Slaves of the Church The two and twentieth forbids to recite any thing but the Psalms at the Funerals of Christians The three and twentieth forbids profane Dances and Songs which are us'd on Festival days These Canons are confirm'd by the King's Edict and sign'd by sixty two Bishops and the Deputies of five more The Council of Narbo in the Year 589. REccaredus did also call this Council which was compos'd of seven or eight Bishops who made fifteen Canons The first forbids Clergy-men to wear Clothes of Purple The second ordains That Gloria Patri shall be said at the end of every Psalm and also that the long Psalms shall be divided into different parts The third forbids Ecclesiasticks to stand still in publick places The fourth forbids any to employ themselves in servile Works on Sunday The fifth ordains That Clergy-men shall keep no Cabals and that Inferiors shall submit to their Superiors The sixth That Clergy-men who are shut up in Monasteries for their Faults shall be treated by the Abbot as the Bishop shall order The seventh That Clergy-men who shall be convicted of acting against the Interest of the Church shall be depos'd The eighth That those who have any ways defrauded the Church shall be put under Penance for the space of two years The ninth That Jews shall not be permitted to sing at the burying of the dead The tenth That Clergy-men shall obey their Bishop and serve the Church to which he sends them under pain of being depriv'd of the Revenues and Communion for one year The eleventh That it is not lawful to ordain an ignorant Priest or Deacon The twelfth That Sub-Deacons Porters and the other Clergy shall discharge their Offices and if they neglect the Sub-deacons shall be depriv'd of their Salary and the others punish'd with whipping The first Council of Sevil in 590. The thirteenth That those who keep in their Houses Diviners shall be excommunicated and fin'd and that the Diviners themselves shall be sold after they have been publickly whipped The fifteenth forbids to keep Thursday as Holiday The first Council of Sevil in 590. THis Council was held at Sevil in the fifth year of the Reign of Reccaredus Leander Bishop of this Metropolis presided in it and seven of his Suffragans were present at it There is nothing peculiar to this Council now remaining but a Letter to Pegasus Bishop of Astigis who could not be present at the Council probably because he was weak for neither could he be present at the third Council of Toledo The Bishops being assembled on the fourth day of November in the principal
possess in the Diocess of another but not between Bishops of different Provinces The 35th Puts in an Exception as to Churches newly built and orders That altho' the old Church belongs to him who enjoyed it Thirty Years since notwithstanding the Church newly built shall belong to the natural Bishop of the place where 't is built The 36th Appoints the Bishop to visit every Year the Churches of his Diocess and if he cannot do it to commit the doing of it to some Priests and Deacons of known probity The 37th declares That Men are bound to pay what they promised to give for the performing some Ecclesiastical Service The 38th imports That seeing Presbyters are bound to assist the Poor if it fall out that they who have bequeathed something to some Church be brought to Misery they or their Children that Church is bound to help them The 39th Forbids Deacons to take place of the Priests and to place themselves in the highest place of the Quire whilst the Presbyters stand below The 40th Forbids Deacons having Two Stoles yea and having one of divers Colours or Embroidered with Gold The 41st Enjoins all Clerks to shave the whole Crown of their Heads leaving but a small Tuft of their Hair in the form of a round Circle or a Crown The 42d and 43d Forbids Clerks to dwell with Women not related to them and only permit them to live with their Mother Sister Daughter and Aunt The 44th appoints That Clerks Marrying Widows Divorced or Debauched Women shall be separated from them by their Bishop The 45th That Clerks taking up Arms shall be put to Penance in a Monastery The 46th That a Clerk found Robbing Sepulchres shall be Expelled out of the Clergy and put to Penance for Three Years The 47th declares That agreeably to King Sisenand's Order the Council decrees That Clerks shall be free from all publick Offices The 48th orders That all Bishops shall have Stewards to manage their Churches Revenue The 49th imports That a Monk may be made so by the Devotion of Parents or his own Profession That all they that are made Monks by either of these Two ways shall be obliged to continue Monks and that they are not permitted to return to the World The 50th Gives Clerks leave to become Monks The 51st Forbids Bishops abusing Monks but it preserveth them the Right which the Canons give them to exhort Monks to a good Life to instruct Abbots and other Officers and to correct what is done amiss contrary to the Rule The 52d orders That Monks leaving their Monastery to return into the World shall be Reproved and put to Penance The 53d Prohibits that sort of Religious persons which are neither Clerks nor Monks and enjoins Bishops to put them to the choice of either of those professions The 54th declares That they who being in danger of Death undergo Penance without confessing any particular Sin but saying only in general That they are Sinners may be prefer'd to the Ecclesiastical State but it is not so with them who have confessed some grievous Crime The 55th commands That those that yielded to undergo Penance and prepared themselves to do it shall be obliged to finish it and shall be constrained by the Bishop to it But if they leave it and refuse to take it again they shall be condemned as Apostates as also the Virgins or Widows which have put on the Religious Habit if they return to the World and Marry The 56th Distinguisheth Two sorts of Widows some Secular who do not leave the Secular Habit and other Religious which take a Religious Habit and declares it is not lawful for these to Marry The 57th Forbids to constrain the Jews to turn because Conversion ought to be wholly free yet as for those who were forced to turn under King Sisebut they will have them bound to continue Christians because they have received Baptism the Holy Chrism and Christ's Body and Blood The 58th Pronounces Excommunication against those that shall favour or uphold the Jews against Christians The 59th orders According to King Sisenand's advice those Christians that turned Jews shall be constrained to return to the Church and if they have Circumcised their Children they shall be separated from them The 60th decrees That the Children of the Jews shall be taken away from them by force to be Christianly brought up in Monasteries The 61st That the Children of the Jews who are become Christians shall not be deprived of their Father's Estate who are condemned for Apostasie The 62d Enjoins Christians to avoid Commerce with the Jews The 63d orders That Christian Women Married with Jews shall be separated from their Husbands if they will not be Converted The 64th That the Testimonies of Christians that turned Jews shall not be received The 65th Forbids the Jews bearing Publick Offices The 66th Forbids them having Christian Slaves The 67th Forbids the Bishops who give nothing to the Church to set at liberty the Slaves of their Churches The following Canons to the 75th contain some other Constitutions concerning the Slaves and the Free-Men which are now out of date The 75th and last Canon is concerning the Fealty due to Kings and the security of their Persons The Bishops detest there the Crime of those that violate the Faith they owe to their Prince and make a long discourse to create an abhorrence of it And to prevent any such thing in Spain they pronounce a solemn Anathema against all those that shall Conspire against Kings that shall attempt against their Life or usurp their Authority after having repeated that Anathema Thrice with terrible Execrations they promise Loyalty and Fidelity to King Sisenand and his Successors and at the same time they beseech him to Govern his People with Justice and Piety not to Judge alone in Criminal Causes but to cause them to be examined and judged by the ordinary Judges reserving to himself the Right of Pardoning They pronounce Anathema against the Kings that should abuse their Authority to do Evil and exercise a Tyrannical Power And they do particularly declare That by the consent of the whole Nation King * Suintilla Suintilan who deprived himself of the Kingdom and laid down his Authority by confessing his Crimes is fallen from his Dignity his Honour and his Lands as well as his Wife his Children and his Brother Council V. of Toledo held in 636. THIS Council was held in the same place with the former but it was composed but of Twenty Two or Twenty Three Bishops of several Provinces of Spain Council V. of Toledo The first Canon decrees That Litanies that is to say Publick Prayers shall be made Yearly during the space of Three Days which shall begin the next Day after the 13th of December yet so that in case one of the Three Days should happen to be a Sunday they shall be put off to the next Week The 2d Canon confirms all that was done in the Council held under
He exhorts him firmly to adhere to the Faith and to joyn Vertues and Good Works to a Lively true Faith In short he lays before him the chief Duties of a Christian Prince the Vertues that are most necessary for him and the Manner how he ought to govern himself 'T is one of the best and compleatest Instructions that were ever given to a Prince and 't would be a hard matter to find a larger exacter or more solid Collection of Precepts The Second is the Circular Letter which he sent to all the Patriarchs of the East against the Roman Church in 866. Wherein he takes occasion to reproach her with what had passed in Bulgaria which was but newly Converted to the Christian Faith where some Persons were found come from the West who spread such Doctrines as were repugnant to the Purity of the Faith First by making the Bulgarians Fast on Saturdays against the Laws of the Church which forbid it Which might occasion a Contempt of the Doctrine because when Men take upon them to slight Tradition even in the least Things they are easily prevail'd with to slight the Doctrine it self Secondly by distinguishing the first Week in Lent from the rest and permitting them to eat in that Week Milk Butter Cheese c. Thirdly by detecting Married Priests Fourthly by causing them to be Anointed again with the Chrism that had been already Anointed with it by the Priests affirming That Unction ought not to be made by Priests He exclaims against the Prohibition affirming That there is no Law reserving that Unction to the Bishop or prohibiting the same to the Priests Lastly he charges the Latin Church with breach of Faith and falsifying of the Creed by Teaching that the Holy Ghost does not onely proceed from the Father but from the Father and the Son Upon this Article he doth inlarge very much and alledges many Objections against the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son Then he breaks out against those who had Taught the Bulgarians this Doctrine and does Excommunicate them by vertue of the Canons about the Saturdays Fast and the Celibacy of Priests He exhorts the Patriarchs to joyn with him in Banishing that Doctrine to send Bishops to Constantinople to have those new Tenets exploded and put a stop to those evils that the Bulgarians may receive the true Faith He acquaints them That he has received a Letter from Italy against the Tyranny of the Church of Rome He admonishes them to receive and cause to be received in all the Churches of their Patriarchates the Seventh General Council in the same manner and with the same Authority as the first Six In the Third Letter which is to Bardas he complains of what he was to suffer in the Place where he was and seems to speak much like a Christian. In the following Letters he also makes his Complaints of the Wrongs done him In the 18th he Writes to Michael the Emperour about the Death of Bardas He owns he deserved it if he had actually conspired to make himself sole Master of the Empire as he could not doubt of it upon the account of the Letters Michael had sent him But he laments his Death because he had not time to do Penance for his sins He very much flatters Michael and expresses to him the great desire he has to see him again shortly at Constantinople The same Thing he insinuates but in more flattering and pathetick Terms in the next Letter In the 20th he congratulates a Monk for having brought over a Bishop to his Party In the 27th he Writes against certain Monks who had took upon them to depose their Abbot and observes that Monks ought not to set up themselves as Judges of their own Abbots but that they ought to refer their Cause to their Superiours In the 30th he proves the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin and explains that place of Scripture where it is said That she knew not Joseph till she had brought forth her first-born observing that the Particle Donec till doth not always imply that the contrary to that which had not hapned before doth happen afterwards In the 31st directed to Tarasius a Nobleman whom he calls his Brother he Treats of Providence and shews why Good Men suffer in this Life whilst the Wicked wallow in Prosperity In the 32d and the Seven next following directed to Theotictus the Abbot he explains in short the Faith of the Mysterious Trinity and of the Incarnation against Hereticks He also speaks smartly therein against the Iconoclasts The next Ten consist of Moral Exhortations to several Persons The Fiftieth is upon the Covenants of the Law and Gospel The next Three consist of Reprimands to a Collector of Taxes for his Covetousness In the 54th he proves that the Holy Mysteries ought not to be given to Infidels or Hereticks nor to Ill-Livers but onely to Orthodox Persons who live according to the Rules of Christianity The 55th is against a Liar In the 63d he gives the Reasons for the Darkness of Prophecies In the Sixty fourth he Confutes the Iconoclasts and Answers to some of their Objections In the 72d he shews how Contemptible our Temporal Life is In the 74th he pretends That Abraham made his Servant Swear by putting his hand under his Thigh in honour to the Circumcision and as a Figure of the Messias to come out of his Seed The 97th was Written to Basilius the Emperour after he had turned him out of his See of Constantinople He complains in this Letter of the Ill Treatment he had received and particularly That his Books were taken from him He gives a very pathetick Account of the Persecution he suffer'd and Writes smartly to the Emperour In the next Letters he continues to deplore his Misfortunes and speaks of the Earthquake that hapned at Constantinople upon his Expulsion In the 102d he examines how St. Paul could be both a Roman of Tarsis and a Jew The 111th is directed to Gregory of Syracuse his old and constant Friend Wherein he exhorts him to stand firm under his present Ill Circumstances and not to discontinue his Episcopal Functions In the 115th he says That the Council which he calls Heretical and which was made up of the Enemies to Image-Worship has Excommunicated him to raise a Man to the See of Constantinople who lay under an Anathema He speaks of the Eighth Council In the next Letters he Writes against that Council but chiefly in the 118th In the 125th he gives Mystical Reasons for the Tearing of the Veil of the Temple when our Saviour died In the 127th he explains that place of Scripture where it is said That the Sin against the Holy Ghost shall never be pardon'd In the following Letters he expounds some other places of Scripture for which he brings Mystical Reasons well invented and happily apply'd In the 137th he affirms That what is said in St. Luke's Gospel that our Saviour sweated drops of Blood is
as they pleased as well in Temporal as Spiritual Services insomuch says he that some Priests wait at Table provide Meat and Drink look after Dogs and Horses and take care of their Farms in the Country And because they can't find any good Clergy-men who will so dishonour their Calling they take such as come next without regarding whether they are ignorant and worthless and guilty of many Crimes They only desire to have some Priests with them that they may leave the Churches and publick Offices to them And when they have a mind to have them ordained they come and say in an imperious way I have a little Clergy-Man whom I have brought up who is the Son of one of my Waiting-Men or Tenants I desire you to make him a Priest and when they have got him ordained they think that they have no need of the Curates and never come to the Service of a Parish-Church nor Exhortions made there He crys out against this abuse and bewails the badness of his time in which the Bishops were not allowed to reprove their irregularities as by their Office they are obliged Lastly he exhorts the Laity to have respect to the Sacraments which are administred by the Priests For says he the Holy Sacraments Baptism and the Consecration of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ and the rest which give Life and Salvation to the Faithful are so Great and Holy that they cannot become more Excellent by reason of the Holiness of good Ministers nor worse by the impiety of wicked ones because they operate not by the Virtue of Men but by the Majesty of the Holy Spirit when the Priest hath made his Invocation whereupon he cites several passages of S. Austin Gelasius and Pope Anastasius and advises the Bishops to be careful that they be not partakers of other Mens Sins by ordaining such Persons Priests as are vicious ignorant and unable to discharge their Ministery well He says that the Learning of Ministers is more to be regarded than their Manners because though a Priest ought to be blameless in both yet 't is less dangerous to have a Priest that teaches well and lives ill than to have the ignorant though they live well Lastly he distinguishes Ministers into four sorts 1. Such as are to be loved who live well and teach well 2. Tolerable such as teach well but live ill or who live well but have not learning enough to instruct others 3. The Contemptible who live ill and are ignorant 4. Such as are accursed who live either well or ill and teach Heresies In the Conclusion he prays God to pour his Graces upon the Priests of his Church that they may carry themselves so as becomes their Ministery Nothing is more judicious than the next Treatise of Agobard's which he wrote to undeceive the People and remove the Opinions they had that Sorcerers could raise Tempests cause Thunder and bring Hail by their Inchantments He proves by several Texts of Scripture that it is great Folly and a kind of Sacrilege to attribute to Men that which belongs to God He laughs at the fancy of some who supposed that there was a Region in the Air whither they conveyed the Corn and Fruit which the Hail beat down He shews by several Texts of Scripture that God only is the cause of Thunder and Hail that he punishes Men by these Plagues That all that is done in the Air is the effect of his Power whether done by Himself or Angels or Men That he alone is the Mover and Creator of the Universe That if wicked Men had power to afflict and destroy other Men all their Enemies would be so dealt with That he understood not how Men had power to disturb the Air or Heaven whose Nature they are ignorant of That most of the Histories written upon this Subject being examined will be found false although there be some People so ignorant as to expose themselves to Death to maintain them as it happen'd a little before when they accused Grimoaldus Duke of Beneventum of having scattered a Powder through the whole Countrey which made all the Oxen die As if says he he could make a Powder which should kill Oxen only and not other Beasts or could make such quantities of it and have Sowers enough to scatter it through the whole Countrey Fredegisus Abbot of S. Martins at Tours having found fault with some passages in one of Agobard's Books he thought himself obliged to defend himself and answer that Abbot's Objections The first Expression of Agobard's which he reproved was That the humble Man who hath mean Thoughts of himself is subject to errour Fredegisus says That Jesus Christ was humble and yet 't is certain he was not subject to errour Agobard answers That his Maxim ought not to be understood of Jesus Christ who abased and humbled himself voluntarily without ceasing to be Omnipotent and Sinless but he confirms it in respect of all other Men who are subject to Errour and Sin Secondly Fredegisus accuses him of weakning the Authority of Scripture and of the Interpretation of it because he had observed that they did not always observe the rules of Grammar Agobard answers that that ought not to make those things doubted of which are related in Holy Scripture that the Interpreters have used so to do either to accommodate themselves to the capacity of the Simple or to express the Sense of the Original the better That it is not allowable to doubt of the authority of those Authors of whom the Holy Spirit hath made use to write the Canonical Books or believe that they ought to have written otherwise than they have That next to the Original the authority of the Translation of the Seventy ought to be acknowledged and the fidelity of S. Jerom's Latin Version upon the Hebrew Text and that the Latin Versions made by Orthodox Christians out of the Seventy are not to be contemned but there are several Translations which are justly to be corrected and reproved as those of those famous Hereticks and Bastard Jews Aquila Theodotion and Symmachus as also certain Latin Interpreters reproved by St. Jerom. And Lastly as to Commentators Men ought to follow the Rule of St. Austin who gives all Liberty to judge of them and reject what is not orthodox and true in their Writings Afterward examining particularly the question about the Holy Books he says 't is absurd to believe that the Holy Ghost did inspire the Prophets and Apostles with the Words and Terms which they used and to prove this he alledgeth the Example of Moses who says that he was of a slow Speech He produces the Testimonies of S. Jerom who acknowledgeth that there is a difference in the Style in the writings of the Prophets and Apostles some of whom wrote more Loftily and Eloquently others with less Elegancy and Loftiness and sometimes there is the same difference in different Writings This difference may not be attributed to the Holy Spirit
but to Men and consequently 't is they not the Spirit which are the Authors of the Words and Expressions which they use although he inspires them with the Sense and Doctrine they ought to write In his Answer to the Third Objection he opposeth the Opinion of his Adversary who maintain'd that the Souls of Men were Created separated from the Bodies he affirms that we ought to believe that they are created in and with the Body although the Philosophers delivered the contrary and Austin doubts of it In the next place he answers a question put to him by his Adversary Whether Truth be any thing but God He answers That Truth is not always taken for God himself although 't is not to be doubted but that God is Truth The Fourth Question concerns the Righteous Men of the old Law Agobard maintains that they may be called Christians although they were not called so because they believed in Jesus Christ and belonged to him being anointed with the invisible Ointment of his Grace as well as those who were good Men among the Gentiles The Jews who were in credit at Court because they had Money obtained an Edict from the Emperour which contained many things in their Favour and among the rest that none of their Slaves should be baptized but with their Masters Consent This Edict being very prejudicial to Religion and contrary to Christian Piety Agobard addressed a Writing to Hilduin the King 's great Chaplain and to the Abbot Vala who was at Court in which he shews the injustice and impiety of that Prohibition being evidently contrary to the Design of the Gospel and the intention of Jesus Christ who will have all Men to be saved and hath commanded his Apostles to preach the Gospel to all Creatures and baptize all that believe whether Bond or Free He desires them to whom he writes to endeavour all they can to get this Edict recall'd which he hoped might be done more easily because he offered to pay the Jews the Ransom of those Slaves according to the appointment of the Canons made in that Case In the Letter written by Agobard in his own Name and Hildegisus and Florus's who were Clergy-men of Lyons to Bartholomew Bishop of Narbonne he speaks of a certain Distemper which took Men suddenly and threw them down like the Falling-Sickness Some also felt a sudden Burning which left an incurable Wound This ordinarily happen'd in the Churches and the astonish'd People to guard themselves from it gave considerable Gifts to the Churches to secure them Agobard disallows this practice and searching into the Cause of this Plague he says 't was nothing else but the will of God who punisheth Men by the Ministery of an Angel After which he relates several Examples of the like Chastisements out of Scripture in which God hath exercised his Justice by Angels and other Creatures He affirms that these sort of inflictions are not from the power of the Devil although he owns that God sometimes suffers the Devil to disquiet and torment Men. Returning then to the Question of Bartholomew viz. what we ought to think of the practice of those who coming into the Churches where they were seized with this Distemper bring presents to them He says that fear causes these people to do what they ought not and hinders them from doing what they ought for it were better says he to give Alms to the Poor or Strangers to address themselves to the Priest to receive Unction according to the Command of the Gospel and of the Apostle to fast and pray and do works of Charity It is true adds he that if the Offerings given to the Church be employed as they ought they are an Action of Charity but because at present they are used only to satisfie the Covetousness and Avarice of Men and not to honour God or relieve the Poor it is a shame to give them to such covetous Wretches to be kept or ill imployed by them The Injustice and Violence which was practised among the people of Lyons and could not be restrained obliged Agobard to write to Maâ—fredus a powerful Man in the Emperour's Court. He begs of him to use his Interest with his Prince to hinder those Disorders and cause justice to be done This Compliment is short but urgent The Letter to the Clergy of Lyons concerning the manner how the Bishops and Pastors ought to govern is an excellent instruction for them He says that those who are entrusted with the Government of the Church the Spouse of Christ who is Peace Truth Justice and the Author of all Good ought to love that his Spouse singularly as himself and apply himself entirely to the spiritual good of his only Spouse That those who neglect to do their Duty and place all their Pleasure and Affections upon Riches Finery Hunting and Debauchery are the destroyers of God's Work and the Assistants of Anti-christ That though they seem to be Bishops in the Eyes of Men they are not so in the Eyes of God no more than Hypocrites who affect to appear outwardly Holy but whose Heart is full of Impurity who seek not the Edification and Instruction of the Faithful but their own Interest and Glory such are those who seek to get into the sacred Ministery only to obtain Honour and Riches or to live finely He adds that all those that make it their main Business to gain themselves the Love and Respect of those that are under their Charge and not to make Jesus Christ be loved and honoured by them who is the only Spouse of the Church are Adulterers and unworthy of the sacred Ministery because they design rather to feed themselves than their Flock Nevertheless he advises that the Sheep should endure wicked Pastors through Prudence when they can't reform them His Book concerning the Dispensing of Ecclesiastical Revenues was not written against the ill usage which Clergy-men might make of them but against the Laity who took them away and kept them unjustly Lewis the Godly having called an Assembly of Clergy-men and Lords at Attigny in 822. for the Reformation of Church and State Agobard advises Adelardus Abbot of Corbey and another Abbot called Helissicarius that they ought to rectifie the Disorder that was in the Church about the Ecclesiastical Revenues which the Laity had appropriated to themselves that they might speak to the Emperour of it He zealously represents to them that the Churches having been enriched by the Gifts of the Emperours Princes and Bishops had made an abundance of Laws and Canons for the preservation of the Revenues and to hinder Lay-men from encroaching upon them That the necessity which they alledged was not a sufficient Reason to over-look those Laws nor to authorize the Usurpations they had made of them The year following this matter was more fully debated in an Assembly held at Compeigne where the Clergy again represented that the Laity were not to be suffered in the quiet Possession of the Revenues of the
written by a more ancient Author who put them out under Damasus's Name But the latter are Anastasius's who reviewed them and put them in that Form they now are in and concluded them with the Life of Nicholas I. for I take the Lives of the five following Popes to be written by William who succeeded Anastasius in the Office of Library-keeper in the Church of Rome Nevertheless Anastasius might write the Life of Adrian II. for he certainly outliv'd him And perhaps he lived long enough to write the Lives of the four following Popes He wrote tolerable good Latin and was a learned Man for his Time He was a good Polititian and studied the Interest of the Church of Rome There remains only the Author of the Treatise called Liber Synodicus whose Name is The Anonymous Author of the Liber Synodicus unknown His Work is An Abridgment of the first Councils commonly called The little Synodical Book It ends with the Council held by Photius in 877. which is accounted the VIII General Council which makes it probable that he lived about the end of the IX Age This Work hath been Printed at Strasburg in 1601 in quarto and since is put by F. Labbe into the last Collection of the Councils It is a very short and plain Abridgment and contains nothing considerable or extraordinary about the History of the Councils The number of the Historians of this Age which have written the Lives and Panegyricks Michael Syncellus of the Saints is very great The chief of them are these that follow Michael Syncellus of the Patriarch Nicephorus and after his Death designed for his Place by the Empress Theodora But he refused to accept that Dignity He wrote the Life of S. Dionysius the Areopagite and made a Panegyrick in Honour of the Holy Archangels and Angels In which after he hath invoked them and distinguished their several Orders he speaks of their good Offices which they perform to Men and relates several Examples to prove it out of Holy Scripture Lastly he makes several Exclamations by way of Encomium There is an Hymn at the end of this Discourse published by F. Combefis in his Auctuar Nov. Tom. 1. p. 1525. and is found in the Biblioth Patr. The Style of it is lofty full of great Words and affected Epithets Methodius preferr'd to the Patriarchate of the Church of Constantinople in 842. is also the Author of S. Dionys's Life which is extant at the end of the Works of that Father printed Methodius at Antwerp in 1634. Tom. 2. 'T is also printed alone at Florence 1516. Paris 1562. Some Fragments also of two Sermons printed by Gretzer in his Tom. 2. de Cruce are attributed to him The one is concerning the Benefit of the Death of Christ and the Reasons why he would dye upon the Cross. The other is against those that are ashamed of the Cross of Christ. To these we may add The Encomium of S. Agatha translated into Latin by F. Combefis in his Biblioth Concionat Patr. and is said to be in MS. in the Library of S. Mark at Venice Some also attribute to him a Sermon upon S. Simeon and another upon the Sunday called Dominica in Ramis or Palm-Sunday which is the Sunday before Easter-day which F. Cambefis hath printed among the Works of the elder Methodius who flourished in 290. at Paris in 1644. although it be very doubtful whether they be so ancient as we have observed in speaking of the Elder Methodius He dyed in 847. in Balsamon's Collection of the Greek Canon we meet with some penitential Canons attributed to Methodius but the Learned judge them not to be his To Methodius we may joyn Hilduinus the Patron of the Fable of S. Dionysius the Areopagite's coming into France He was Abbot of S. Medard at Soissons of S. German and Hilduinus Abbot of S. Medard at Soissons S. German and S. David S. Dionys near Paris and chief Chaplain to the Emperor Lewis the Godly He made a Reformation in the last of these Monasteries in 829. and settled Monks there instead of the Canons formerly there He took Lotharius's part against his Father and was banished into Saxony But he was again restored and after his Restauration he wrote his Book of the Areopagite by the Command of Lewis the Godly In it he undertakes to prove That Dionysius the Apostle of France was the Areopagite But this Work is full of abominable Falsehoods and gross Forgeries He proves his Opinion by Records of so small Authority That his Writing discovers the weakness of the Cause he maintains and his own inability to do it This Work was printed at Cologn in 1563. and is put by Surius among the Lives of the Saints Octob. 9. with a Letter from Lewis the Godly to him and his Answer Hilduin dyed according to the Opinion of some in 838. and of others in 842. David Nicetas surnamed Paphlago because he was a Bishop in Paphlagonia altho' he was David Nicetas Paphlago also Patriarch of Constantinople was a great admirer of the Patriarch Ignatius and wrote a long History of his Life which is extant with the Acts of the VIII Council at Ingolstadt 1604 quarto and Tom. 8. of the Councils p. 1179. He hath also composed several Panegyricks in honour of the Apostles and other Saints viz. S. Mark S. Mary S. Gregory the Divine S. Hyacinthus Eustatheus Agapius and Theopistus printed by F. Cambesis in his last continuation of the Biblioth Patrum at Paris in 1672. His Style is elegant and pleasant his Relations are simple and plain without being tedious He often turns his Speech to the Saints he commends and makes Acclamations in their Honour according to the Custom of his Time Leo the Wise Emperor of the East may be reckoned among the Panegyrists of the Saints Leo the Wise Emperor of the East He succeeded his Father Basilius in 886. and reigned till 911. He took great pleasure in composing Sermons Baronius hath published a List of 33. ad Annum 911. numb 3 which are found in a MS. in the Vatican Library Gretzer hath published 9. printed at Ingolstadt in 1600. and since F. Cambesis hath inserted 10 in the first Tome of his Auctuar Biblioth Patrum Besides these we have a Discourse upon the Life of S. John Chrysostom among the Works of that Father Tom. 8. of Savil's Edition and a Sermon upon S. Nicolas Bishop of Myra printed at Toulouse in 1644. and some Predictions viz. 17 concerning the State of Constantinople Printed by Codinus at the end of his Antiquities at Paris in 1655. Baronius mentions other Works of Leo which are in MSS. in the Vatican Library viz. several Discourses Moral Precepts Riddles or mystical Sayings Constitutions and †They are Printed at Basil in 1554. and Leyden in 1612. and 1613. his Tacticks or a Treatise of the manner of Ranging an Army in Battalia The Sermons printed by F. Cambefis are upon the Nativity Purification
191. Luitbertus 152. Lupus of Ferrara 13 14 169 170. M. Methodius 190. Michael Syncellus ibid. Milo Sigibert 193. N. Naucratius 9. Nicephorus 1 5 6. A Nameless Author of the Liber Synodicus 190. Nameless Authors against Paschasius Ratbertus 72 79. Nicetas Paphlago 191. Nicholas I. 86 89 90 176. O. Odilbertus 157. Odo 111. Orthegrinus 192. Otfredus 194. P. Paschal I. 175. Paschasius Radbertus 69 70 71 72 c. 84 85. Photius 85 105 106. Petrus Siculus 189. Prudentius 13 15 19. R. Rabanus 10 11 13 160 194. Ratramnus or Bertram 13 15 24 73 c. 81 111. Regino 153. Rembertus 194. Remigius of Lyons 18. Remigius a Monk 174. Riculphus 152. Rudulphus or Rodulpus 192. S. Sedulius 174. Sergius II. Pope 175. Sergius the Historian 189. Smaragdus an Abbot 168. Stephen V. 103 104 187. Stephen VI. 188. T. Theganus 189. Theodorus Graptus 9. Theodorus Abucara 110. Theodorus Studita 8. Theophanes of Nicea 9. Theophanes Cerameus 191. Theosterictus 9. U. Usuardus 195. Vufinus Boetius 191. W. Walafridus Strabo 4 166. Wandelbertus 194. Wolfadus or Wulfadus 193. AN ALPHABETICAL TABLE of the COUNCILS held in the Ninth Age of the Church Place Page Year A. AIx-la-chapelle 114 809 Aix-la-chapelle 117 816 Aix-la-chapelle 118 817 Aix-la-chapelle 120 836 Aix-la-chapelle 46 860 Aix-la-chapelle 47 862 Arles VI. 114 813 Attigny 146 822 Attigny 123 854 Attigny 37 870 B. Beauvais 121 845 Bonneval 123 856 C. Celichith 117 816 Chalon II. 116 813 Coblentz 130 860 Cologn 134 887 Compeigne 142 833 Compeigne 123 866 Constantinople 5 806 Constantinople 8 809 Constantinople 3 842 Constantinople 86 859 Constantinople 87 861 Constantinople 91 866 Constantinople VIII General 92 869 Constantinople 102 879 Coulein Assembly 122 843 D. Douzy I. 43 871 Douzy II. 132 874 E. Epernay 122 846 F. Fismes 134 881 I. Ingilheim 119 826 L. Langres 21 859 Lyons 119 829 Lyons 142 836 Lyons 150 845 M. Mentz 115 813 Mentz 119 829 Mentz 124 847 Mentz 11 848 Mentz 134 888 Meaux 121 845 Mets 129 859 Mets 47 48 863 Mets 135 869 N. Nantes forged 138 895 Noion 157 83â— P. Paris 2 824 Paris VI. 119 829 Paris 142 838 Paris 121 846 Pavia 125 850 Pavia 124 876 Pista 123 862 Piste 35 123 869 Pontigon 50 876 Q. Quiercy 12 848 Quiercy 19 853 Quiercy 123 857 Quiercy 129 858 Quiercy 124 877 R. Ravenna 132 877 Rheims 116 813 Rheims 49 842 Rheims 49 857 Rheims 49 874 Rome 127 826 Rome 127 853 Rome 89 862 Rome 48 863 Rome 90 864 Rome 25 865 S. Savonieres 21 129. 859 Senlis 24 863 Sens 19 853 Soissons 19 22 27 126. 853 Soissons 34 866 Soissons 34 867 T. Thionville 118 821 Thionville 23 24 32 145 835 Thionville 121 844 Thoulouse 119 829 Thoulouse 122 843 Toul II. 130 860 Tours III. 116 813 Toussi 48 860 Treves 12 845 Tribur 136 895 Troyes 32 867 Troyes 45 133 878 V. Valence III. 20 23 128 855 Verbery 127 853 Verbery 36 869 Verneuil 121 844 Vienna 135 892 W. Wormes 119 829 Wormes 131 868 A General INDEX of the Principal Matters contained in this Volume A. ABbots whom they may ordain 7. Of their Promotion 181. Abbesses not to go out of their Monastery 125. Abortion the Punishment imposed upon Women that procure it 131. Absolution granted by a Letter 52. Granted to Photius on condition 101 Means of obtaining it 129. How granted to sick Persons that have lost their Speech 152. Acts and Records necessary in Ecclesiastical Affairs 28. Adalgarius the Deputy of Charles the Bald to the Pope who granted him the Pall 181. Adegarius a Priest of the Diocess of Sens his Design to leave his Cure to become a Monk 170. Authorities that confirmed him ibid. Adelard Bishop of Verona the Cause of his Excommunication 181. Adventius Bishop of Mets declared Charles the Bald King of Lorrain 123. Adultery all Commerce with any Person besides a Husband or Wife is Adultery before the Sentence of Dissolution 47. When it gives Liberty to marry another Woman 128. And when it hinders 139. When it makes Marraige void 137. Penances for Adultery 139. Adulterers Punishments ordained for them 130 131. Aeneas Bishop of Paris his Election and Ordination 171. Affairs Ecclesiastical Formalities required about them 28. Afflictions and Sufferings profitable for the Godly 171 Agius Bishop of Autun his Ordination confirmed 12â— Agobard Archbishop of Lyons his Deposition 143. His restoration ibid. Almsgiving the Punishment of those that do not give the Alms of the Sick 136. To be given according to Men's Ability 137 Two sorts according to Rabanus 162. Altar-Cloath washed by Chance loseth not its Consecration 6. Amalphitans excommunicated 185 And forced to break their League with the Saracens ibid. Anastasius a Priest of the Church of Rome deposed in a Council Another Priest of Rome his Affronts offered to Benedict III. Pope 127. Anathema may be pronounced for other Causes besides Heresie 96. The Ceremonies used before it is pronounced 122 130. Aniana an Abby its Foundation 168. Ansegisus Archbishop of Sens the Pope's Vicar in France and Germany 50 188. The Deputy of Charles the Bald to the Pope who blames his Carriage 181. Anspertus Archbishop of Milan the Reproofs and Orders given to him by John VIII 183. Cited often to the Synods at Rome 183 184. Suspended from his Episcopal Office for refusing 184. Excommunicated which he solicited to be taken off 184 185. His Deposition in a Synod and the Pope's Orders to chuse another in his Place 185. Joseph Bishop of Vercellae was first ordained but soon excluded from that Dignity ibid. Then the Bishop of Ast was ordained and that Ordination was approved 186. Antichrist his Life and Actions 164. Antiphonies reasons for correcting them 159. Apostates how to be dealt with 178. Appeals to the Holy See 25 29 44 51. The Pope's Pretensions to Appeals 44. From Bishops to Metropolitans and from these to the Patriarch 98. Arles the Archbishop of Arles made the Pope's Vicar in France 182. Privileges granted to him upon that account 182. His Commission to judge 〈◊〉 Bishops 182. Arms Churchmen not to use them 135. Arts Schools established for them by a Council 128. Asylum The Right of the Asyla preserved to Churches of Advantage to those that fly to Churches Assemblies of Secular Persons not to be in Churches or Church-porches 135. A Rule for the Publick Assemblies of this Age 1â—6 Days forbidden to them 137. Nuns or Widows not to be at Publick Assemblies without the Allowance of the Bishop 1â—9 Assemblies of Priests in the Deanaries 152. Athanasius Bishop of Naples excommunicates his Brother and assumes the Government of that City 181. Excommunicated himself and why 187. Autun the Charters which confirmed the Gift of the Revenues of that Church 133. B. BAptism allowed Monks to administer 7. In what Cases Laymen may baptize ibid. Whether a Priest that communicates with Hereticks may baptize 7. Forbidden to be done by Sprinkling 118. Ought to be
first Exil and address'd to the most Learned Prelates of his Time A Treatise Entituled The Frenzy because he therein talks like a Mad-man against Baudry Several Sermons for Holy Thursday for the Feast of Pentecost and for several Festivals of the Blessed Virgin and several other pieces The same Author adds that Ratherius in his Exile at Cumae meeting with a Copy of the Life of St. Usmar corrected the Solecisms thereof and sent it to Lobes and that afterwards being in Provence he Compos'd a Treatise of Grammar which he Dedicated to Roësting's Son under the Title of Spera-dorsum or A Shelter for the back-side The Stile of Ratherius is obscure and intricate but pure enough in the Terms his Expressions are lively and smart and his Reasonings just enough He was well acquainted with the Canons had thorowly read the Latin Fathers and very pertinently made use of their Authority and Principles He reproves with sharpness the Vices and irregularities of his Time without sparing any Man and particularly levels against the corrupted Morals of Ecclesiasticks which he did not stick to detect and describe in very lively Colours and perhaps with a little too much Picquancy ATTO Bishop of Verceil ATTO or Hatto Bishop of Verceil not the same with the Bishop of Basil of the same Atto Bishop of Verceil Name whom we mentioned in the foregoing Century is more moderate and less obscure than Ratherius He was the Son of Aldegaire and presided over the Church of Verceil from the Year 945. till about the Year 960. His Works were a long time conceal'd in the Vatican Library and were at last made publick by Father Dachery in the Eighth Tome of his Spicilegium The first is a Capitulary for the Clergy of his Diocess containing an Hundred Heads or Articles almost all extracted and copied from the Councils of Laodicea Carthage Toledo and others from the Decretals of Popes both true and false and from the Capitulary of Theodolphus only excepting a very few of which perhaps he is the Author These are the Fourth wherein he injoyns his Priests Deacons and Sub-deacons to learn the Catholick Faith that is the Creed of Athanasius by Heart The Fifth which is a general Admonition to the Ecclesiasticks to discharge their Duty and lead exemplary Lives The Tenth whereby he ordains that when they Consecerate the Body of JESUS CHRIST it should be an intire Oblation i. e. a whole Loaf unbroken and that the Priests should celebrate the Mass Fasting The eighteenth concerning the Institution of Catechumens the Baptism of Mutes and the Obligation of Godfathers to instruct those for whom they stand Sureties The Twentieth whereby 't is order'd that in all Churches where Baptism is Administred there should be a Deacon with the Priest and enjoyns Priests who have no Deacons to make speedy choice of some fit Person and get him to be ordain'd Deacon The Twenty ninth which enjoyns the Conferences of the Priests on the First day of the Month a Custom established in the Ninth Century as appears from the Capitularys of Hincmarus and Riculphus The Thirty ninth which imports that for the future all Bishops should be enjoyn'd not to ordain Deacons till they had oblig'd themselves to continue in Celibacy The Seventy fifth whereby he imposes a Penance on such who by their slovenliness should Belch after they had receiv'd the Eucharist The Seventy seventh which imports that those who shall be Baptiz'd or Confirm'd shall abstain during the time prescrib'd by the Bishop from eating Meat and for eight days from the use of Marriage and that no Clerk should be ordain'd till he had received both these Sacraments And the Ninetieth which concerns the Pennances which Priests ought to impose on Publick Offenders and after what manner they ought to present to the Bishop such Persons as will not submit to Pennance The next Treatise is about the Persecutions and Troubles which the Ecclesiasticks suffer'd It is divided into three Parts The first treats of the Troubles they suffer'd in being censur'd in their Persons The second of those they met with in their Ordinations and the third of those they endur'd in their Revenues In the beginning he takes notice that the Church will always have its Persecutors but that they will never get the Mastery and that the Church being founded on the Solid Rock of the Apostolical Faith will always stand by Faith by the Love of JESUS CHRIST by the Use of Sacraments and by the Observation of the Commandments of God Happy House says he it is not overthrown by Storms nor shatter'd by Floods nor shaken by Winds against which the Gates of Hell will never prevail tho' assaulted by them continually which yields neither to secret Temptations nor to open Persecutions nor to the Attacks of Malicious Spirits nor to the Corruption of Vices and Impieties After he had thus exprest himself in general concerning the Persecutions of the Church he says that one of the most usual in his time is that when the Wicked are corrected by their Superiours they persecute those who teach them and openly assault them that by this means they may evade the submitting to Ecclesiastical Punishments that to prevent this abuse it was ordain'd in the Canons that Bishops should not be accus'd but by Men of unspotted Reputation nor judg'd by any other Judges than those of their own choosing nor Condemn'd by any other Authority than that of the Holy See altho' it was allow'd for Metropolitans and Bishops of the Province to hear and examine their Causes After having establish'd this Point of Civil Law on the false Decretals of the Popes he says that in his time they did not only not observe these Precautions in the Accusation of Bishops but that they would not so much as give them leave to make their own defence and would oblige them either to bring their Brethren to swear that they are innocent or to provide a Champion to fight for them He shews that these two Methods of judging the Crime or Innocence of any Man which were then in use are both of them unjust and unlawful especially among Ecclesiasticks The first because it does not follow that all those who cannot produce Witnesses to swear to their Innocence are guilty and that it had been always the Custom of the Church to acquit those who were not convicted of the Crimes laid to their Charge without obliging them to bring others to swear for their Innocence The second Method 1. Because it was only in use among Laicks who did not approve of it themselves 2. Because it often happens that the Innocent are vanquish'd and the Guilty crown'd as Victors 3. Because this was to tempt God 4. Because it being unlawful for Ecclesiasticks to fight themselves 't is altogether unjust to oblige them to find Champions in their stead in order to be acquitted 'T is to put them into an incapacity of clearing themselves of one Crime unless by committing another He then makes
be mutually assisting to each other it were to be wish'd that they were united together That he own'd he had not as yet paid all that Respect to the Papacy which he ought nor punish'd the Guilty with sufficient Severity That he confess'd his Fault in order to obtain Pardon for it That he acknowledg'd that the Levity of his Youth or his being Jealous of his Authority or Lastly his being led by evil Councellors was the cause of his Sinning against Heaven and the Pope not only by unlawful seizing upon the Revenues of the Church but also by communicating with unworthy Persons and such as were guilty of Simony and by selling of Churches instead of protecting them as he ought That he desired he would for the future assist him with his Authority and that he implor'd his Aid and his Advice for the Reformation of the Churches and particularly that of Milan assuring him that he would assist him as far as possible and hop'd he was of the same mind with respect to him The Pope seem'd satisfied with this Letter as he declares in the Five and twentieth Letter of the first Book directed to Herlembold whom he had made Arch-bishop of Milan after the Excommunication of Godfrey wherein he does not stick to tell him That King Henry had sent him such a submissive Letter as was never in his Memory sent by that Prince or any of his Predecessors to the Popes of Rome This Letter bears date September the 28th so that King Henry's Letter which is not related till after the Nine and twentieth of Gregory is written some time before The Six and twentieth Letter bearing date October the 9th is likewise directed to Herlembold whom he advises to use his utmost endeavours to reclaim the Bishops of Lombardy and among the rest the Bishop of Verceil by treating them with meekness and to grant Absolution to those who had communicated with excommunicate Persons whenever they would repent In the Seven and eight and twentieth he exhorts the Bishops of Aix and Pavia to assist Herlembold and to shun Excommunicated Persons these Letters bear date the 13th of the same Month. However he would not have the Germans to rise up in Arms against Henry he desires that both Parties would refer themselves to his Judgment as he sent word to the Arch-bishop of Magdebourg by the Nine and thirtieth Letter of the same Book which bears date December the 20th in the same Year By the Two and three and fortieth Letters dated January 25 and 26 1074. he summon'd The Council of Rome in the Year 1074. the Arch-bishops of Aquileia and Milan with their Suffragans to a Synod which was to be held at Rome in the beginning of Lent This Synod being met the Pope order'd that all those who had been promoted to Ecclesiastical Dignities or had obtain'd any Benefices by Simony should be suspended and depriv'd of them That it should no longer be lawful for Clerks guilty of Fornication to celebrate Mass nor to wait at the Altar and that the People should not assist at the Mass or any other Office of such Priests or Clerks who kept Concubines In this Council he gave Absolution to Garnier Bishop of Strasbourgh who had been Excommunicated by Alexander This Bishop was the only Person of the German Bishops who were guilty of Simony who came to Rome to beg Pardon for his Fault so that the Pope thought this Submission deserv'd an absolute Pardon But as for the Bishops of Placentia and the other Bishops of Lombardy who were likewise come to Rome he only granted them the Power of Confirming Infants in case of Necessity This is what he gives an Account of to the Princesses Beatrice and Matilda in the Seventy seventh Letter of the first Book dated April the 15th 1074. A proposal was likewise made in this Synod to ordain Anselm Bishop of Lucca and Hugh Bishop of Dia but a Remonstrance was made in behalf of King Henry that the Pope ought not to Consecrate them till they had receiv'd Investiture However the Pope did not stick to ordain the Bishop of Dia but put off for some time the Ordination of the Bishop of Lucca Notwithstanding a little time after he ordain'd him the People of Lucca would not acknowledge him but turn'd him out in spite of all the intreaties the Pope us'd for his Reception Some Authors say that Gregory in this Council made a Decree against the Investitures of Benefices by Laicks It appears by the Letter written by this Pope to Beatrice and Matilda the Sixteenth of November the same year that Robert Guiscard Duke of Pozzuolo was already Excommunicated and 't is probable that this was done in this Council Some time after the Pope sent to King Henry the Bishops of Ostia Palestrina and Cumae as his Legats with order to call a Council of Bishops in Germany to reform the Abuses to communicate to that Council the Decrees of the Council of Rome against such Clerks as were guilty of Simony or kept Concubines and to oblige King Henry to abandon the Interests of the Bishops of Lombardy and to put himself upon the zealous Reformation of the Church These Legats attended with the Empress Agnes waited upon Henry about Easter at Nuremberg He receiv'd them very obligingly regulated several Abuses promis'd them to extirpate Simony wholly out of his Dominions and to submit to the Holy See But he would not separate himself from the Communion of the Arch-bishop of Milan and return'd this Answer upon that Subject That he hop'd that when the Pope should be fully inform'd of the matter he would revoke what he had done against that Arch-bishop and the Bishop of Lombardy Nor would he promise the Legats to call a Council under a pretence that it did not belong to them but to the Arch-bishop of Mayence to act in Germany as Vicar of the Holy See since he had receiv'd that Privilege from the Predecessors of Gregory It was Liemar Arch-bishop of Breme who furnish'd King Henry with this reply The Legats insisted and remonstrated that the Power which had been granted to the Arch-bishop of Mayence ended at the Death of that Pope who had given him the Grant that besides they had a Commission or Power which that Arch-bishop had not but they were not harken'd to and were oblig'd to return after they had suspended the Arch-bishop of Breme and cited him to a Council to be held at Rome about the Feast of S. Andrew The Legats having brought this Answer back to Gregory he wrote word to Henry That tho' he had not satisfied him in the business relating to the Arch-bishop of Milan yet he was very well pleas'd with his Submission and with the Civilities he shew'd to his Legats That he was willing to have another hearing of that Affair to see whether any alteration ought to be made in the Judgment that had been pronounc'd against that Arch-bishop By this very Letter he gives him to understand that he
to the latter 39. Her second Marriage 70. She is confounded by some Authors with a Lady of the same Name who was the Sister of William Bishop of Pavia 63. Maugier Archbishop of Roan depos'd in a Council 116. Maurice elected Bishop of London the Advice given him by Lanfrank 16. St. Medard's Abbey at Soissons Regnald excommunicated for seizing on the Monastery 31. Megenard Monk of St. Reter at Chartres his Attempts to get Possession of that Abbey 3. Men the selling of Men for Slaves forbidden 123. St. Mennus the Restitution of the Relicks of that Saint order'd by Pope Alexander 30. Metropolitans of their Rights and Privileges 25. Metropolitical Right a Contest about it between the Church of Tours and that of Dol 62. Messiah that Jesus Christ is the Messiah the Son of God 92. Michael Cerularius Patriarch of Constantinople the Reproaches and Oppressions he put upon the Latins 76 and 77. The Complaints and Reprimands made by Pope Leo IX against that Patriarch 25 26 and 76. He is excommunicated by the Pope's Legats 79. His Practices against them 79 80 and 81. His great Authority at Constantinople 82. The Cause of his Banishment ibid. Michael Ducas Emperor of Constantinople desires Supplies of the Pope to recover the Throne Impeperial of which he was dispossess'd 53. A War carried on under pretence of his Restauration 54. Milan of the Dignity of that Church 93. Of the first Planters of the Gospel in those Parts ibid. The Clergy of that Diocess reform'd by Peter Damian ibid. Subject to the Jurisdiction of the See of Rome 27. Mincius Bishop of Velitri intruded on the See of Rome by force 27. He renounces the Papal Dignity ibid. He begs pardon of the Pope and is suspended for ever from the Ecclesiastical Functions ibid. Monasteries the Licentiousness of some Monasteries restrain'd by Pope Gregory VII 66 and 67. Monks of their Duties and of the Vertues they ought to practise 95 and 97. The Decrees in their Favour against the secular Clerks confirmed 15. They cannot leave their Monasteries to reside in another without a Licence from their Abbot 124. That they who have assumed the Monastick Habit without serving as Novices for some time cannot return to a secular Course of Life 95. Punishments to be inflicted on those Monks who quit their Profession 112 115 and 117. They are oblig'd to instruct Youth 122. Their Irregularities in the time of Peter Damian 95. Of the Obedience they owe to Bishops 96 and 124. Some of them permitted to administer Baptism on the Festivals of Easter and Whitsontide 113. That they are capable of administring the Sacraments 96. They cannot impose Penance without the Consent of their Abbot 123. They cannot perform the Office of God-father ibid. Nor turn Farmers ibid. They ought not to be suffer'd to exercise their Functions when convicted of publick and notorious Crimes 118. Those who turn Monks on purpose to be promoted to Ecclesiastical Dignities declar'd uncapable of enjoying them 119. They ought to be subject to the Jurisdiction of their Bishop 5 and 124. Forbidden to be concern'd in the Management of secular Affairs 74. That they may administer the Sacraments and have the Cure of Souls 75. They cannot serve a Church without the Bishops Consent 123. Monks advanced to the Papal Dignity 126. Substituted in the room of secular Clerks in the Cathedral Churches 15 and 31. When a Pardon may be allow'd to those who have apostatiz'd 16. The Rights granted to them upon account of Restitution 75. To whom accountable for the Spiritualities and to whom for the Temporalities ibid. Monstier Rendy a Contest about that Abbey 114. Murder liable to Excommunication 5. Excludes a Priest for ever from the Sacerdotal Functions 65. Punishments inflicted on a Priest for murdering another Priest 31. On a Lay-man for assassinating a Priest ibid. And on a Father for killing his Son ibid. N NIcephorus Botoniata Emperor of Constantinople for what Reason excommunicated by Pope Gregory VII 43. Nicolaitans their Heresy condemned in divers Councils 29. Normans their Wars and Conquests in Italy 52. They take Pope Leo IX Prisoner 24 and 53. Their Generosity towards him ibid. The Advantage they get by setting him at Liberty 53. They are excommunicated by Gregory VII 43 and 53. Their Reconciliation with that Pope 45 and 53. The Succours they afford him 46. Their Exploits in Greece 54. Norway the Admonitions given by Pope Gregory VII to a King of Norway 51. Nurses Jewish Women not to be admitted in that Quality 118. O OAths of the manner of clearing by Oath us'd in the Council of Rheims 114. Subjects absolv'd from their Oath of Allegiance 39 43 and 45. Whether the Pope has a Right to absolve any 66. Such an Oath exacted of Kings by the Court of Rome 15. The King of England refuses to take it ibid. Exacted of divers Princes by Pope Gregory VII 54. Bishops and Priests forbidden to take an Oath of Fidelity to Kings or other Laicks 74. Odito Abbot of Cluny blam'd for refusing the Archbishop of Lyons 23. Offerings an Exhortation to bring them to the Mass 44. That they belong to the Priests 112 and 119. The disposing of them reserv'd to the Bishop 27. A Contrast about a piece of Gold presented as an Offering at the Celebration of Mass 89. Offices Divine That the People ought not to sit during the Celebration of them 97. Of their Usefulness 94. Of the Difference between the Rituals of Clergy-men and those of the Monks ibid. A Prohibition to celebrate the Divine Offices in the vulgar Tongue 66. Whether those who recite them alone in private ought to say Dominus vobiscum Jube Domine c. 94 127. When the Roman Office was introduc'd into the Churches of Spain 50. The Institution of the Office of the Virgin Mary for every Saturday throughout the Year 127. Of its Usefulness 94. Olaus King of Norway receives Admonitions from Pope Gregory VII 51. Orders and Ordination the Times appointed for them 117. The Qualities requisite in Persons who are to be ordain'd 116 118. Whether the Sons of Clergy-men may be admitted into Orders 112. The Sons of Priests Bastards and Slaves uncapable of being ordain'd unless they become Monks or Regular Canons 58 72 74 and 126. A Constitution to exclude the Sons of Priests 71. The Proceedings enjoin'd by Lanfrank in Reference to a Person who was ordain'd Deacon without receiving any Order 16. A Deacon and Priest ordain'd without taking any other Orders ibid. and 31. The manner of re-instating them 16. Ordinations are valid altho ' perform'd by unworthy Ministers 94. Those made by Schismaticks or excommunicated Priests condemned 43 47 71 and 74. Whether those that are made by Clerks who stand guilty of Simony Adultery or other notorious Crimes are valid 71. Whether Persons ordain'd by Clerks convicted of Simony ought to be re-ordain'd 94. Ordinations procur'd by Simoniacal Practices forbidden and condemned 27 28 44 112 114 119. The manner of reconciling those
Bernard to confute that Duke 38. Witnesses such as are liable to be accepted against in the case of Adultery 19. 20. Women that their Conversation with Ecclesiastical Persons is Scandalous 17. 20. Y. YVes Bishop of Chartres see Ives FINIS L. E. DU PIN's Ecclesiastical History OF THE THIRTEENTH FOURTEENTH and FIFTEENTH CENTURIES Which make the ELEVENTH TWELFTH and THIRTEENTH VOLUMES THE TRANSLATOR TO THE READER AS Monsieur Du Pin has merited the Applause of the Learned World for his former Volumes of Ecclesiastical History so in these three which are now publish'd he continues still to write like himself and maintain the same Character which has been given of him he is no less faithful in his Relations judicious in his Reflections exact in his Criticisms and moderate in his Censures of those who differ from him and even more impartial than would be expected from one of a contrary Party The two first Ages treated of in this Volume viz. the 13th and 14th were cover'd with some Remains of that Ignorance and Barbarism which reigned in the last preceeding Ages But this is so far from being any just Prejudice against this History that it should rather invite the Ingenious Reader 's Curiosity when he considers that the excellent Historian has enlightned these dark Ages by giving a clearer account of them than any one Writer before him for he has brought to light some notable Pieces of History which seem'd to be buried in Oblivion and collected together the several Fragments which were scatter'd in many Volumes and plac'd them in such a clear light that the Darkness of the Times serves to set off and commend the Judgment of the Historian It is his peculiar Excellency that he gives a just Idea of the most considerable Ecclesiastical Writers in all the Ages of the Church not by general Characters but by giving an account of the Matters handled in their Works and taking judicious Extracts out of them and particularly in this Volume he has added to the History of each Century such useful Observations as give the Reader a general Idea of the great Transactions then on foot So that nothing seems to be wanting to render this Translation compleat but some Remarks which may be use to the Protestant Reader of which I shall therefore present him with a few relating to the Controversies between the Roman Church and the Church of England It has been observ'd by Monsieur Du Pin and others That School-Divinity was corrupted in the 13th Century by introducing into it the Principles of Aristotle's Philosophy whereby all Matters of Doctrin were resolved into a great many curious and useless Questions and decided by the Maxims of that Philosophy which yet was learned not from the Greek Originals but the corrupt Versions of the Arabians as if they were of equal Authority with the Scriptures And as this mixture corrupted the Simplicity of the ancient Christian Faith so it was the cause of many Mischiefs among which I reckon this to be none of the least that it furnish'd Men with such Principles as were subservient to maintain the Popish Doctrin of Transubstantion which begun in this Century to be established As for instance This Philosophy taught Men that Quantity is an Accident distinct and separable from Body from whence they inferr'd the Possibility of the Replication and Penetration of Bodies and maintain'd as the School-men do to this Day That the same Body may be in a thousand distant Places at the same time That the same Man may be alive at London and kill'd at Rome That the whole Body of a lusty Man with all its several parts may be crouded within the Compass of a Pins head by which Doctrins they defended some of these Absurdities which are implied in Transubstantiation viz. That the Body of Christ is at the same time in Heaven and Earth and in all the several Places where the Eucharist is celebrated that it is whole in the whole Loaf and whole in every the least part of it and many other such like Absurdities which are real Contradictions to the Nature of a Body if Extension is essential to it as it is held to be by the best Philosophers both Ancient and Modern The first pretended General Council in which Transubstantiation is said to be established was the fourth Lateran Council under Innocent III. in the Year 1215. But Du Pin has plainly prov'd that the Canons which go under the Name of this Council were Du Pin 13 Cent. not made by the Council it self but only by Pope Innocent III. who read some of them in the Council and after its Dissolution added many more as he pleas'd Dissert 7 de Antiq. Eccl. Discipl Ch. 3. Sect. 4. which is a Trick that the Popes had commonly used in the 12th Century who publish'd their own Constitutions as the Decrees of Councils Du Pin. Hist. Eccl. 10th Cent. p. 217. I shall not pretend to give an Account what was the Doctrin of the first Eight Ages of the Church concerning the Eucharist which may be learn'd from Archbishop Usher Bishop Cosins and others But to me it seems an Invincible Argument that Transubstantiation was not then believ'd That the Jews and Heathens did not charge the Christians with the Absurdities and Contradictions which are the obvious and natural Consequences of that Doctrin As to the Term of Transubstantiation Du Pin says it was first used by Celles Bishop of Chartres and Stephen Bishop of Autun in the 12th Century p. 156. As to the Doctrin it self it appears to have been first published by Paschasius in his Treatise of the Body and Blood of our Saviour about the Year 832. wherein he asserts That after the Consecration under the Figure of Bread and Wine there is nothing but the Body and Blood of Christ and which is yet more wonderful he adds It is no other Flesh than that which was born of Mary suffered on the Cross and rose again from the Grave He might very well call it wondâ—…ul Doctrin not only for its apparent Absurdity but for its Novelty since the like Expressions had never been used before which is ingenuously confess'd by Bellarm. de Scriptor Eccl. ad annum 850. and by Sirmondus in the Life of Paschasius prefix'd to his Works Par. 1618. and may be plainly proved from the Writings of the most learned Men in this Century For first Claudius Bishop of Turin asserted the contrary Doctrin eighteen or nineteen Years before Paschasius's Book upon this Subject was publish'd which Doctrin was never oppos'd by those who cenfur'd some other Opinions of his as Dr. Allix shows from a Manuscript Commentary of this Author 's upon St. Matth. Remarks upon the Ancient Church of Piedmont p. 62 c. II. In the same Century after this Doctrim was published it met with great Opposition from many eminent Men such as Ratramnus Joannes Scotus Amalarius Florus Druthmarus and Erigerus all which are own'd by Du Pin to have oppos'd the Doctrin of
sets down Four infallible Signs whereby to discover them taken out of the same Gospel They love the first Places in the Feasts the chief Seats in the Synagogues to be saluted in publick Places and to be call'd by Men Rabbi He afterwards explains those Tokens after the following manner On the First says he it ought to be observ'd That they may be said to love the First Places in Feasts who frequent the Tables of Kings Princes and Prelates who are the first at them to get the best of the Treat which is unbecoming Regulars and especially Preachers c. He likewise adds another Proof of the Love they have to the Uppermost Places in Feasts viz. The Curiosity they have of diving into the Affairs of Great Men and of intermeddling with them Upon the second token which is the Loving of the Uppermost Seats in the Synagogues he observes That they are justly to be charg'd with this who get themselves to be nominated by the Secular Powers for to Preach in Churches on the Great Festivals without having any deference to the Authority of the Bishops and other Prelates who intrude themselves into the Ministery without being Call'd thereto and who aim more at shewing their own Parts and Eloquence that at Preaching the Word of God Upon the Third Sign or Token of Loving to be Saluted in the Publick Places he applies it to the Regulars who get themselves to be summon'd into the Consistories of Princes and Prelates who frequent them who concern themselves in giving their Judgments and Counsels in them in order to attract the Respect of those who have any Business there Lastly on the Last Token viz. Their Desire of being Call'd Rabbi Rabbi he Observes That it is very Applicable to the Regulars who make use of Excommunication and raise a Scandal in the Church in order to obtain the Quality of Masters This Discourse is only an Introduction of that which William of Saint Amour establishes in his Book concerning the Perils of the Last Times In the First Chapter he Proves from that Place of St. Paul 2 Tim. 2. 1. That at the Latter End of the Church there should happen Perilous Times In the Second he describes the Characters of those who shall be the Cause of those Perils as they are set down in the same Place Men Lovers of themselves Coveteous Boasters Proud Blasphemers Disobedient to Parents and Superiors Unthankful Unholy Unnatural false Accusers Incontinent without Charity Traytors Heady High-minded Lovers of Pleasure more than Lovers of God Such as creep into Houses c. He adds That they are those false Teachers and false Prophets foretold by our Saviour which he applies to those who Preach without a Call without a Mission and without the leave of the Curates under Pretence That they have Permission from the Pope or the Bishop He observes That he would not Dispute the Authority of the Pope or of the Diocesan Bishop but that the Licence which they Grant to some to Preach signifies only in case they be Invited thereto since the Bishops themselves can do nothing out of their own Diocess unless call'd by their Brethren and that 't is not to be suppos'd That the Pope Grants a Power to a great many Persons of Preaching to one and the same Auditory if they be not invited to it by the Curates In the Third he demonstrates what those Characters were by which those Dangerous Men shall sow those Disorders Namely a semblance of Piety Religion and Charity which shall make them to pass for true Christians In the Fourth he explains the Perils to which the Faithful shall be expos'd by the Imposture of those false Preachers who shall resist the Truth as Jannes and Jambres resisted Moses that is to say who shall seduce Princes and the Christian People by their shew of Wisdom and shall divert them from obeying the Counsels of their Lawful Superiors in order to follow their Corrupt Maxims and Morals In the Fifth he shews the ways which they shall make use of to seduce them viz. by creeping into Houses by making them discover their Secrets in Confessions by seducing Women and the Simple by making themselves Lords and Masters of their Souls and by forcing them to make Vows and by diverting them from the Submission which they ow to their Pastors In the Sixth he says that those who shall not foresee those Perils shall be in danger of perishing by them He proves in the Seventh That those who are the Cause of them shall perish In the Eighth he endeavours to prove by the Signs set down in Scripture That these Perils are not far off In the Ninth he shews That it chiefly belongs to the Prelats to foresee discover and divert those Perils In the Tenth he demonstrates the Punishments to which they are liable in this World and the next if they do not oppose them In the Eleventh he proves That tho' those Perils have been foretold yet they might be diverted for a time if vigorously oppos'd In the Twelfth he explains the Methods which ought to be made use of in order to divert them Which are 1. To consider who those Persons are who creep into Houses and whether there be any such in the Church 2. When one shall have discover'd them to inform others of them 3. To Injoyn them to avoid such 4. To hinder them from Preaching and Teaching 5. To oblige those who are of their Sect to withdraw themselves from them 6. To hinder others from entring into their Sect and in general to shun the False Prophets the Idle who will not work with their Hands and the Inquisitive He in this place oppugns the Practice of begging when one is strong and Lusty and when a Man may get his Living by his Labour and says That 't is a piece of Injustice In the Thirteenth he examines among what sort of Persons we ought to search after these Seducers and pretends That 't is not among the Pagans nor among the Wicked or Ignorant Christians that this Search ought to be made but amongst the Wise Persons among those who profess to follow the Dictates of Jesus Christ who seem to be most Holy and most Prudent that one would think them to be the Elect of Jesus Christ. In a word in the last Chapter he reckons up Forty one Marks to distinguish the False Apostles from the True of which says he some are Infallible and others Probable In the beginning he protests that he had no Design of advancing any thing against any particular Person or against any State or Order of Men but only in general to declaim against the Sins of the Wicked and the Perils of the Church However 't is easy to see that he means the Dominican Friars and that 't is at them he aims and whom he sets upon in this Book which he submits to the Correction of the Church This Treatise is follow'd by two Pieces wherein he resolves two Queries viz. In the First
and next to that lay down on the Bench whereon he sat that he kissed the Master about the Fundament upon his Garments and the same being set the other Brethren kissed him on the Navel That after this the Master pluckt out of a Box a Copper Image of a Humane Shape placed it on a Chest and said Sirs behold a Friend of God who speaks to him when he will give him Thanks for that he hath brought you unto the Dignity you have so much desired and hath accomplished all your Wishes that forthwith they worshipped this Image three times falling on their Knees and they produced a Crucifix to shew that they renounced it and spat thereon that the Master gave him a small Girdle of Cord and gave him leave when he felt any Provocations of the Flesh to make Use of his Brethren that this being finished he was conducted to another place invested with the habit of the Order and brought back to the Master who instructed him how he must behave himself at Church in the War and at Table Another of the Templars added to these Particulars That the Master shewing the Image kissed it Saying Yalla which is a Saracen word It is related in the History of Provence That one of the Commissioners deputed by the King about Beaucaire named Odoardus des Moulins wrote to his Majesty how he had Arrested Five and forty Templars whereof there were five Knights and one Priest who being examined they all Agreed as to the Denial of JESUS CHRIST the Permission of Sodomy and the shameful Kissing That as to the Image they said that they never worshipped it but once at a Provincial Chapter held at Montpellier That the Priest added how he that did admit him had enjoined him never to Pronounce the Words us'd at the Consecration of the Host the which he had observed in his distribution of it to the Brothers of the Society but not as to that which he shewed to the People though he had been commanded not to Consecrate it Some Authors accuse them further of other Crimes as of burning the Body of those who died firm in their Idolatry and of giving their Ashes to be Swallowed down by Novice-Templars of Roasting the Children of the Women they had Abused to rub their Image in the Grease that dripped from them and to cover it all over with the Skin of a Man but these Accusations were not Proved by their Interrogatories The greatest part of these Inquisitions were taken at the end of the Year 1307. and the beginning of the Year 1308. The Pope to put a stop to these Proceedings which he thought intrenched upon his Authority The Pope forbids the Ordinaries and the Inquisitor to meddle with the Affair of the Templars forbad the Archbishops Bishops and Inquisitors of France to intermeddle herein and ordered the Cause to be Heard before himself The King hereupon signified to him his Resentment and represented to him that he was amazed that his Holiness shew'd so great coldness in the Prosecution of this Affair that 't was as if he consented to the Crimes of the Impeached and would shew them a way to defend themselves that he ought rather to stir up the Prelates and Ordinaries of Places to do their Duty in the Extirpation of this Order that they could better search out this Matter in their Dioceses than Strangers that 't is a great Injustice to take from the Bishops without reason the Administration wherewith God hath entrusted them and the Merit of Defending the Faith that neither the King nor they could endure it that the Suspension of the Inquisitors Power gave hopes to the Templars to find Favour in the Pope's Court and to spin out the time The King who desired to dispatch it out of hand proposed it to the Divinity-Faculty at Paris to be satisfied whether he could not order Process against the Templars before Secular Judges They answered him by their Resolve of 25. March in the Year 1308. Shewing 1. That the Authority of a Secular Judge cannot extend so far as to The Answer of the Divinity-Faculty at Paris proceed against any one for the Crime of Heresie if it be not required by the Church and she hath not resign'd up the Criminal to him nevertheless in case of Necessity and where there is Danger the Secular Judge may order Hereticks to be Arrested but with a Resolution to resign them into the Power of the Church 2. That those who are listed for the Defence of the Faith and have made Profession of a Religion established by the Church ought to pass among the Religious and enjoy the benefit of Exemption 3. That their Estates ought to be reserv'd to be employed to the Ends for which they were conferred on them This Resolve discover'd the Wisdom and Steadiness of the Divinity-Faculty of Paris which seeks not to please the King by agreeable Answers and conform to his Designs but explains to him the Truth sincerely without any Evasion or Disguise The King that he might take just Measures resolv'd to go himself to Poictiers and before he The Pope himself examines the Templars repair'd thither he appointed at Tours a Meeting of the Deputies of the Cities of the Kingdom by Letters Patents sent to the Bailiffs on the 25th of March in the Year 1308. But in Conclusion having no way to do it otherwise he resigned into the hands of two Cardinals sent to him by the Pope some of the Principal Templars and ordered them to be conveyed to Poictiers where the Pope was to the end he might know the Truth from their own Mouth The Pope having examined them in presence of the two Cardinals who had been sent to the King and of three others they confess'd the Crimes whereof they were accused and persisted in their Testimony He understood likewise the same things from one of his Domesticks a Knight of this Order who confessed ingenuously all the Evil which was committed among them The Pope being by this convinced of the Necessity of prosecuting this Affair by a Bull The Pope permits the carrying on the Process against the Templars directed to the Archbishops Bishops and to the Inquisitors of the Kingdom dated the 5th of July in the Year 1308. he took off the Suspension of their Power and permitted them to proceed in their Diocesses against the Templars even to the Sentence which should be pronounced in their Provincial Councils reserving nevertheless to himself and the Holy See the Process against the Great Master of the Temple and against the Masters and Heads of that Order in France the Lands beyond the Seas Normandy Poictou and Provence He took Care of the keeping and preservation of their Estates by four other Bulls of the same Month willing that they should be reserved to the same end for which they had been given that is to say for the Relief of the Holy Land without prejudicing the Rights which the King and the other Lords might
to celebrate Divine Service in their Private Chapels the following Days are to be excepted the first Sunday in Advent the Sunday in the Octaves of Epiphany the first Sunday in Lent Passion-Sunday the Sunday in the Octaves of Pentecost and the Sunday in the Octaves of the Assumption The Council of Toledo in the Year 1339. 〈◊〉 Council of Toledo in 1339. THIS Council was held under GILES â—…BERNOZ Archbishop of Toledo May 19. 1339. It contained no more than 5 Canons The 1st forbids the Alienation of the Câ—urches Goods The 2d renews the Constitution of the Council of Valladolid concerning the capacity that such Persons ought to have who are made Curates and put into Benefices with Charge of Souls The 3d. renews another of the same Council concerning the appointing of a Master of Divinity in every Chapter The 4th 〈◊〉 the Canon of John Archbishop of Toledo Giles's Predecessor concerning such Proctors as thâ—â—ishops are obliged to send to a Council when they can't come themselves The 5th oâ—â—ers the Execution of the Canon Omnis utrâ—â—sque Sexus and that they may observe it enjoins the Curates to set down in Writing the Names of their Parishioners and to present them to him that are not confessed and have not received the Communion The Council of Noyon in the Year 1344. The Council of Noyon in 1344. JOHN de VIENNE Archbishop of Rheims held a Council of his Province at Noyon July 26. 1344. in which he published 17 Canons The 3 first and the 5th 6th 8th 13th and 15th are for the securing of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction to the Clergy The 4th orders That the same Service shall be celebrated in the Parochial Churches which is in the Cathedrals The 7th forbids the Abuse of certain Stage-Players who carried about Candles light as in Procession The 9th enjoins the Begging-Friars to exhort the People to Pay their Tythes to the Curates The 10th exhorts Chapters and Bishops to communicate their Titles The 11th That Deans of Chapters and other Superiors of the Church should oblige the Clergy subject to their Government to wear the Tonsure and the Habits of Clergymen The 12th forbids publishing new Miracles without the Bishops allowance The 14th Excommunicates Laymen that assume the Habit of the Clergy by their own Authority The 16th forbids Ecclesiastical Proctors to proceed against any Person of whom they have no just cause of Complaint The Last is against the excessive Exactions of the Proctors of the Ecclesiastical Courts The Council of Paris in the Year 1346. The Council of Paris in 1346. WILLIAM de MELUN Archbishop of Sens held a Council of his Province at Paris March 14 1346. in which he published 13 Constitutions The 1st is about the Immunities of the Clergy and 2d about their Habits The 3d. is against such Excommunicate Persons as continue so above one Year and orders that they should be proceeded against as persons suspected of Heresie The 4th Excommunicates those Lords and Judges who do cause Persons suspected of Heresie to be Apprehended The 5th forbids applying the Legacies given to the Church to other uses The 6th and 7th prescribes forms of Letters for Deputies sent to a Council as also of Citation The 8th ordains That Priories and Curacies be united in places where there are not Revenues sufficient The 9th renews the Laws concerning Houses for Lepers and Hospitals The 10th enjoins Beneficed Persons to Uphold their Churches and the Buildings of their Houses and lay out a part of their Revenues upon them according to the Bishops order The 11th forbids Bishops to reserve any part of the Revenues of the Benefices that belong not to their Table The 12th respects the way of Proceeding which ought to be observed in Causes of Matrimony Usury and Tythes The 13th confirms the Indulgence granted by John XXII to those who say Ave Maria three times in the Evening and grants 50 days Pardon to those who pray at that Hour for the Prosperity of the Church and Realm for Peace for the King and Queen of France and their Children and who say a Pater Noster and an Ave Maria. The Council of Toledo in 1347. The Council of Toledo in 1347. THIS Council was held April 24. 1347. at Alcala under the same Archbishop as that of the Year 1339. In it were published 4 Constitutions The 1st is about the Habits which the Clergy ought to wear in their Journeys The 2d is against those who attempt any thing against the Clergy or Revenues of the Church The 3d. is against Questors And the Last against such as are guilty of Simony It condemns all such as oppose these Ordinances to be Fined certain Summs The Council of Beziers in the Year 1351. The Council of Beziers in 1351. PETER JUDEX Archbishop of Narbonne Summoned a Council Novemb. 7. 1351. and invited the Bishops and Chapters of his Province to it by Letters It was held upon a day appointed and published 8 Decrees By the 1st is granted 10 days Pardon to those who bow their heads at the Name of Jesus when it is mentioned in reading Divine Service The 2d grants Pardons to those who accompany the Body of Jesus Christ with Wax Tapers when it is carried to the Sick The 3d. does the like to such as Pray for the Pope King of France and Bishops at Mass. The 4th orders That the Fonts for Baptism should be locked up The 5th is against them that invade the Goods of the Churches The 6th forbids the Curates to give their Parishioners leave to communicate out of their own Parish within Fifteen days after Easter The 7th exhorts the Clergy to abstain from Flesh on Saturdays The 8th is against those who dare Excommunicate their Superiors The Council of Toledo in 1355. The Council of Toledo in 1355. THIS Council was held Octob. 1. 1355. by Blaisus Fernandez Archbishop of Toledo who seems to have called it to discharge himself of many Scruples which he had upon the account of the great Number of Constitutions made by his Predecessors declaring That the Canons of the former Provincial Councils and Council of Valladolid were only Penal Laws which did not oblige under the Penalty of Sin at least it was otherwise ordained The Council of Anger 's in 1365. The Council of Anger 's in 1365. SIMON RENULPHI Archbishop of Tours held a Council of the Bishops of his Province at Aâ—gers March 12. 1365. in which he published 34 Articles or Rules the greatest part of which are taken out of the Decretals and concern Ecclesiastical Causes the Collation or Lapses of Benefices the Residence of the Beneficed Clergy the Obligations of such to take Orders the Rights of Arch-Deacons to whom it is forbidden by the 10th to take any thing for the Examination of such as are to be promoted to Orders and grants them by the 11th 50 or an 100 Sols Tournois i e. a Crown or Ten Shillings of our English Money at the Death of every
Subject whereof is not as some imagine That the Church can take away the Pope for ever but that there are many Cases wherein the Church may be for a time without the Pope and that there are some Cases wherein he may be Depos'd He takes for the Text of his Discourse the Words of Jesus Christ in St. Mark Ch. 2. The time will come when the Bridegroom shall be taken away from you whereupon he enquires First Whether Jesus Christ who is the Bridegroom of the Church can be taken from the Church and its Members And first he lays it down for certain That he cannot be taken away from the whole Church according to the Ordinary Law Secondly That tho' he may cease to be the Spouse of particular Believers in the Church Militant yet he cannot cease to be the Spouse of the whole Church Collectively Thirdly That he cannot cease to dispense continually his Graces to the whole Church and every one of its Living Members Fourthly That it was not possible That Jesus Christ should be taken away from the far greatest part of his Spouse so that the Church should subsist in one Woman only or in the Sex of Women only or in Lay-men only This is what concerns Jesus Christ. Now follow the Propositions which concern the Pope his Vicar First The Monarchical State of the Church Establish'd by Jesus Christ cannot be chang'd Secondly A Pope may cease to be the Vicar of Jesus Christ by Cession or Resignation of the Pontificat Thirdly He may be remov'd by a General Council even against his Will in some Cases and tho' the Council cannot take from him the Power of Order yet it may Deprive him of the lawful Execution of the Power of Order and of his Jurisdiction Fourthly The Council has Power to do this legally and with Authority Fifthly The Pope may be Depos'd as a Heretick and Schismatick tho' he be only mentally so in such Cases as he may be presum'd and judg'd to be such Sixthly He may in some Cases be depriv'd of the Pontificate without any Fault of his though not without cause as if he become incapable of doing his Duty if he do not prove that his Election was Canonical if his Deprivation be a means to procure the Peace of the Church or the Re-union of a great many People or if he has promis'd to resign Seventhly The Church cannot take away the Vicar of Jesus Christ unto the end of the World supposing that it shall last yet for some time From whence he concludes That those who contribute to maintain a Schism oppose the Order of Jesus Christ because they hinder the Church from having a lawful Head The 4th Treatise of Gerson is about the manner of our Behaviour during a Schism where he shews That when it is doubtful which of the Competitors is the true Pope we ought to abstain from Condemning one another and endeavour to procure the Peace of the Church either by obliging the Competitors to resign their pretended Rights or by withdrawing our Obedience to them but above all things we ought not to divide the Communion of one from the other At the end of this Treatise he has added an Appendix wherein he gives a Catalogue of the Schisms of the Church of Rome The 5th Work is a Treatise of the Unity of the Church wherein he shews with what Zeal we ought to seek after Union with one sole Head the Vicar of Jesus Christ and of what importance it is to procure it After this follows a Treatise of the different States of the Ecclesiasticks of their Duties and Privileges First With respect to the Pope who hath the Supremacy in the Church tho' he be subject to the Laws of General Councils and ought also to pay a Deference to other positive Laws Secondly With respect to the Bishops who are of Divine Institution and exercise their Power in Subordination to the Pope yet so that he cannot destroy it nor deprive the Bishops of it without Reason or restrain their Rights or Jurisdictions beyond reasonable Bounds Thirdly With respect to Parish-Priests who succeed the 72 Disciples and who are also instituted by Jesus Christ who although they be inferiour to Bishops yet are superiour to the Regulars having a Right to Preach and Administer the Sacraments Fourthly With respect to the Regulars who are priviledg'd and have been chosen to Preach and hear Confessions a long time after the Establishment of the Church a Privilege which they ought to use Charitably and not from a Principle of Interest Emulation or Ambition and to the Prejudice of the Parish-Priests and not at all but when they are approv'd by the Bishop The next Treatise is a Work purely of Morality wherein Gerson collects many Christian Maxims for all Estates after which follows a Sermon preach'd at Constance wherein he relates divers Signs of the approaching Destruction of this World among which he places the Pomp Pride and Tyranny of the Prelats of his time and the Novelty of Opinions After this we find a Catalogue of the Faults of Ecclesiasticks which are many The plurality of Benefices is not forgotten there nor the Tricks and Sollicitations that are us'd to obtain them the Absence of Bishops from their Diocesses the Negligence of Ecclesiasticks in performing their Office and reading Divine Service their Ignorance the worldly Life which they lead the Pomp and Pride of Cardinals and other Prelats and an infinite number of Disorders both in the Manners and Behaviour of the Ecclesiasticks The three following Treatises were Compos'd before the Council of Constance at such time as Benedict XIII was yet acknowledg'd by France wherein he proves the Right that Benedict had to the Pontificat and would have him put an end to the Schism by way of Compromise or Cession rather than by a General Council Gerson being sent to Pope Benedict by the University of Paris preach'd before him two Sermons at Taraseon in the Year 1404. one on the day of our Lord's Circumcision and the other about the Peace of the Church wherein he undertakes to persuade the Pope that he ought to embrace all ways for procuring it even by resigning if need were his Right to his Adversary This Discourse was ill taken wherefore Gerson was forc'd to justify himself by two Letters which he wrote whereof one is address'd to the Duke of Orleans and the other to the Bishop of Cambray In these Letters he speaks of another preceding Sermon deliver'd before the same Pope at Marseilles wherein he declares the Occasion of his Embassy which is printed after the other two whereof we have now spoken although it should be before them and there is also among them a Discourse which was not preach'd by Gerson till a long time after in the presence of Alexander V. The other Pieces of Gerson about the Schism are a Discourse spoken in the Name of the University of Paris in 1408. in the presence of the Embassadors from England who were
no less an Enemy than the Catholicks themselves but he maintained the Usage of communicating in both kinds which became common in the greatest part of the Churches of Bohemia tho' that Precaution was not observed of advertising the People that there was no Necessity of this Usage The Cardinals Carvasal and Aeneas Sylvius Legats in Bohemia used all their Efforts to abolish this Practice but in vain for Pogebrac and Rocksana maintain'd it which gave occasion to Pope Paul II. to proceed against Pogebrac declare him a Heretick and to give away his Kingdom to Matthias King of Hungary who after he had made War for some time against him made Peace with him and left him in peaceable Possession of his Kingdom in spite of the Emperor and the Pope Altho' Pogebrac and Rocksana had totally ruin'd the Thaborites yet there remain'd many Persons who were tinctur'd with their Principles that separated from the Calixtines and made a new Sect under the Name of The Brethren of Bohemia When they declar'd themselves openly they had for their Captain a Cordwainer named Kelesisky who drew up for them a Form of Faith and for their Pastor one named Matthias Convaldus they re-baptized all those who were admitted into their Sect they explained themselves darkly about the real Presence refused to adore Jesus Christ in the Eucharist and were mortal Enemies to the Clergy and the Roman Church insomuch That they made no great Scruple of joining with the Lutherans and Calvinists as we shall hereafter declare CHAP. VIII An History of the Errors Publish'd and Condemn'd in the Fifteenth Century Chiefly by the Faculty of Theology at Paris all whose Censares are here Related WE shall now give you an Historical Account of the Errors that were Censur'd in the Fifteenth Century by the Sentence given-against John Monteson a Dominican and against those of his Order by the Faculty of Theology at Paris For tho' this Affair was begun in the preceeding Century yet it was not ended till the beginning of this whereof here follows the Relation John Monteson a Catalonian of the Order of Friars-Preachers Doctor of Divinity of the A Censure of the Errors of John Monteson a Friar Preacher Faculty at Paris advanc'd in 1387. many Erroneous Propositions in his Acts De Vesperiis and de Resompta and in his publick Lectures The Faculty of Theology being certainly inform'd of this appointed three Deputies who were Seculars and three who were Regulars to Examine the * i. e. a Parcel of Paper consisting of 3 or 4 sheets Caâ—ire from whence they were extracted but these being unwilling to make their Report unless there were a greater number of Deputies the Faculty appointed Six more who gave their Opinion in Writing whereupon the Faculty being assembled July the 6th of the same year Condemn'd the 14 following Propositions and declared that this Regular ought to retract them 1st That the Hypostatical Union in Jesus Christ is greater than the Union of the three Persons in the Essence of God 2. That it was possible he should be a meer Creature who could merit for himself and all others after the same manner as the Soul of Jesus Christ did by the assistance of habitual Grace tho' it was not at all possible that he could Redeem and Save Man with the same Convenience and Sufficiency as Jesus Christ. 3. That a pure Rational Creature cannot really see the Essence of God as the Blessed do 4. That 't is possible there should be a meer Creature more perfect than the Soul of Jesus Christ as to merit such as was the Grace of the Soul of Jesus Christ. 5. That such a Creature if he were in the World would be above all kinds of Creatures 6. That it is not a Doctrin contrary to the Faith to suppose it absolutely necessary that any Creature should exist 7. That a thing may exist necessarily and yet be produc'd by a Cause 8th That 't is more agreeable to the Faith to say that some other thing is absolutely necessary besides the first Being than to say without Exception that he is the only necessary Being 9th That 't is a Heresie to affirm that a Proposition contrary to Scripture may be true this Proposition is not Condemn'd but only so far as it is meant universally of all Propositions which are contrary to Scripture tho' this contrariety be not evident 10th That it is expresly contrary to Faith to say that every Man except Jesus Christ did not contract the guilt of Original Sin The Faculty Ordain'd that this Proposition should be retracted as false scandalous offensive to Pious Ears and presumptuously advanc'd notwithstanding the probability of the Affirmative in that Question viz. Whether the Blessed Virgin was Conceiv'd in Original Sin The 11th That 't is expresly contrary to Faith to say that the Blessed Virgin Mary Mother of God did not contract the guilt of Original Sin 12th That it was as much contrary to Scripture to say that one Person only was exempt from Original Sin as Jesus Christ was as to except ten 13th That 't is more expresly contrary to Scripture to say that the blessed Virgin was not conceiv'd in Original Sin than to affirm that she was Blessed and Victorious in the Instant of her Conception and Sanctification 14th That in the explication of Holy Scripture whether the Church define a Matter or the Doctors explain it or some exception be deduc'd about it we must not draw any Decision Declaration or Exception but only from the Scripture it self The Faculty declar'd that this Proposition ought to be retracted as false and erroneous if the meaning of it be that the Exposition or Exception ought to be found expresly or explicitly in Scripture and that there are many general Propositions in Scripture which have Exceptions that are not expresly set down therein whereof they give for an Example the following Propositions Every thing which enters into the mouth is cast forth all Men from the highest to the lowest are addicted to Covetousness no Man hath ascended into Heaven but the Son of God who came down from it if we say that we have no Sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us The Faculty observes afterwards that this Rule is prejudicial to the Decisions and Usages of the Catholick Church because in the Primitive Church there were many explications of Scripture by Revelation or by the Inspiration of God and by the Information of the Apostles John Monteson was acquainted with this Censure by the Dean of the Faculty and Charitably admonish'd to retract these Propositions but instead of doing it as he had promised he protested that he would defend them till death Then the Faculty of Theology accused him to the University which approv'd the Sentence of the Faculty and presented it to the Bishop of Paris Peter Orgemont who being the ordinary Judge in such Matters order'd John Monteson to be Cited who not appearing he publish'd a Sentence on the 23d
writing to them That though he had power to judge all Causes and none had any right to reform his Judgments yet he would do nothing without communicating it unto them That he was surprized that they should write to him as if they had been persuaded that he had given credit to all that Coelestius had said to him That he had not proceeded so fast because too much Deliberation cannot be used when a Supreme Judgment is to be pronounced and That after the first Letter which he received from them he left all in the same Condition that it was before This Letter of the 19th of March 418. is the Tenth in the usual Order of Zosimus's Letters It appears by this that the Pope began to alter his Mind concerning Coelestius and to mistrust his Sincerity But he was fully convinced of his Double-dealing when the time of Judgment came for having caused him to be cited to come and condemn the Six Articles that were laid to his Charge clearly if he would be absolved of the Judgment that was given against him in Africa he not only refused to appear but fled from Rome Zosimus provoked to see himself deceived wrote to all the Bishops a long Letter wherein he condemned Coelestius's Articles and Pelagius's Writings This Letter is not all extant but only some Fragments of it produced by St. Augustin and Marius Mercator It was very long and contained the whole History of this Affair He gave this Judgment after April in the Year 418. Zosimus had likewise some Contests with the Bishops of Gaul The Churches of Arles and Vienna had long disputed the Right of Primacy over the Provinces of Gallia Narbonensis and Viennensis This Contest had been laid a-sleep for some time by a Decree of the Council at Turin which ordained That in Expectation of an absolute Decision of that Quarrel both Churches should enjoy the Right of Metropolis over the Churches that were near to each of them But Zosimus was no sooner promoted to the Popedom but he declares for Patroclus Bishop of Arles and granted him by his Letter all that he could wish for For he gave him in the first place the Right of giving Formed Letters to all the Ecclesiasticks of Gaul that would come to Rome forbidding absolutely that any should go out of Gaul without that sort of Letters from him whereby it appeared what they were and whence they came This Privilege did belong to the Church of Arles as indeed Zosimus saith That he granted it not to Patroclus because of his Church but for his Deserts Meritorum ejus Contemplatione The second Advantage which Zosimus would have Patroclus enjoy was annex'd to the Dignity of his Church and concerns the Metropolitical Rights which he ordains him to have over the Province of Gallia Viennensis and both the Narbonenses which implies the Right of Ordaining all the Bishops of those Provinces Lastly Zosimus annexed to the Bishoprick of Arles all the Parishes and Territories which formerly belong'd to it He added That all the Contests that should arise in the Provinces of Gallia Viennensis and Narbonensis were to be carried to the Bishop of Arles except the Business was of Consequence in which case he affirmed it necessary That he should examine the same himself at Rome Nisi magnitudo causae nostrum desideret examen He observes besides in that Letter That Trophimus was sent to Arles by the See of Rome and that through his means the Gauls received the Faith of Jesus Christ. This Letter was written soon after the Promotion of Pope Zosimus the 20th of March of the Year 417. It is the Fifth in the common Editions About the latter end of that Year he writ Two more wherein he confirms the Metropolitical Rights to the Church of Arles rejecting even with Scorn the Canon of the Council at Turin and condemning Proculus of Marseilles and Simplicius of Vienna who opposed his Design In both those Letters he grounds the Primacy of the Church of Arles upon its being founded by Trophimus who was sent from the See of Rome These Letters are the Seventh and the Eighth The former is directed to the Bishops of Gallia Viennensis and the second to Narbonensis and the latter to Hilary of Narbon who maintained That to him belonged the Ordinations of the Bishops of the first Narbonensis Both these Letters are dated the 27th of September 417. He that most opposed Patroclus was Proculus Bishop of Marseilles who constantly Ordained Bishops in his Province norwithstanding the Pope's Prohibitions Zosimus undertook him and cited him to Rome But he not much regarding that Citation continued to maintain his Rights and to Ordain as he had done before This brought upon him a Condemnation from Zoâ—… who writ against him not only to Patroclus but also to the People of Marseilles That they should Expell him out of his Bishoprick His Ninth Letter to Patroclus is upon this Subject September 27th 417. And the Eleventh to the same written March 2d 418. and the Twelfth to the People of Marseilles dated on the same day Yet notwithstanding the Pope's Judgment and Threatnings Proculus remained peaceable Possessor of his Bishoprick and was always acknowledged Lawful Bishop not only by the Gallican but also by the African Bishops And St. Jerom tells us in his Letter to Rusticus That this Proculus of Marseilles who was used so ill by the Popes was a most Holy and Learned Bishop The Grudge which Zosimus bore to Proculus made him Condemn likewise two Bishops Ordained by him called Ursus and Tuentius against whom he writ a Circular Letter to the Bishops of Africa Gaul and Spain it is the Seventh dated September 20th 417. He saith of these two Persons whom Proculus had Ordained That they had been both Condemned The first by Proculus himself and the second by other Bishops That this Man after his Condemnation came to Rome where he did Penance and adjured the Errors of the Priscillianists He reproaches Proculus for regarding neither his Judgment nor the Judgment of others He speaks also against Lazarus whom Proculus Ordained Bishop of Aix who had assisted at the Ordination of Ursus and Tuentius He declares That those Ordinations were Illegitimate having been performed in prejudice of the Bishop of Arles who alone had the Right to Ordain in the Provinces of Narbon and Vienna Lastly He advises the Bishops of Gaul Spain and Africa not to own either Ursus or Tuentius for Bishops and not to communicate with them By these Letters one plainly sees the Reason why Zosimus did so much desire to invalidate the Judgment given against Coelestius and Pelagius Their Accusers were Heros and Lazarus Patroclus's Adversaries and Friends of Proculus of Marseilles He openly declar'd for Patroclus He eagerly prosecuted Proculus and his Adherents He would have been glad to find Matter of Condemâ—tion against Heros and Lazarus by causing them to be looked upon as False Accusers Perhaps this is the only thing that made him favour Coelestius