the Nature of Bodies after the Resurrection and of that of Angels It is incertain whether they have Boâ—…s or whether they are pure Spirits These Letters are of the Year 408. The 96th Letter is an Excellent Example shewing How little Bishops in St. Augustin's time were given to Interest Paulus Bishop of Catagnae had bought an Estate in the Church's Name with a Summ which he recovered though he had Surrendered his own Estate for what he owed to the Royal Treasure Boniface his Successor not willing to benefit himself by that Fraud declared the thing as it was chusing either to have nothing or to receive the whole from the Emperor's Liberality rather than keep a thing gotten by Fraud St. Augustin writeth this Letter to Olympius Surveyor of the Buildings to obtain by his means this Gratification from the Emperour in the behalf of Boniface Olympius not being in that Employment before the Death of Stilico which happen'd in August 408 this Letter cannot have been written till towards the latter end of that Year To the same Magistrate and at the same time was the following written whereby he prayeth him to see the Laws maintained that were Published in Africa in the time of Stilico his Predecessor and to let the Church's Enemies know That these Laws having been Enacted freely by the Emperour himself they were in full force after Stilico's Death In the 98th to Boniface St. Augustin resolves a Question that was made to him by that Bishop namely How the Faith of Parents can serve for their Children that are admitted to Baptism though the incredulity of Parents can be no Prejudice to their Children when they offer them to Daemons St. Augustin Answers That it is most certain that after a Child is born he partakes no longer of other Men's Sins but before he is partaker of Adam's Sin from which he is delivered by the Operation of the Holy Ghost in the Sacrament of Baptism That Water represents outwardly both the Mystery and Grace but the Holy Spirit produces the Effect That neither the Faith of Parents nor yet of Godfathers is the cause of this Grace but the Prayer of the whole Church that begets Christ in each Member In which sence the God-fathers Answer for the Child that he believes and resolves to live Christianly because he receiveth the Sacrament of Faith and of Conversion to God He explains this last Notion by several Examples and among the rest he alledgeth that of the Eucharist saying That as the Sacrament of Christ's Body is in some sort the Body of Christ so the Sacrament of Faith is Faith it self and in this sence it is said That whosoever hath the Sacrament of Faith hath Faith it self This Comparison would not be very Just if St. Augustin did not consider something else in the Eucharist besides the external and sensible part The 99th is written to the Lady Italica on the occasion of the first Siege of Rome by Alaricus in 408. In the 100dth Letter St. Augustin intreateth Donatus Proconsul of Africa to restrain the Donatists but not to punish them with Death And having expressed himself with the most Pathetical terms that can be used to oblige him to Meekness he concludes with these curious words It is a more troublesome than profitable Labour to compel Men to forsake a great Evil rather by Force than by Instruction This Letter was written at the time when they published new Edicts against the Donatists in 408. The 101st Letter to Memorius a Bishop was joyn'd to the Sixth Book of his Treatise of Musick which St. Augustin sent by it self to that Bishop because he could not find his other Books upon the same Subject that Memorius desired This Memorius was Father to Julianus who writ afterwards against St. Augustin who was now a Deacon St. Augustin gives him great Commendations in that Letter The 102d is placed in the Retractations amongst the Books composed before the Year 411. There St. Augustin answereth Six Questions proposed by an Heathen to a Priest called Deogratias The First is concerning the Resurrection Whether that which is promised to us shall be like that of Jesus Christ or like that of Lazarus And whether after the Resurrection Men shall be Subject to the Infirmities and Necessities of the Flesh. St. Augustin answereth That our Resurrection shall be like that of Jesus Christ and that after the Resurrection we shall be freed from all cares and inconveniencies of corruptible Flesh. The Second Question is If none can be Saved but by Jesus Christ what is become of those that died before his coming What is become of so many Millions of Souls against whom nothing can be objected since Christ had not yet appeared among Men Why did not the Saviour come sooner Let it not be said that the Jewish Law supplied that want for there was already an infinite number of Men upon Earth when it was given and yet it was neither known nor practised but in a small corner of the World St. Augustin having shewed That the Pagans were not less perplexed with that Question than the Christians answers That Jesus Christ being the Word of God who Governed the World from the beginning all those that knew him and lived according to his Precepts might be saved by the Faith which they had that he was in God and should come upon the Earth He adds That Jesus Christ would not appear in the World and cause his Doctrine to be Preached but at such a time and in such Places where he knew that there were those who should believe in him and that he foresaw that in all other Places or at any other Times Men would be such as they have been though the Gospel had been Preached to them This Notion was very favourable to the Semipelagians and they failed not to make use of it as appears by Hilary's Letter to St. Augustin But this Father answered them in the 9 Chap. of the Book of the Predestination of the Saints That he did make use of the Word Fore-knowledge only because he thought it was sufficient to convince the Infidelity of the Pagans who made this Objection and therefore he omitted to speak of that which is hid within God's Counsels of the Motives of that Dispensation And so when he said That Jesus Christ would not show himself nor cause his Doctrine to be Preached but in those places and at such a time he knew those Persons liv'd who should believe in him It is as if he had said That Jesus Christ did not show himself unto Men nor suffer his Doctrine to be Preached but in those places and at that time when he knew that those should live who were Elected before the Creation He expounds again in the same place what he had said in this Letter That the Christian Religion never failed of being Preached to those that were worthy and that if it failed any it was because they were not worthy of it Saying That he had not
Arius vigorously and endeavour'd to stiâ—â—e it in its Birth by Excommunicating him who was the Author of it and his Followers This he did in a Council assembled in the City of Alexandria for that purpose But Arius and those of his Faction having found some Bishops that receiv'd them into their Communion though they were Condemn'd by their Bishop Alexander complains in a Letter which he wrote to his Fellow-Bishops which is related by Theodoret Ch. 4. of the First Book of his History wherein he describes the Troubles that were caus'd in the Church by Arius and his Faction he lays open their Heretical Doctrine and observes that they had withdrawn to some Bishops who had received them into their Communion and sign'd Letters in their Favour because they disguis'd their true Sentiments and conceal'd the Poison of their corrupt Doctrine He reprehends the Conduct of those Bishops and accuses them of having violated the Canon of the Apostles by Patronizing the Actions of those who deny'd the Divinity of Jesus Christ. Afterwards he refutes the impious Opinion of the Arians and proves from Testimonies of Scripture That the Word was not a Creature made of Nothing but that he subsisted from all Eternity and is equal to his Father being of the same Nature with him and that there never was a time when the Son of God was not and that the Father was always a Father After having thus Establish'd the Divinity of the Son of God by most convincing Proofs drawn from the holy Scriptures he proceeds to the Explication of the Articles contain'd in the Creed concerning the Holy Spirit the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and the Resurrection of the Dead He observes that Jesus Christ had a real Body and not an imaginary one that he was Crucified and was dead but his Divinity suffer'd nothing He adds That this is the Doctrine of the Apostolick Church for which he is ready to die and says that Arius and Achillas were cast out because they taught another Doctrine wherefore he exhorts his Fellow-Bishops to avoid them and to joyn with him to repress their Insolence After all he prays them to send him their Letters approving what he had done and concludes his Letter with the Names of those Hereticks whom he had Condemn'd and cast out of the Church When the Bishops who maintain'd Arius wrote also on their Side in his favour Alexander found himself oblig'd to write again a large Letter on this Subject to all the Bishops in the World which is set down by Socrates and Theodoret Ch. 6. of the First Book of their History I know very well that 't is commonly thought that this Letter was written immediately after the Excommunication of Arius before that which is in the Fourth Chapter of Theodoret But this is a mistake since this Letter was written at the time when Eusebius of Nicomedia was fully declar'd a Patron of Arius Wherefore Alexander having observ'd in this Letter That since the Catholick Church was but one Body and all the Bishops were oblig'd to preserve Peace in it It was expedient that they should reciproâ—ally advertise one another of what happen'd in each Diocess to the end that when one Member was afflicted all the rest should mourn or else rejoice together with it After he had begun his Letter with this handsom Reflexion he adds That he had once a design to have buried this Disorder in Silence but since Eusebius had taken upon him the Patronage of these Apostates and had written on all hands in their favour he thought himself oblig'd to break Silence and to give Notice to all the World of this New Error and to hinder his Fellow-Bishops from giving credit to the Letters which Eusebius might have written After this he inserts the Names of these Hereticks lays open their Error and refutes it in a few words He says That their Impiety was the cause why they were thrown out of the Church and smitten with an Anathema and though he acknowledges that he was sensibly troubled for their loss yet he must not wonder that such false Teachers should arise and corrupt the Faith and Doctrine of Jesus Christ since we are forewarn'd of them by Christ and his Apostle These Two Letters of Alexander were sharp and vehement wherein he pursues Arius and his Party vigorously and having represented their Doctrine after such a manner as discovers all that 's odious in it he disputes against it by many solid Arguments and writes to his Fellow-Bishops with great Assurance and yet with due respect In short one may say That these Letters are the best in their kind Cotelierius has also publish'd a Letter or a Pastoral Advertisement of Alexander to his Priests of Egypt and Mareotis written after these Two Letters in which he tells them That tho' they had subscrib'd to the First Pastoral Advertisement which he had address'd to Arius and those of his Faction wherein he exhorted them to return from their Impiety and make Profession of the Catholick Faith yet he thought it still necessary once more to Assemble the Clergy of Alexandria and Mareotis to shew them the Letter which he had written to all the Bishops since the first Condemnation of the Arians and to give them Notice that Carus and Pistus Priests Serapion Potamon Zosiâ—us and Irenaeus Deacons having join'd themselves to the other Arians were depos'd He demands their Consent and Approbation because says he 't is reasonable that ye should know what I have written and imprint it in your Minds as if you your selves had written it This Monument of Antiquity gives us to understand That according to the Discipline of the Church of Alexandria which was agreeable to that of other Churches the Bishop of that great See held Synods of his Priests or Curates not only of those that were in the City but also of those that were in the Country and that he would do nothing without the Consent and Approbation of his Clergy The Cause of Arius being afterwards carried into the Council of Nice Alexander assisted there and held one of the Chief Places as appears by the Council's Letter to the Alexandrians wherein they say That he was Head of the Council and had a great Hand in all its Decisions He liv'd but five Months after this Council and left Athanasius Successor to his See and to his Zeal against the Arians St. ATHANASIUS ST Athanasius was born at Alexandria a At Alexandria He was a Clergy-man of this Church and the Clergy were commonly of that Place where they discharg'd their Office but besides this Conjecture 't is plain also that he was originally of Alexandria by the Letter of Constantius who recalling him from his Exile says that he would restore him to his own Country c. Apol. 2. p. 769 770. and he takes his Country and Church for the same thing Orat. 1. contr Ar. but the precise Year of his Birth is not certainly known neither do the Ancients tell us
thinks that he is cloathed with the Royal Purple and that his infamous Head is adorn'd with a Crown Is it credible that St. Basil should write to an Emperonr with so little respect and should treat him as a ridiculous senseless and impertinent Person as the Author of this Letter does In short There is at the end of this Letter an Inference drawn from an Opinion of Julian's which is extremely wide and has scarce any sence and not according to the Genius of St. Basil who is nice and exact in his Thoughts and moderate in his Expressions As to the 205. Letter address'd to the same Emperour 't is evident that it is Supposititious The Title of it is To Julian the Apostate Would St. Basil ever have directed a Letter to him with this Inscription 2. The Stile of this Letter is very different from that of St. Basil. 3. This Letter is nothing but a Confession of Faith Now to what purpose should St. Basil send a Confession of Faith to Julian 4. He adds to this Confession of Faith the Invocation of Saints and Worship of Images Who ever heard that these Points were put into the Confessions of Faith of the First Ages 5. He says That he Honours and Adores the Images of the Saints because it is an Apostolical Tradition Would St. Basil have spoken thus And is it not plain that this Letter is the Work of some Greek who liv'd after the Seventh Council The Six Letters publish'd by Hoeschelius which are the 210 211 212 213 214 215 being written to different Persons were also compos'd by St. Basil while he was in his Solitude They contain nothing remarkable The 141 Letter of St. Basil was written in the Year 363. after the Difference which he had with his own Bishop The Inhabitants of Caesarea complain'd that he had retir'd after his Ordination and recall'd him with very Importunate Letters St. Basil wrote to them to thank them for their Goodness to him and to give them an account of the Cause of his Retiring He admonishes them not to suffer themselves to be surprized by the Artifices of Hereticks and for a Preservative against them he explains the Faith of the Church concerning the Trinity and answers some Objections which they alledg'd He blames those that said only the Son of God was like his Father without adding any thing for Explication The 4th Letter to St. Gregory is the last of those which St. Basil wrote in his Retirement before he was Bishop It is directed to St. Gregory Nazianzen wherein he Exhorts him to be very careful to procure the Choice of a Bishop in the room of Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia lately Dead who might be worthy to fill that Bishoprick St. Gregory had resolv'd to come himself to Casarea but for fear lest the giving of his Saffrage in favour of St. Basil should render him suspected he contented himself with sending Two Letters written in his Father's Name whereof one was address'd to the Church of Caesarea and the other to the Council Assembled in that City wherein he recommended St. Basil as most worthy to Succeed in the room of Eusebius Some Authors attribute this Letter of St. Basil which we have already mention'd to Eusebius of Samosata And indeed it is not very probable that St. Basil should so openly pray St. Gregory to do that which look'd so like solliciting that himself might be made Bishop We should joyn to this the Two Letters of St. Basil to Apollinarius which were publish'd by Cotelerius if they were Genuine but they are Forg'd by the Apollinarians since St. Basil himself testifies in the 59 79 and 82 Letters That he never wrote concerning the Faith to Apollinarius and that the Letters which were published under his Name were Supposititious Which plainly shows That the Two Letters which go under St. Basil's Name and are address'd to Apollinarius which Treat of the Mystery of the Holy Trinity and which suppose that St. Basil and Apollinarius held a great Correspondence by Letters are Forg'd as well as those of Apollinarius to St. Basil which contain Errors not only about the Incarnation but also about the Trinity The Second Class of St. Basil's Letters ought to be of those which were written after he was Bishop of Caesarea These are far more numerous and more considerable The First are those which he wrote for the Reconciliation of Meletius with St. Athanasius and the Western Bishops To compass this design he wrote about the End of the Year 369. the 56. Letter to Meletius to dispose him to enter upon a Treaty about it He did not openly acquaint him with his Design lest he should be discovered but he signified to him that he desired that he might see him to treat about an Affair of great Importance but being detain'd by his Brethren he sent Theophrastus to communicate it to him The Secrecy which he observes in this Letter plainly discovers that this was the First which he wrote about this Negotiation 'T is probable that about the same time to conciliate the favour of St. Athanasius who had written to him immediately after his Promotion he wrote an Answer to him by Letter 47. wherein he gives him an Account of the share that he had in the Persecution which the Governor of Libya raised against this Holy Pastor and he acquaints him That all the Faithful of his Church look'd upon this Governor as an Excommunicate Person That they would have no Correspondence with him because 't is fit that the Powers who will use Violence should find themselves unanimously condemn'd by all the Churches Meletius having signified to St. Basil that he would willingly hearken to an Accommodation this Father wrote to St. Athanasius at the Beginning of the Year 379 the 48. Letter wherein he exhorts him to procure the Peace and Union of the Eastern and Western Churches and prays him to begin with receiving the Church of Antioch He supports this Proposal in Three Letters which in the common Edition are 49 50 and 51. The 50th was written at the desire of Dorotheus the Deacon whom Meletius sent to Negotiate this Affair In it he gives great Commendation of Meletius and says That all the other Parties which are in the Church of Antioch ought to re-unite to him and to those who adhered to him as to the principal Body of the Church of Antioch whereof the rest are but separate Members He assures him That the West wish'd for this Re-union as well as the East as appeared by the Letters brought from the West by Silvanus He conjures him afterwards to use his usual Prudence for procuring the Peace of all the Churches In Letter 51. he exhorts St. Athanasius to write a Letter of Communion to all the Eastern Bishops and prays him to send it either by some Persons in his own Name or even by the Deacon Dorotheus He assures him That the Bishops are Orthodox and that they desire to be Re-united to him
was call'd to the place That be only followed the Guidâ—… of the Holy Spirit and that after he 〈◊〉 to Constantinople 〈◊〉 did not 〈◊〉 those who were â—…bly Covetous That 〈◊〉 had commenc'd no Law-suit against the Arians neither for their Châ—… nor for the Ecclesiastical Revenues tho' they were 〈◊〉 possess'd both of the one and the other That he had Persecuted no Body That â—e had Suffered paâ—…tly all manner of Injuries and 〈◊〉 Treatment After he has shown these things he makes an Elegant Comparison between the Arians and the Catholicks of Constantinople They have says he the Temples but we have the God that dwells in them and we our selves are the Temples They have the People for them we have the Angels for us They have for their Portion Assurance and Rashness we have the Faith on our side They have Threâ—… we have Prayers They Persecute and we Suffer They have Gold and Silver and we are in possession of the Holy Doctrine But our Flock is little Yes but it does not go to throw it self upon Precipices our Sheep fold is narrow but it is well guarded against Wolves it does not 〈◊〉 open to Robbers and Strangers cannot enter into it This-little Flock which will every Day grow greater by the Grace of God gives me no Cause to fear I see it I count it easily I know my Sheep and they know me they hear my Voice they answer me I call them and they follow me and they will not follow Strangers they will not follow Valentinus Montanus Manes Donatus Sabellius Arius Photinus and they continue stedfast in the Faith of the Trinity in whose Name they were baptiz'd This Discourse was spoken by St. Gregory some time after he was come to Constantinople In the 26th Discourse he exhorts those of his Party to observe Moderation in their Disputes with Hereticks He there lays down a great many very Wise and useful Maxims He observes That Peace is the greatest Good that can be enjoy'd That Schisms and Heresies have been raised up by Men of great Wit but turbulent and designing That those Men are the Cause of Wars Seditions and other Mischiefs both to the Ecclesiastical and Civil Society That we ought neither to be too hot nor too remiss in the Defence of the Faith That upon the whole Matter the Order established in the Church between the Pastors and their Sheep between the Clergy and the Laity must be inviolably observed That 't is often much better to be silent than to speak of Mysteries because it is very Difficult to comprehend and explain them and that 't is very rare to find Ears fit to hear them and Minds capable of bearing them That when we are obliged to speak we should do it with much Humility and Modesty That the common People should content themselves with believing and leave Disputes to the Learned That Faith and Religion are for the Ignorant as well as for the Learned and for the Poor as well as the Rich That the Learned themselves ought to shun useless Questions and Disputes That among the Hebrews it was not allow'd to all the Jews indifferently to Discourse of the Law but they chose such to do it as were judg'd Capable of it That some Men had one Gift some another in short That those who take upon them to Dispute and Teach others being push'd on by a Zeal for the Faith should not condemn those who by a reasonable Precaution and wholesome Fear are hindred from adventuring to do the like He concludes all these Reflections in these Words If you will all obey me as well Young as Old as well Clergy as Laity as well Monks as those that are barely the Faithful you will give over this vain Ostentation of showing your Knowledge by Disputes and you will rather take Care to draw near to God by an upright and prudent Conversation by the Purity of your Manners by your edifying Discourses that so at last you may obtain Eternal Life 'T is not necessary here to observe that this Discourse was spoken at Constantinople In the 27th Discourse St. Gregory vindicates himself against those who accused him of Ambition In his Exordium he enquires after the Reasons why the People of Constantinople were entic'd and as it were charm'd by his Preaching He says That it could not be his Learning which allur'd them for they were satisfied that he had but little of it That it could not be the Doctrine which he taught them since he was not the First who had preach'd it to them neither had he preached any thing to them which they had not learn'd formerly from St. Alexander their Bishop That neither can they say That he had gained them by Artificial and Flattering Discourses as for the most part says he they do now a-Days who are of the Priestly Function who have made an Art of Preaching the Word of God who have brought the Arts of the Bar into the Church and the Ornaments of the Theatre into the Chair of Truth You know adds he and God is my Witness That we are so great Strangers to this Fault that they rather accuse me of Rusticity and of not knowing the World than of being a Flatterer and seeking to please Men since I sometimes Reprove too severely even those who are most Affectionate to me when they do any thing that I think not reasonable You know how I mourn'd how I cry'd when ye plac'd me against my Will upon the Throne violating the Laws of the Church for the Love that you show'd me I used so great Freedom with those who appeared most zealous for me that they withdrew in Anger and changed their ancient Friendship all of the sudden into hatred against me Why then have you so great a Passion for me but only First Because you chose me your selves and called me to your Assistance and Secondly Because you have acknowledged that I was neither Ambitious nor Fierce nor Passionate nor Proud nor given to Flattery and Thirdly Because you have seen how I have suffered for you all both from those that openly attack'd me and from those that so cruelly laid secret Sâ—…s for me After this he vindicates himself from the Charge which his Enemies drew up against him upon the account of his Eloquence He says That 't is Envy which makes them speak thus He justifies himself also from the Ambition whereof he was accus'd and shows That he did not ambitiously aspire after the See of Constantinople That he had met with nothing there but Labour and Fatigue That if he had been free to choose he should have preferr'd his Solitude before so painful an Employment That he was not engaged in it for any other Reason but only to assist the Church of Constantinople which was then without an Orthodox Bishop That he would not trouble himself tho' Men should Censure him for having other Motives than really he had That God knows what his true Intention was That he never sought
fault of the Bishop or the Curate of the Parish if the Widows and Nuns are forced through necessity to have too much familiarity with the inferiour Ministers The 103d That the Widows who are maintained at the Expence of the Church ought to be very diligent and constant in the Service of God that they may edify the Church by their Prayers and Works The 104th excommunicates Widows who marry again after they have made Profession of Celibacy Baluzius has added yet one Canon more to these which is against those who cause Schisms and Divisions in the Church of Jesus Christ which is the Pillar and Foundation of the Faith of Christians There were many Bishops at this Council and they all subscribed but there are none now extant besides the Subscriptions of Aurelius of Carthage of Donatianus of Talabreca or Telepta and of St. Austin Of the COUNCIL of Carthage in the Year 399. IT was a settled Custom in Africk that National Councils should be held at Carthage very often Of Carthage 399. There was one in 399 in the Month of April which is mentioned in the Code of the Canons of the African Church which informs us That this Council sent Epigonius and Vincentius Deputies to the Emperour to obtain a Law to forbid the taking of those out of Churches who had fled thither whatsoever Crimes they had been guilty of Of the COUNCIL of Carthage in the Year 401 commonly call'd the Fifth 'T IS commonly thought that this Council was in the Year 398 but it appears by the Code of the Of the Fifth of Carthage 401. Canons of the African Church that the greatest part of the Canons attributed to this Council were made in Two Assemblies held in the Year 401 in the Months of June and September and therefore we follow this Code in the Abridgment of the Canons of this Council Aurelius remonstrates That it was necessary for relieving the Churches of Africk which were under great Necessity and Grief to depute some Bishops into the West and particularly to St. Anastasius Bishop of the Apostolical See and to Venerius Bishop of Milan He represents that the Church of Africk was so abused and had suffered so great a Desolation that it had no Deacon who was sufficiently learned and much less a Priest that therefore one might hear every day the Complaints of an infinite number of languishing People and that if the Bishops did not relieve them they must be accountable to God for the loss of their Souls The 1st Canon of this Council which is the 57th in the Greek Code of the African Church confirms what had been ordain'd in a former Synod That it should be lawful to Ordain those who having been baptized in their Infancy among the Donatists were afterwards reconciled to the Church and it leaves it to the Prudence of the Bishops to consider whether or no they might not receive a whole Donatist Church with its Bishop who should desire to be re united to the Catholicks In the 2d Aurelius says That the Emperours ought to be entreated to destroy the Remainders of Idolatry and to demolish some Temples which were yet standing In the 3d. That they must also be desired to give Orders that it shall not be lawful to Summon a Clergy-man for a Witness before a Secular Judge who has been Arbitrator or Judge of some Difference The 4th That they must be desired to forbid the Feasts and Dancings which are made to the honour of False Gods The 5th That they must be prayed to hinder the showing of Sports Plays and Comedies on Sundays and Festivals particularly at Easter-time when it happens sometimes that more People go to the Circus than to the Church The 6th That they must be entreated to give Order that no Person shall defend an Ecclesiastick condemned by the Bishops under the pain of Correction and a Fine The 7th That they must be desired to hinder Comedians who turn Christians from being forced to exercise their Profession The 8th That the Power of enfranchising Slaves in the Church must be desired The 9th declares That if one Equitius a Bishop be found in Italy who had been condemned in Africk leave shall be desired to make a Process against him These are the Canons of this First Assembly in the Year 401. The other Assembly was held the same Year on the 13th of September In it were read the Letters of Pope Anastasius who exhorted the Bishops of Africk not to dissemble the Vexations which they suffer from the Donatists Nevertheless the Bishops were of Opinion that they should be treated with gentleness and that a Letter only should be written to the Governours of Cities to pray them to cause those Churches to be restored to the Catholick Church which the Maximianists had usurped This is found in the Canons 66 and 67 of the Greek Code of the Canons of the African Church The 68th permits the Bishops for Peace-sake to receive into the Catholick Clergy those Clergy-men of the Donatists who should be converted The 69th declares That some shall be deputed to the Donatists to remonstrate to them that they ought to be reconciled to the Church The 70th Ordains Bishops Priests and Deacons to have no more to do with their Wives under pain of Degradation for the lesser Orders it does not oblige them to Celibacy The 71st forbids a Bishop to forsake the principal Church of his Diocess and make his abode at another The 72d declares That Children ought to be baptized when there is no proof nor testimony that they have been already baptized The 73d renews the Canon which Ordains That the Bishop of Carthage shall publish Easter-day The 74th forbids him who has the care of a Church committed to him after the death of its Bishop to continue there more than one Year and obliges him to cause a Bishop to be chosen and if he neglects it the Canon ordains that at the end of the Year another Steward shall be chosen for the Church The 76th is against the Bishops who absent themselves without cause from the National Council The 77th is against a particular Bishop named Cresconius who refused to come thither The Council Ordains That he shall come to the first National African Council and if he did not that a Sentence should be pass'd against him The 78th names Deputies for deciding a Difference of a Church in Africa The 79th declares That those Clergy-men are not to be admitted to justify themselves who have continued a Year without taking pains to take off the Excommunication which was pronounced against them The 80th ordains That if a Bishop give Holy Orders to a Stranger or if he make a Monk of another Monastery Superiour of his own Monastery he shall be separated from the Communion of the other Bishops and shall enjoy only that of his own Church and that he who was made Clergy-man or Superiour shall not enjoy that Honour The 81st is against those Bishops who
notice of it and being Summoned to it as other Bishops were nominated 3 Legats to send into the East Julius Bishop of Putebli Renatus a Priest and Hilarius a Deacon with Dulcitius a Notary he gave them several Letters which are Dated June 13. The first was that famous Letter directed to Flavian in which he Explains with so much Accuracy the Mystery of the Incarnation In it he distinguishes two Births of the Son of God and Ep. 24. two Natures in Jesus Christ whose Properties subsist distinctly although they be united in one and the same Person He maintains that the Word hath assumed our Nature and all the Properties of it Sin only excepted In it he proves that he hath a true Flesh like ours He rejects the Confession of Faith made by Eutyches because says he 't is absurd to say That the Son in the Incarnation is of two Natures and impious to maintain That after the Incarnation he hath but one He acknowledges that he was justly Condemned and yet was willing to shew him some Mercy if he would confess his fault and eondemn viva voce and in Writing the Errors which he had published The second was written to Julian Bishop of Coos who had been present at the Judgment given Ep. 25. against Eutyches and had written about it to S. Leo. In it he speaks passionately against Eutyches calling him an Impudent Old man he accuses him for reviving the Errors of Valentinus Apollinaris and Manichaeus He proves that there is no change nor a confusion made in the two Natures in Jesus Christ. He observes that it follows from Eutyches's Confession of Faith that the Soul of Jesus Christ was united with the Godhead before it assumed a Body in the Womb of the Virgin Mary and that the Body of Jesus Christ was created out of Nothing Lastly He maintains against Eutyches That although Jesus Christ had some particular Privileges as to be Born and Conceived of a Virgin by the Power of the Holy Ghost and not to be subject to the motions of Concupiscence nor Sin yet he hath a Body and Soul of the same Nature with ours and endued with the same Properties The third is directed to Theodosius He tells him That he had sent his Legats to be present at Ep. 26. the Council in his stead which he had called at Ephesus and assure him at the same time that Eutyches was apparently in an Error The fourth Letter of the same Date is directed to the Empress Pulcheria He commendeth Ep. 27. her Zeal for the defence of the Faith explains the Mystery of the Incarnation to her condemns the obstinacy of Eutyches complains that the Emperor had appointed the Council upon a day too near because the Bishops of Italy had too little time from the 12th of May on which they received the News of it to the 1st of August which was the day appointed for the Meeting of the Synod at Ephesus to prepare for and finish such a Journey Tâ—at the Emperor had thought that he ought to be present in Person but although he had had some President for it which he had not the present Conjuncture will not permit him to leave Rome Lastly He shews of what Importance this Question was and prays him to take care that Eutyches's Impiety be Condemned by pardoning him if he Recant it The fifth Letter of S. Leo is directed to the Abbots of Constantinople he tells them that he Ep. 28. condemns the Errors of Eutyches and hoped that he would acknowledge it The sixth is directed to the Council it self In it he opposes Eutyches by the Confession of Ep. 29. S. Peter who acknowledged that Jesus Christ was the Christ the Son of the Living God He exhorts the Fathers of the Council to suppress the Error and to reduce those that are in it There are also two Letters of the same date of which one is addressed to Pulcheria the other Ep. 30 31 32 33. to Julian of Coos as also another to Flavian dated June 17 and another June 20 to Theodosius He repeats the same things in them The Emperor Theodosius also wrote several Letters about the Council The first is about the Calling of it dated May 30 directed to the Patriarchs and Exarchs in which he orders them to be at Ephesus Aug. 1. with the Metropolitans and so many of the Bishops of their Jurisdiction as they would choose except Theodoret who was Prohibited to come thither unless the Council should Summon him The second is a private Letter to Dioscorus dated May 15 in which he gives him Notice That he would have the Abbot Barsumas present at the Council as a Deputy for the Eastern Abbots who complained that they were used hardly by their Bishops who were favourers of Nestorius's Party The third is an Order to Barsumas to be present at the Council It is dated the day before the former Letter The fourth is an Order directed to Elpidius to come to the Council with Eulogius a Tribune and Notary to prevent that there be no Tumults there In it he Orders that the Bishops who have been Judges of Eutyches should be present at it but have no power to Consult nor right to Vote but shall wait upon the Judgment of the other Bishops because they Re-examine what they have Judged He forbids them to meddle with any Civil Affairs least that which concerns the Faith be not throughly decided The fifth is an Order to the Proconsul of Asia to afford Elpidius all necessary Assistance The sixth is a Letter to the Bishops of the Council in which he tells them That he wished that they had had no cause of going from their Churches and leaving their Ministerial Functions and to spare themselves the trouble of so long a Voyage but Flavian having moved a Question concerning the Faith by accusing the Abbot Eutyches after he had done what he could to appease the Contest but to no purpose by perswading Flavian to keep close to the Nicene Creed he thought that there was no other way to decide this Question but by assembling a Council that they might examine all that had passed utterly extirpate the Error and expel all those out of the Church who would revive the Heresie of Nestorius The seventh is a private Letter to Dioscorus in which he gives him the Precedence of the Bishops and the Chief Authority in the Council not only upon the Account of Theodoret whom he commanded to be Excluded out of it but upon the Account of some other Bishops whom he suspected to favour the Sentiments of Nestorius He takes notice also that he was perswaded that Iuvenal Bishop of Jerusalem and Thalassius Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia and the other Orthodox Bishops would join with him and he was unwilling that they who would add or change any thing that had been Established at Nice or Ephesus should have any Authority in this Synod It is easie to perceive by these Letters
he was one of his Friends and had caused the Monks to burn his House Lastly That he had sent a Company of Church-men to apprehend him who had slain him had he not fled from them That he had seized on him in Alexandria and shut him up in an Hospital where he endeavoured also to destroy him The third Petition was presented by Athanasius S. Cyril's Nephew He accused Dioscorus for deposed him and his Brother for causing them to be hardly used at Constantinople by Chrysaphius and to buy their Liberty of him very dearly That they had been forced to borrow Money at Use which had ruined them That his Brother being dead he was left alone over-whelmed with Debts That Dioscorus to compleat his ruine had seized upon an House at Alexandria which was all he had to make it a Church That he had thrown him out of the Clergy and forbidden any Person giving him relief That he had despoiled him of all his Estate and of what belonged to his Brothers Children and had reduced them to Beggary The fourth Petition was of a Lay-Man called Sophronius who accused Dioscorus not only for not executing the Orders which the Emperor had directed to him against an Officer of Alexandria who had carried away his Wife but also of sending his Deacon to pillage his Estate and forcing him to fly The same Sophronius likewise declared that he was ready to prove that Dioscorus had uttered Blasphemies against the Trinity and endeavoured to make himself Supreme over the Province of Egypt Then they deputed certain Persons to summon him the third time to come and answer as well to the Accusations of Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum as to other fresh Accusations The Bishops who summoned him shewed him among other things that he was obliged to go and clear himself of the Accusations formed against him because the Misdemeanors of the Bishops turning to the general disgrace of the Clergy he ought to free the Church from it and if that which they laid to his Charge were false he ought to justifie himself and convince the World of his Innocency Dioscorus gave them no other answer than this That he had nothing more to say that was new When they had certified the Council that Dioscorus would not come to it Pascasinus asked What Punishment he had deserved The Bishops said That he had offended against the Canons Then the Popes Legats declared That it was evident as well by the Examinations made in the first Assembly as by what had already passed in this that he had attempted several things contrary to the Order and Discipline of the Church First in that he had absolved the Priest Eutyches by his own Authority who had been condemned by Flavian his Bishop That the Holy See had pardoned the other Bishops who had been forced to do the same but since had submitted themselves to the Council but that it ought not to deal so with Dioscorus because he obstinately persisted in his fault That he had committed no small Crime in not suffering S. Leo's Letter to be read in the Council of Ephesus That this notwithstanding they were ready to use him with the same Lenity as other Bishops but since he continued in his Obstinacy dared to Excommunicate S. Leo and would not appear before the Synod being summoned three times although he was accused of very great Crimes and had received Persons deposed and excommunicated into his Communion For these Causes says the Legats Leo Archbishop of Old Rome doth by us and by the Synod with the Authority of S. Peter who is the Rock and Foundation of the Church and the Ground of Faith Depose him from his Episcopal Dignity and declare him unworthy of the Priesthood And let all the Council judge now what ought to be done with Dioscorus according to the Orders of the Holy Canons Anatolius Maximus Bishop of Antioch and all the other Bishops following Pascasinus's Sentence gave one after another their Votes for the Deposition of Dioscorus and confirmed them with the Seal Then the Council sent to the Emperor an Account of their Proceedings in which they deliver the same Motives for the Condemnation of Dioscorus which are mentioned in Pascasinus's Sentence They also sent another Relation of them to Pulcheria the Empress Then they certified Dioscorus of the Judgment pronounced against him they published it by a private Writing to the Clergy of Alexandria and by a publick Edict to all the People of Chalcedon and Constantinople The Commissioners were present at the fourth Session held Octob. 17. They began it with Act IV. reading the Judgment pronounced by the Commissioners in the First Action they also read that which was said in the Second about deferring the Exposition of Faith The Commissioners demanded of the Council What they had decreed concerning the Faith The Popes Legats said That they had no other Doctrine or Faith to deliver than that which was contain'd in the Creed of Nice and Constantinople in the Acts of the Council of Ephesus and in S. Leo's Letter which agreed exactly with the Doctrine of these Councils All the Bishops declared that they believed the Doctrine of S. Leo's Letter to be conformable to the Faith of the Nicene Fathers and also those of Constantinople and Ephesus Some of those who were most scrupulous declared that in their Judgment S. Leo's Legats had removed all Difficulties in saying That the Terms of S. Leo's Letter did not imply any Division in the Person of Jesus Christ. There was a good Bishop of the Province of Lycaonia who thought good to speak thus That his Country had always been free from Controversies and had always remained in the Faith of the Fathers with simplicity and that if any Persons did contradict S. Leo's Exposition of Faith he should be very little concerned but as to himself he believed as the Fathers of the Councils of Nice and Constantinople believed When all the Bishops had given their Opinions particularly they made several Acclamations in common for the Confirmation of what they had said and desired that the * Juvenal of Jerusalem Thalassius of Caesarea Eusebius Bishop of Ancyra Eustathius of Berytus Basilius of Seleucia five Bishops who had been deposed by the Council and deprived should be restored because they had signed as well as others and were of the same Judgment The Commissioners answered That they had spoken to the Emperor for them and that they ought to wait for his Answer and that as to the rest they should give an Account to God for the Deposition of Dioscorus which they had done without the Concurrence of the Emperor or his Commissioners for the Restauration of the five Bishops whom they demanded and of all which they had done All the Bishops cryed out several times that Dioscorus had been justly Deposed They waited some time for the Emperor's Answer but at last he sent the Bishops of the Council word That he left them to their own Liberty to do
Consecrate the Churches of the Arians as was done in the East has the same marks of Falshood The Date of the Consuls is false It begins with some Scraps of the Letters of St. Leo and the rest is a hotch-potch of passages out of the second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians according to the Vulgar Version In fine this Letter is contrary to History to Ingenuity and good Sense To History because Anastasius assures us that John perform'd this Embassy to Ingenuity because John should not have undertaken this Negotiation if he had a mind to desire of Justinus that which was contrary to his Trust. In fine It is contrary to good Sense for nothing can be more ridiculous then this Inference I have consecrated the Churches of the Arians in the East under a Christian Emperor who desir'd it Therefore you ought to consecrate them in Italy in spite of an Arian Prince who will be provok'd by so doing utterly to destroy the Catholick Churches A delicate Consequence FELIX the Fourth Bishop of Rome AFter the Death of John the Holy See was vacant for almost two Months and at last Theodoric Felix IV. Bishop of Rome caus'd to be chose in his room Felix the fourth of that Name who continued in the Holy See until the twelfth day of October in the Year 529. There are three Letters which go under the Name of this Pope but the two first are manifestly supposititious being nothing but a Collection of Passages patch'd together out of the Letters of St. Innocent St. Leo St. Gregory and the forged Letters to St. Clement and Damasus The third which is addres'd to Caesarius Bishop of Arles was some time attributed to Felix the Third because of the Name of the Consul Boetius which is found in it altho Caesarius was not yet Bishop under that Consulship But F. Sirmondus has found in a Manuscript the Name of Mavortius instead of that of Boetius which discovers that this Letter is Felix the Fourth's and of the Year 528. There he approves the Canon made by the Bishops of the Gauls wherein it was forbidden to promote a Lay-man to the Priesthood unless he were first tried BONIFACE the Second Bishop of Rome Bonif. II. Bishop of Rome BOniface the second of that Name the first Pope of the Nation of the Goths was promoted to the Holy See under the Reign of King Alaricus on the fourteenth day of October in the Year 529. At the same time one part of the Clergy chose Dioscorus who was formerly one of the Deputies sent into the East by Hormisdas Boniface was Ordain'd in the Church of Julius and Dioscorus in that of Constantine But this last died the twelfth day of November Boniface seeing himself left in sole possession us'd his utmost endeavours to bring over those who had been of the other Party he threatned them with an Anathema and forc'd them to subscribe He call'd together the Clergy and condemn'd the Memory of Dioscorus accusing him of Simony He proceeded yet further and as if it were not enough for him to be secur'd of the Holy See for himself he would also appoint himself a Successor and having call'd a Synod he engag'd the Bishops and Clergy by Oath and under their Hands that they should choose and ordain in his room the Deacon Vigilius after his Death This being against the Canons he himself acknowledg'd publickly his Fault and burnt the Writing which he extorted from them To this Pope there is attributed a Letter to Eulalius Bishop of Alexandria wherein he writes to him that the Bishop of Carthage was re-united to the Church of Rome supposing that he had been separated from it ever since the time of Aurelius But as little as is known of the History of these times this Piece appears to be supposititious For every one knows that Aurelius and his Collegues were always closely united to the Church of Rome and that their Successors did never separate from it Besides that there never was any Eulalius Bishop of Alexandria and that the Impost or who contriv'd this Letter supposes it written under the Empire of Justin who was dead before Boniface was promoted to the Holy See But tho he had not so plainly fail'd in History it were easie to discover his Imposture by observing that this Letter is compos'd of Passages taken out of the Letters of St. Leo Hormisdas and even out of the Letter of St. Gregory who was not promoted to the See of Rome till many years after Boniface This Letter therefore is the Work of an Impostor as well as that Libel of this Eulalius wherein he Excommunicates all his Predecessors and all his Successors and all those who shall infringe the Priviledges of the Roman Church For excepting this impertinent passage the rest of this Writing is taken out of St. Gregory and Hormisdas The Date of the Consuls agrees to a year wherein Boniface was dead The only true Letter of Boniface is that which is address'd to Caesarius of Arles who had written to his Predecessor against the Opinion of some Bishops of the Gauls who said that the beginning of Faith should be attributed to Nature and not to Grace and at the same time had pray'd for the removing of all difficulties that it might be confirm'd by the Authority of the Holy See That Faith and the first Motions of the Will to that which is good were inspir'd by preventing Grace Boniface answers him That it is a manifest Truth that we can neither desire nor begin any Good nor have Faith but by the Grace of Jesus Christ. He commends the Bishops of France who had approved this Doctrine and hopes that others would submit to it This Letter is dated the 25th of January under the Consulship of Lampadius and Orestes in the Year 530. The Date of it shews that Boniface was promoted to the Holy See in the Year 529 and that Felix had the Pontificat a year less then is noted in Anastasius In the Year 531 Boniface held a Council about the Petition of Stephen Bishop of Larissa concerning the Rights of the Popes of Illyricum We shall speak of it hereafter in the Acts of this Council His Epistles are printed Concil Tom. 4. p. 1684. Cave p. 402. JOHN the Second Bishop of Rome JOHN sirnam'd Mercurius a Roman by Nation the Son of Prejectus was Ordain'd Bishop of Rome on the 22th of January in the Year 532 and govern'd this Church two Years and some John II. Bishop of Rome Months Immediately after his Promotion the Emperor Justinian wrote him a Letter which he sent by two Bishops call'd Hypatius and Demetrius wherein after he has testified his Respect for the Holy See he informs him that some Persons would not believe that Jesus Christ the only Son of God who was born of Mary and who was crucified is one of the Persons of the Trinity which gave just cause of Suspicion that they were of Nestorius's Judgment He
heard from the Deacon Demetrius the things which were charg'd upon Hadrian altho this Deacon deny'd it so stifly that he could not be made to confess it by putting him to the Torture Hadrian had recourse to St. Gregory who null'd the proceedings at Larissa and those of the Bishop of the first 〈◊〉 as contrary to the Laws and the Canons and as null in themselves even tho there had not been any Appeal He cuts off the Bishop of Justinâ—… from Comâ—… for thirty days threatens to Excommunicate him of Larissa takes from him all his Jurisdiction over the Bishop of Thebes orders him to restore the Effects of the Church of Thebes and remits the Cause in his own right only to his Residents at Constantinople B. 2. Ind. 11. Ep. 6. 7. He believed also that the Holy See could call Causes of great Consequence to Rome and judge them Thus he judged and acquirred at Rome John a Priest of Chalcedon who was accused of Heresie and condemned by the Bishop of Constantinople B. 5. Ep. 15 16. And he alledges this Example to prove to the Bishop of 〈◊〉 thâ—… he could examin and judge at Rome the Cause of Claudus the Abbot who had a Difference with the Church of Ravenna B 5. Ep. 24. He acquits also a Priest of Isauria who was accused of Heresie B. 5. Ep 64. But he rarely made use of his Jurisdiction And the Metropolitans 〈◊〉 it with him Paul a Bishop of Afric came to Rome to purge himself Witnesses are sent thither who are 〈◊〉 insufficient Paul desires to be sent back to Constantinople the Pope allows him to go thither with two Bishops B. 6. Ep. 2. As to the ordinary Causes between the 〈◊〉 Clergy of the Bishopricks depending upon the Metropolis of Rome he left them to the Decision of the Bishops and would not have his Wardens to meddle in them nor to diminish the Jurisdiction of the Ordinary For says he if we do not preserve the Jurisdiction of each Bishop we 〈◊〉 the Order of the Church which we should maintain Nam si unicuique Episeâ—… sua jurisdictio non 〈◊〉 quid aliuâ— agitur nisi ut per nos per quos Ecclesiasticus ordo custoâ—… debuit 〈◊〉 B. 9. Ep. 32. Yet he punish'd a Priest of a Parish in the Diocese of another Bishop B. 2. Ep. 16. As to the Informations about the Disorders committed in the Person of a Bishop he observes that they should be made by a Clergy-man together with the Judge B. 2 Ind. 11. Ep. 1. He would not have a Bishop detained a long time in Prison He says that he must be Deposed if he be guilty or set at Liberty if he be innocent B. 1. Ep. 32. The Custom for a Man to purge himself by Oath when there was no Conviction of him was in use in the time of St. Gregory which he approves and makes use of B. 2. Ep. 23. B. 9. Ep. 12. Against the Title of Universal Patriarch ST Gregory does not only oppose this Title in the Patriarch of Constantinople but he maintains also that it cannot agree to any other Bishop and that the Bishop of Rome neither ought nor can assume it John the younger Patriarch of Constantinople had taken upon him this Title in a Council held in 586 in the time of Pope Pelagius which oblig'd this Pope to null the Acts of this Council St. Gregory wrote of it also to this Patriarch but this made no impression on him and John would not abandon this fine Title B. 4. Ep. 36. St. Gregory address'd himself to the Emperor Mauritius and exhorted him earnestly to employ his Authority for redressing this Abuse and to force him who assumed this Title to quit it He remonstrates to him in his Letter That although Jesus Christ had committed to St. Peter the Care of all his Church yet he was not called Universal Apostle That the Title of Universal Bishop is against the Rules of the Gospel and the Appointment of the Canons that there cannot be an Universal Bishop but the Authority of all the other will be destroy'd or diminish'd That if the Bishop of Constantinople were Universal Bishop and it should happen that he should fall into Heresie it might be said that the Universal Church was fall'n into destruction That the Council of Chalcedon had offer'd this Title to St. Leo but neither he nor his Successors would accept it lest by giving something peculiar to one Bishop only they should take away the Rights which belong to all the Bishops That it belongs to the Emperor to reduce by his Authority him who despises the Canons and does injury to the Universal Church by assuming this singular Name B. 4. Ep. 32. These Remonstrances had no effect for the Emperor would not meddle in this Affair and had even authorized John the younger and therefore the Pope complain'd of it to the Empress Ep. 34. of the same Book He wrote also to other Patriarchs who were it seems concern'd to oppose this new Title But they did not take the Matter so heinously as St. Gregory and suffer'd the Patriarch of Constantinople to enjoy this Title which did them no prejudice Nay Anastasius the Patriarch of Antioch had the boldness to remonstrate to St. Gregory that he must not be angry for a Matter of so little consequence But St. Gregory gave him to understand that he did not take the Matter to be so Cyriacus succeeding to John in the See of Constantinople continued to assume the same Title yet he wrote to St. Gregory immediately after his Promotion This Pope would not refuse his Letter but he gave him notice that he should quit that Ambitious Title of Universal Patriarch if he would prevent a Rupture between them and wrote to the Emperor that his Legat should not Communicate with Cyriacus till he had parted with this vain Title B. 6. Ep. 4. 5. 23 24 25 28 30 31. He exhorts the Bishop of Thessalonica not to approve this Title B. 7. Ind. 2. Ep. 70. Yet Cyriacus would not quit it and St. Gregory was also oblig'd to write to him about the end of his Pontificat B. 11. Ep. 43. Of the Rights and Authority of the Metropolitans ST Gregory desires that in Afric a Primate should be chosen rather with respect to his Merit then the Dignity of the See and that he should recide in a City B. 1. Ep. 72. Yet he permits the Bishops of Numidia to observe their ancient Customs even as to the appointing of Primates provided notwithstanding that they suffer none who have been Donatists to ascend to that Dignity B. 11. Ep. 75. St. Gregory in naming his Deputies preserves the Rights of Metropolitans Singulis quibusaue Metropolitis secundum priscam consuetudinem proprio bonore servato B. 4. Ep. 50. i. e. Saving to each Metropolitan his peculiar honour according to ancient Custom About the Pallium ST Gregory sent the Pallium to many Bishops To Anastasius of Antioch B. 1. Ep.
things are spoken in his Treatise De Divinis Officiis which is Printed at Mentz 1549 at Paris 1610 and in Biblioth Patr. Tom. 15. Other small Treatises of his are extant in Surius Canisius Antiq. Lection Tom. 6. Biblioth Patr. Tom. 15. After this time I do not find that there was any Contest in the West about the Use and Worship of Images which henceforward became common in France Germany and other Places Let us now speak of the Authors chiefly engaged in this Controversy Nicephorus was but a Layman when he was chosen Patriarch of Constantinople in 806 after the Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople Death of Tarasius He had passed some part of his life at Court but had been for some time before his Election retired from the World yet was no Monk He was no sooner in possession of the Patriarchal Dignity but through complaisance to the Emperor Nicephorus he restored in a Council Joseph the Steward who had Crowned Theodota whom Copronymus had Married having Divorced his lawful Wife Theodorus Studita and Plato violently opposed this Act whereupon the Patriarch held a Council in 809 in which Joseph was not only confirmed in his place but the second Marriage of Constantine was declared lawful by Dispensation and every one that should maintain the contrary was Anathematized This Decision raised a great Quarrel between Nice-phorus and Theodorus who together with several Monks separated themselves from his Communion and treated him as an Heretick which Division continued till the Death of Nicephorus the Emperor But the Emperor Michael put an end to this Schism and made them Friends upon condition that Joseph should be displaced and that the Monks for the future should obey the Patriarch in all things that were not manifestly contrary to the Faith and Law of God From this time Nicephorus and Theodorus Studita were perfectly good friends and suffered Persecution together for the Worship of Images Nicephorus was driven out of his Church and banished in 814 by the Authority of Leo Armeniacus and although under the Emperor Michael Balbus many that were banished had liberty to return yet he was allowed that favour but remain 14 years in banishment in which he died in 828. The Works which he hath left us are these that follow The first is a Letter written in 811 to Pope Leo III. which contains a long Confession of Faith Baronius hath Printed it in Latin in his Annals and 't is also Printed in Greek with the Acts of the Council of Nice and in Greek and Latin in Zonoras and in the Collection of the Councels In it Nicephorus speaks of himself with much humility and abasement He says that having passed the former part of his life at Court and in Worldly Affairs he had retreated into solitude out of which he was drawn against his Will and made Patriarch of Constantinople that finding himself burdened with the Weight of so great a Charge he begged the Prayers of the Bishop of Rome and all the Faithful of his Church He commends the Piety and Faith of the Church of Rome but adds that New Rome was not at all inferior to Old in the purity of her Faith To make proof of this Assertion he joins a Confession of Faith to his Letter in which after he hath explained the Mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation and acknowledged the Invocation and Intercession of Saints and Worship of Images he declares that he receives the 7 first Councils and the Doctrine of the Fathers After this he excuses himself to the Pope that he did not write to him sooner and says that the cause was that he was made to believe that the Church of Rome was at Enmity with that of Constantinople but now the cause of the Division being removed he doubted not but there would be a perfect agreement between the two Churches In the conclusion he recommends to the Pope Michael the Archbishop of Philadelphia who carried this Letter and some Presents with it This Letter is extant in Greek and Latine at Heidelberg 1591 put out by Cornelius and with Zonoras at Paris 1620. Nicephorus's Abridgment of History is his most considerable Work it begins at the Death of the Emperor Mauritius and ends with the Reign of the Empress Irene ad an 769. It hath been published in Greek and Latine by Petavius and Printed in Latine and Greek in Octavo in 1616 and since put into the Bizantine History Tom. 1. It hath been since put out with Theoph. Simoccitta's History Paris 1648. Some attribute to him also a Chronology which was heretofore Translated by Anastatius Bibliothecarius into Latine and inserted into his History it contains a Catalogue of all the Patriarchs Kings and Princes of the Jews Kings of Persia and Macedon Roman Emperors according to the Order of their Successors the Years of their Lives and Reigns the Names of some of the Empresses Kings of Israel and Jewish High-Priests the Names and Years of the Patriarchs of the Churches of Jerusalem Rome Constantinople Alexandria and Antioch This Work is very defective if it be Nicephorus's some other Person hath added the Names of some of the Emperors and some Patriarchs which lived after his Death At first there appeared only a Translation attributed to Anastasius afterward Camerarius made another Version upon which Contius a Lawyer at Bruges made a Comment Scaliger Printed it in Greek at the end of his Edition of Eusebius's Chronicon or Thesaurus Temporum and last of all F. Goar Printed them in Greek and Latin at Paris 1652 with Sycellus's Chronicon At the beginning of this Work is prefixed a Book Entituled Schometria which contains a Catalogue of Canonical Ecclesiastical and Apocryphal Books but 't is not certain that it is the Work of this Patriarch our Learned Bishop of Chester Dr. Pearson proves that 't is not Nicephorus's but some other Authors coeval with him in his Vind. Ignat. p. 1. He made also four Treatises against the Iconoclasts of which we have only a Latin Version composed by Turrian which is extant in Canisius's Collection Tom. 4. p. 253. and in the Biblioth Patrion Tom. 14. In the first he supposes the Iconoclasts to have wrong Sentiments of the Incarnation from whence he concludes that they are justly condemned because they have not followed universally the Doctrine of the General Councils because they have demolished the Temples beat down the Images and treated them as Idolaters which worship them insomuch that they have been the cause of the effusion of much Christian Blood and lastly because they have separated themselves from the Church In the 2d Tract he endeavours to prove by 10 Reasons that the Image of Jesus Christ ought to have more respect than the Cross. In the 3d Book he proves the Worship of Images by the Example of the Cherubims over the Ark. In the last he shews that the Image of Jesus Christ may be formed and painted because according to his Humane Nature he is bounded
Secondly Because the Church can set Bounds to the Power of the Pope which the Pope cannot do to the Power of the Church Thirdly Because the Church comprehends all the Ecclesiastical Powers even that of the Pope Fourthly Because the Church can make Laws to oblige the Pope and reform him whereas the Pope cannot judge the whole Church nor set any Bounds to its Power As to the Effects of the Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction Gerson says That the last Penalty that the Church can inflict is Penal Excommunication and that it has no Right to make use of any Corporal Punishment but by the Concession of Princes wherefore he does not approve that so many Censures have been us'd for maintaining this Jurisdiction He treats in the fifth Consideration of the Power of Jurisdiction in the Internal Court which is Exercis'd over those that voluntarily submit to it by enlightening and perfecting them with Instructions and the Administration of Sacraments and Purifying them by Baptism and by Penance After he has Establish'd these Principles he applies them in the following Considerations The Ecclesiastical Power consider'd in it self is unvariable and continues the same from the beginning of the Church unto the end and comprehends all the different Powers even the Authority of the Pope The same Power consider'd respectively in its particular Subjects is variable since the Subjects are chang'd by Natural or Civil Deaths by Deposition Renunciation c. The Pope himself may voluntarily resign the Pontificat or be Depos'd The Power which respects the Institution of Ministers has very much varied in the Church and the Ambitious Desires of Men has caus'd so great Confusions about it that 't is difficult to distinguish what is in it of Jesus Christ's Institution from that which is of Human appointment The History of the Popes of General Councils and the Decretals of the Pope plainly discover this variety But we ought to consider the many Processes about Benefices which busie the Court of Rome the Collations and Seals of the Pope the Annates and an infinite number of Practices by which the Pope would usurp the Institutions the Rights the Offices and the Benefices of all the Churches they ought to remember That God has not given them a Power but to Edification they have a Right to reform Abuses to watch over the whole Church to turn out Intruders to advance the Humble and Poor without Prayers or Presents The Ecclesiastical Power consider'd according to its Usage and Exercise is variable for tho' it be the Institution of Jesus Christ yet the Use and Exercise of it is convey'd from some Men to others according to the various Necessities of the Church The Plenitude of this Power is subjecttively in the Pope only supposing that he be Ordain'd which was given by Jesus Christ to St. Peter for him and his Successors But the Church and Princes have granted them Rights which they had not by the Institution of Jesus Christ and the General Councils could make Laws which the Pope could not destroy but only by dispensing in cafe of necessity or apparent advantage because Human Laws can never be made so general but they will admit of some Exception and Interpretation Gerson there gives Excellent Rules about Dispensation After this he proceeds to the Authority of the Church and a General Council which he proves to be the Sovereign Authority in the Church and to have Right to exercise the Pontifical Jurisdiction and also to take care of it for a time tho' they cannot abolish it for ever The twelfth Consideration is about the Power of the Pope with respect to Temporal Revenues He says That he has no Power to dispose of the Revenues of Clergy-men and much less of those of Lay-men altho' the Government Direction and Regulation of these Revenus belong to him He owns That these Doctrins are contrary to two opposite Errors whereof one is That the Ecclesiasticks ought not to have Temporal Revenues that if they have any they are only Alms which are not due and which they ought not to enjoy but to live in the Poverty of Jesus Christ the other is That the Pope is the Sovereign Lord of Temporals as well as Spirituals That all Kings receive their Power from him or at least that he is absolute Lord of the Ecclesiastical Revenues and that he can dispose of them according to his Will without being guilty of Simony and without admitting any Appeal from his Judgment He concludes from all these Considerations That the Power of the Pope is much Superior to all other Power Ecclesiastical and Temporal but that the Power of the Church and a General Council is more extensive and large not only for its Infallibility but for the Right it has to Reform the Church in its Head and Members and to decide as the last resort the Causes of Faith He defines a General Council a Congregation made in any place by a Lawful Authority of all the Hierarchical Orders of the Catholick Church from which none of the Faithful are excluded who has a mind to be heard in order to the Management of what concerns the Government of the Church in Faith and Manners It belongs to the Pope to call them together except in three Cases in which the Congregation of a Council may be made without the Pope The first is If the Pope be naturally dead civilly or canonically if he be Depos'd Distracted or a Prisoner in any place where he cannot be address'd unto The second is If being requir'd to call a Council he does obstinately refuse to do it The third is If a General Council being Lawfully Assembled appoint the time and place of a subsequent Council The Prelats that ought to be present at a Council are those of the first Order viz. Archbishops and Bishops who succeed the Apostles and Prelats of the second Order who are Successors to the 72 Disciples Both the one and the other have a Definitive Voice in the Council other Persons have only a Consultative Voice By the Prelats of the second Order are understood the Parish-Priests but this cannot be extended to the Regulars who Exercise no Hierarchical Functions but by Privilege The thirteenth Consideration contains the Definition and Division of the differen sorts of Laws of Jurisdiction and Government This Treatise of Gerson was written and repeated in the Council of Constance 1417. The second Work of the same first Part is a Discourse spoken at the same Council in 1415. upon occasion of the Processions that were made for the happy Voyage of the King of the Romans to Peter de Luna wherein he explains the Progress which the Council made towards Peace by removing the Obstacles which hindred the Extirpation of the Schism and Heresie and the Reformation of Manners In it he confirms the Authority of the Council above the Pope in Matters of Faith and as to the Reformation of Manners The third Treatise is Entitled de Auferibilitate Papae ab Ecclesia the
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
understanding this sent Lucifer Calaritanus with Pancratius a Priest and Hilary a Deacon to carry a Letter to the Emperour Constantius wherein after he had given an Account of what we have already said concerning every thing that had been done since the Beginning of his Pontificate in the Cause of St. Athanasius he prays him to Order the Examination of this Affair in a Free Council upon Condition that they should begin with Confirming the Nicene Creed He gave to the same Deputies a Letter of Recommendation address'd to Eusebius Vercellensis and indeed he wrote two other Letters to him one of Recommendation and another of Thanks About the same time He wrote also to Hosius and to other Bishops concerning the Lapse of Vincentius of Capua Immediately after the Council of Milan held in the Year 355 which was not more favourable to St. Athanasius than that of Arles had been before Liberius wrote an Elegant Letter to Eusebius Vercellensis Denys and Lucifer then in Banishment wherein he praises them for their Constancy and testifies to them That he was ready to suffer the same Persecution for the same Cause He says He knew not whether he should be griev'd for their Absence or rejoyce for their Glory which he observes to be greater than that of former Martyrs because these suffer'd only the Torments of their Pagan Persecutors but they endur'd the Injuries of their false Brethren He prays them to assist him with their Prayers That God would give him Grace to bear with Patience and Constancy the Tryals that he was threaten'd with And indeed a little after Constantius perceiving that there was none almost left but Liberius who justified the Innocence of this Saint and desiring to confirm his Condemnation by the Authority of the Bishop of Rome sent an Eunuch thither who urg'd him to Subscribe to the Condemnation of St. Athanasius to no purpose for all the Answer he could get from him was That he should call a Free Council in some place that was distant from the Court where there should be neither Guards nor Officers That this Council should begin with making a Profession of the Faith as it had been explain'd in the Council of Nice That it should drive away all the Arians and anathematize their Error and then afterwards should examine the Cause of St. Athanasius The Emperour having receiv'd this Answer sent an Order to the Governour of Rome to surprize Liberius and send him to Court which Order was executed And when he was in the Emperour's presence he spoke to him with no less Constancy than he had done at Rome to his Eunuch We have his Answers in Theodoret in B. II. of his Hist. Ch. 16. wherein he discovers an unconceivable Firmness of Mind in refusing to Subscribe to the Condemnation of St. Athanasius Constantius objected to him That he had been condemned by all the World and says he You are the only Bishop in the World that justifies an impious Disturber of the Peace to which he answered with great Constancy Tho' I were alone yet the Cause of Faith is nevertheless Good for at another time there were found but three young Men that disobey'd the Orders of the King After this he pray'd him That he would call a Synod but withal desir'd That before they should proceed to examine St. Athanasius's Cause He would make all the Bishops Subscribe the Nicene Creed Constantius being enrag'd against St. Athanasius as supposing him the cause of that Enmity which his Brother Constans had against him Liberius as to this answer'd him wisely You ought not Sir to make use of Bishops to revenge your Quarrels for the hands of Ecclesiasticks ought not to be employ'd but only to Bless and to Sanctify At last Constantius threatning him with Banishment I have already says he bid adieu to my Brethren at Rome for the Ecclesiastical Laws are to be preferr'd before my Living there Three Days time were given him to consider of it and because he did not change his Opinion in that time he was Banish'd two Days after to Beraea a City of Thrace The Emperour the Empress and the Eunuch Eusebius offer'd him Money to bear the Expence of his Journey but he refus'd it and went away chearfully to the place of his Banishment The Clergy of Rome having lost their Head took an Oath to chuse no body in the Room of Liberius as long as he was alive But Constantius by the management of Epictetus Bishop of Centâ—…cellae in Italy procur'd one Felix a Deacon to be ordain'd Bishop who was himself also one of those that had sworn not to chuse a Bishop in the Room of Liberius St. Jerom says That Acacius had a hand in this Ordination St. Jerom and Socrates accuse this Felix of Arianism but Theodoret and Ruffinus say That he was not an Arian in Doctrine but only communicated with that Party However all the Ancients agree That this Ordination was not lawful a However all the Ancients â—gree That this Ordination was not lawful St. Athanasius in his Epistle to those that lead a Monastick Life says that he was ordain'd in the Palace without the Consent of the People or the Election of the Clergy by Epictetus in the Presence of Three Eunuchs and Three Bishops who were rather Spies than Bishops that the People would not permit him to enter into the Church and withdrew themselves from his Communion St. Jerom says that he was an Antipope Optatus and St. Austin in the Catalogue of Popes make no mention of Felix but place Damasus immediately after Liberius And certainly Liberius being a lawful Bishop another could not be ordain'd in his Room And whereas 't is suppos'd that after his Lapse he fell from his Bishop-rick This can never make the Ordination of Felix valid which was null from the Beginning Besides Liberius was not depos'd after his Fall but on the contrary was always acknowledg'd as a lawful Bishop and continued in the Possession of his See with the Consent of all the Bishops of the Catholick Church and some laâ—e Authors are very much to be blam'd for putting this Man in the Catalogue of Popes and yet they have far less Reason to place him among the Holy Martyrs in very many Martyrologies b They have far less Reason to place him among the holy Martyrs in very many Martyrologies His Festival is kept on August 4th Mombritius was the first that publish'd his Life and after him Bâ—lusius put forth a more correct Edition of it There was a Dispute about the Saintship of Felix among the Correctors of the Roman Martyrology in the Time of Gregory and 't is said there was then found an old Inscription in the Church of St. Cosmus and St. Damian express'd in these words The Body of St. Felix Pope and Martyr by whom Constantius was Condemn'd But the Life of this Felix and these Monuments are apochryphal For first they suppose that Constantius put him to Death But 't is evident by
Eastern Bishops that they might Join with the right Side in those Councils which were shortly to be held at Ariminum and Ancyra But before he comes to speak of those Creeds which are suspected he relates and explains that of the Council of Ancyra which was made in opposition to the Second Creed of Sirmium afterwards he relates the Creeds made by the Eastern Bishops after the Council of Nice at Antioch Sardica and the First Creed at Sirmium He shows That those Creeds are Catholick and endeavours to excuse the Oriental Bishops for making so many by alledging the Multitude and Obstinacy of the Arians that were in the East He says That in those Provinces to which he was Banish'd there was only Eleusius and a small number of Bishops with him that acknowledg'd the Divinity of the Word He Congratulates the Western Bishops for maintaining the Apostolical Faith engrav'd by the Holy Spirit in their Hearts who were ignorant of the Creeds written by the hands of Men. After this he explains in a lively and clear manner his own Doctrine and that of the Western Bishops concerning the Mystery of the Trinity and secures it against the false Explications of the Hereticks He gives the true sence of the word Consubstantial which he justifies against those that directly oppose it or that think fit it should be suppress'd He Exhorts the Eastern Bishops with much Eloquence to use this term and to receive the Confession of Faith made by the Council of Nice He concludes with conjuring his Brethren in much Humility to Pardon the Freedom he had taken to inform them of these things and advise them what they ought to do He Exhorts them to preserve with inviolable Fidelity the Doctrines of Piety and Religion which were written upon their Hearts and Requests them to remember his Banishment in their Prayers The Third Discourse address'd to the Emperor Constantius which should be the First as we have observ'd already is a Petition presented to this Emperor wherein he remonstrates that he was a Catholick Bishop of France banish'd by the Intrigues of his Enemies who had falsly accus'd him to his Majesty He prays the Emperor that he would grant him Audience in the Presence of Saturninus who was the chief Cause of his Sufferings that he might have Opportunity to justify himself from those Accusations that were form'd against him and he makes no scruple to declare that if his Adversary could show that he had done any one thing unworthy either of the Holiness of a Bishop or the Piety of a Christian he would not only quit all Claim to his Favour for continuing to him his Bishoprick but on the contrary he would be willing to spend his Old Age in a State of Penance among the Laity But so far as this Petition concern'd only his own Person he went further and protested that he would never speak more of it unless the Emperour commanded him yet still he desir'd with great Boldness and Earnestness an Audience about the Cause of the Faith which was common to him with all other Catholicks And to this purpose he represents to the Emperor the Confusion of so many Creeds When once they begun says he to make new Confessions of Faith the Faith became the Creed of the Times rather than of the Gospel Facta est Fides temporum potius quam Evangeliorum Every Year new Creeds were made and Men did not keep to that Simplicity of Faith which they profess'd at their Baptism And O what Miseries ensued For presently there were as many Creeds as might please each particular Party and nothing else has been minded since the Council of Nice but this making of Creeds New Creeds have been made every Year and every Month they have been chang'd they have been anathematiz'd and then re-establish'd and so by enquiring too much into the Faith there is none left it has always continued uncertain and there was never any Certainty of the Truth After he has described this Confusion very smartly he remonstrates to the Emperour that the only way to save himself from this Shipwrack was to acquiesce in the Faith of the Gospel whereof he made Profession at his Baptism Then he prays the Emperour that he would give him Audience in the Presence of the Council which was to meet at Constantinople and promises that for explaining and proving the Faith of the Church he would only make use of the Words of Jesus Christ. He confesses that all the Hereticks boast of preaching the Gospel but says he they do not understand it For they alledge Scripture without knowing the meaning of it and make use of Orthodox Terms without having the True Faith He presses the Emperour to grant him this Audience for the good of the whole Church and promises him that being to speak publickly to him of a Question so famous in the Presence of a Council divided upon this Subject he would say nothing but what should tend to the Honour of the Emperour the Preservation of the Faith and the peaceable Union of the East and the West And to assure him of this Promise he gives him this Sign of it by confining himself wholly to the Terms of the Gospel in declaring his Doctrine at present With this Declaration he concludes this Paper which some have thought Imperfect but without any Ground The Second Book of St. Hilary to Constantius is also a kind of Petition wherein he prays him To put an End to the Persecutions and Vexations wherewith the Arians exercis'd the Church To forbid the Secular Judges to meddle in Affairs of Religion To leave his Subjects to their Liberty whether they will be Arians or no To permit them to continue united to the Catholick Bishops and separated from the Arian Bishops and in short To suffer all the banish'd Bishops to return to their Sees After this He compares the Persecution of the Arians against the Catholicks with that of the Pagans against the Christians He shows how Cruel it was and how far distant from the Spirit of the Church and of Jesus Christ. The Bishops say he are put in Prison The People are oblig'd to serve as their Guard The holy Bodies of the Virgins of Jesus Christ are expos'd to the View of all the World to abuse them Men are compell'd I do not say to be Christians but to become Arians The Name and Authority of the Emperour is abus'd He is impos'd upon by Surprize Judges are desir'd of him for approving these Injustices and in short The People are forc'd to consent unto them After this He describes particularly the Violence that was us'd to Paulinus of Triers to Dionysius of Milan to Eusebius of Vercellae and many others This Book is imperfect These Discourses of St. Hilary are written with great Moderation as to what concerns the Emperour whose Conduct he excuses but he has not us'd the same Moderation in the last which is commonly plac'd before the other Two There he speaks with so fervent
This sort of Books which contain the Lives of Authors are pleasant when they are written of Great Men who had a share in the Management of Affairs or of such Persons whose Lives were full of extraordinary and surprizing Accidents and they are useful when they are written of Persons of great Vertue and Merit But when no such thing is to be found in them they are commonly tedious and useless Books 'T is probable that this Life of Aquilius was fill'd with Extraordinary Occurrences which was the reason why he wrote it and why he gave it the Title of The Catastrophe or the Experiment Wherein he probably gives us cause to admire the Providence of God in the wonderful Changes that happen'd to himself This is all that we can say by Conjecture having no certain Knowledge of this Matter EUZOIUS EUZOIUS was the Scholar of Thespesius the Rhetorician together with St. Gregory Nazianzen He Studied in his Youth at Caesarea in Palaestine whereof he was afterward Bishop He Euzoius repaired the Library of Origen and Pamphilus causing the Books to be written out upon new Skins because the old ones began to rot He was at last turn'd out of the Church in the time of Theodosius He wrote many Treatises which were easie to be known in St. Jerom's time This is what this Father has told us of this Author St. Epiphanius speaks of him in Haeres 73. and places him among those Bishops that were purely Arian And yet he is different from the famous Arian Euzoïus Bishop of Antioch St. CYRIL of Jerusalem ST CYRIL was ordain'd Priest of the Church of Jerusalem by Maximus Bishop of that City but if we believe St. Jerom he would not do the Office of a Deacon as long as that Bishop liv'd St. Cyril of Jerusalem After his Death a After his Death Socrates B. II. Ch. 30. and Sozomen B. IV. Ch. 19. says That Acacius of Caesarea and Patrophilus of Scythopolis turned out Maximus to place St. Cyril in his room But St. Jerom who speaks of St. Cyril after such a manner as sufficiently discovers that he did not favour him since he treats him as an Arian tells us That Maximus was dead when he was Ordain'd But he accuses St. Cyril of persecuting Heraclius who was Ordain'd Bishop by the Catholicks in the room of Maximus and of reducing him to the rank of Presbyters St. Epiphanius Ruffinus and Theodoret speak not a word of this Heraclius But Socrates and Sozomen place him as second of the Bishops whom the Arians set up in Opposition to St. Cyril St. Jerom calls the first Irenaeus instead of Eremius he was plac'd in his room by Acacius and the Bishops of his Party which render'd his Faith suspected to the Catholicks b His Faith suspected to the Catholicks Ruffinus and St. Jerom observe That he oftentimes chang'd his Faith and his Communion As to his Communion 't is true for at first he held Communion with Acacius afterwards he separated from him then he communicated with the Bishops of his Party at the Synod of Melitina after this he forsook them to joyn with Basil of Ancyra and the Semi-Arians at last he re-united himself to the Catholicks But for all this he did not change his Faith for he always believed the Son to be like in Substance unto the Father without condemning the Term Consubstantial 'T was Acacius who was so changeable in his Faith for he sometimes signed the Doctrine the Words being like in Substance and sometimes condemned this Doctrine and approved the Error of the Anomaeans but Meletius re-united them all and made them approve the Term Consubstantial We must not believe St. Jerom about the Cause of St. Cyril for he was addicted to Paulinus against Meletius and against all those of his Party But he was not long a Friend to Acacius for the Differences which they had about the Prerogatives of their Sees quickly broke them in pieces The Council of Nice had given the Bishop of Jerusalem the first place among all the Bishops of that Province and yet left the Rites of the Church of Caesarea entire which was Metropolis to the Church of Jerusalem This Honour gave occasion to the Bishop of Jerusalem to assume to himself some Privileges and so Maximus of Jerusalem took upon him to Ordain Bishops in Palaestine and to Assemble a Council of that Province His Successor St. Cyril desiring to maintain himself in the Possession of those Privileges was troubled by Acacius of Caesarea who would not endure that the Church of Jerusalem should assume to it self a right which legally pertain'd to his own Church To revenge himself for this Encroachment he call'd a Council in the Year 356 wherein he depos'd St. Cyril under pretence that he had Sold the Ornaments of the Church and the Sacred Vessels to relieve the Poor in time of Famine He plac'd in his room Eutychius who probably was Bishop of Eleutheropolis St. Cyril appealed from the Sentence of this Synod to a more numerous Council but he was forced to retire to Tarsus where he continued some time with Silvanus Bishop of that City who received him very kindly and gave him leave to celebrate the Holy Mysteries and to Preach in his Diocess At this time there was a Synod held at Melitina compos'd of Bishops of Acacius's Party where St. Cyril was present He came afterwards to the Council of Seleucia wherein he took part with Basil of Ancyra Eustathius Sebastus and the other Semi-Arian Bishops who treated him as a lawful Bishop and gave him a Seat in the Council in spite of all the Opposition that was made by Acacius And Acacius that he might the better Oppose his Adversary threw himself upon the Party of Eudoxus and by this means got St. Cyril depos'd anew in the Council of Constantinople 'T was about this time that Heremius was ordain'd Bishop of Jerusalem because probably Eutychius who was already Bishop of Eleutheropolis would not leave his Church to take the See of Jerusalem After Heremius there was one named Heraclius and to him Succeeded one Hilarius But at last St. Cyril was restored to his See under the Emperour Theodosius after his Ordination had been approved by the Council of Constantinople held in the Year 380 c The Council of Constantinople held in the Year 380. This appears by the Letter from the Council of Constantinople produced by Theodoret wherein the Bishops declare That they had approved the Ordination of St. Cyril because it was performed according to form by the Bishops of his Province He died in the Year 386 and had John for his Successor St. Jerom assures us That St. Cyril compos'd his Catechetical Discourses in his Youth We have 18 of them extant address'd to the Catechumens whereof some are quoted by Theodoret d By Theodoret c. This Father in his Second Dialogue cites a long Passage taken out of the 4th Catechetical Discourse of St. Cyril Bishop
Favour address'd to Cynegius the Praetorian Prefect wherein he testifies his Indignation against the manner of treating them and ordains That the Bishops Gregory of Spain and Heraclides of the East who are mentioned in their Petition and all those who communicate with them be suffered to live in quiet This Petition must have been presented after the Year 383 because Arcadius to whom it is address'd was not admitted a Partner of the Empire till that Year and the Rescript must be before 388 which was the Year wherein Cynegius died It seems to have been presented while Damasus liv'd who died in the Year 384. There is some probability that Faustinus presented the Confession of Faith which goes under his Name in the Roman Code publish'd by Monsieur Quesnel at the End of the Works of St. Leo along with this Petition I know very well that this Learned Man pretends that this Confession of Faith was made about the Year 379 before the Council of Constantinople but his Conjectures are not convincing He attributes to the Priest Marcellinus the Confession of Faith which precedes this in the New Code but this also is a Conjecture that is not absolutely certain The Stile of Faustinus in his Treatise of the Trinity is very plain and simple He contents himself with producing Passages of Scripture from which he draws consequences to prove the Doctrine of the Church and with answering the Objections of the Arians but the Stile of his Petition is swelling and pathetical In it you Every Reader must needs see that these Reflections were inserted here more for the sake of the Protestants than of the Luciferians Either all Abuses ought always to be tolerated or a Reformer is not to be blamed upon the score of his Office And when Men set up for Reformers the Cause only is to be considered not the Pretences which if it be just they have no reason to be ashamed of any of these things here urged against them as Marks of Obloquy if their Numbers are small they ought to shew by a proportionable firmness of Mind that they place their Confidence in a Being that is Superiour to any Powers here below and if they find Fault with the multitude who do not joyn with them they Act according to their own Principles since all Men who think themselves to be in the Right must believe that their Adversaries are mistaken their standing to their own Assertions cannot reasonably be Interpreted to be injurious to Men in Eminent Places Constancy Contempt of the World of Life Riches and Honours are Vertues which when Supported by a good Cause are glorious Ingredients in the Characters of the greatest Saints and therefore are favourable Prejudices for all those Reformers in whom they are to be found if they are too apt to attribute the ill Successes of their Enemies to Divine Vengeance they are not Singular since all Parties and even all Religions constantly practise it if they are hardly used they may reasonably complain of their Usage and Mr. du Pin knows that his Church has always taken very particular Care that her Adversaries should never complain against her for Persecuting without Just Cause whilest they believe themselves to be in the right Reformers as all Men naturally do will aggravate their Sufferings that they may lay load upon their Persecutors and last of all every Man is tempted to think his Adversary's Zeal for Religion to be only Hypocritical If we consider what good Success these Two Luciferian Priests had in their Business we ought not hastily to condemn them Theodosius the Great always shew'd an unshaken Zeal for the Orthodox Faith and his Carriage towards St. Ambrose who censured him for his hasty and cruel Orders against the Thessalonians was an Evidence how very much he Reverenc'd the Orders and Discipline of the Church and besides if we reflect upon the Accounts which Ammianus Marcellinus gives us of the Differences between Damasus and Ursicinus they will seem to plead for Ursicinus's Party His being a Heathen is no prejudice against him in this Matter because he was not a Bigot against the Christian Religion so that it rather gave him the Advantage which all Neuters have of judging impartially of both sides may see the Humour and Genius of all Reformers who Glory in their small number who blame the Multitude who rend in Pieces the Reputation of those who are promoted to Dignities who testify their Indignation against the Higher Powers who make a show of much Firmness and Constancy of a great Contempt of this Life of Honours and Riches who look upon themselves as unblameable and attribute to the Divine Vengeance all the Fatal Accidents which happen to those that are not their Friends who are always complaining of being Persecuted and ill used who exaggerate the Evils which they justly suffer and affect to show a great Zeal for Plety and Religion PHILASTRIUS PHILASTRIUS Bishop of Brescia flourish'd under the Elder Theodosius and was one of the Bishops in the Council of Aquileia St. Austin says That he had seen him sometimes with Philastrius St. Ambrose We have his Life written as is thought by St. Gaudentius his Successor He died before St. Ambrose about the Year 387 a About the Year 387. The Author of this Life says That he died before St. Ambrose In Heresy 63 't is said that he wrote in the Year 430 but 't is plain that this was the Mistake of a Figure and that they put a C for an L which would make it just 380. He wrote a Treatise of Heresies wherein he reckons 20 Heresies before the Birth of Jesus Christ and 128 afterwards to the Year 380 in which he wrote and tells in a few Words the principal Errors of each of them St. Austin observes at the beginning of his Book about Heresies that it was a surprizing thing that Philastrius who was much less learned and less exact than St. Epiphanius should reckon up many more Heresies than he did from whence he concludes that these two Authors could not have the same Notions of Heresy because indeed it is very difficult to give a just Definition of it Wherefore adds St. Austin in giving the Catalogue of Heresies we must carefully avoid these two opposite extremes whereof one is to make those Heresies that are not and the other is to omit those Heresies which really are such 'T is a rare thing for those who make the Catalogues of Heresies to fall into this last Fault but the first is very common and Philastrius was more subject to it than any body For he feigns a multitude of Heresies that never were b Heresies that never were As the Nazareans the Heliognosts the Adorers of Mice the Muscaronnites the Troglodites in the Old Testament the Fortunatians the Baalites the Celebites the Molochites the Tophites making several Sects of Hereticks of the Abominations committed by the Jews and the Sacrifices of the People that were their Neighbours
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
held at Caesarea in Palaestine in the Year 334 but he did not Of Caesarea 334. appear and there is nothing known of this Synod Of the pretended COUNCIL of Tyre against St. Athanasius THE Emperour call'd a Council in the Year 335 in the City of Tyre to judge the Cause of Of Tyre against St. Athanasius 335. St. Athanasius He wrote a Letter to the Bishops of this Synod wherein he exhorts them to settle Peace and Concord in the Church He recommended it to them to Judge justly and without Prejudice and threatned those with banishment who would not appear at the Council He sent thither Count Dionysius with Guards to hinder any Disorder This Council consisted of Sixty Eastern Bishops or thereabouts St. Athanasius came thither with Forty Bishops of Egypt he was forc'd to appear there as a Criminal Several Accusations were propos'd which could not be prov'd and so they insisted upon that of the Chalice which they alledg'd he had caus'd to be broken in Maraeotis by his Priest Macarius The Council sent Deputies to the places to inform themselves of the Truth or Falshood of this Story But since the Deputies were the greatest Enemies of St. Athanasius who could not fail of returning their Information to his Disadvantage he thought himself obliged to retire and appeal to the Emperour Some time after the Deputies returning with an Information which they had made as they would themselves the Synod pronounced against him a Sentence of Condemnation and Deposition Of the SYNOD of Jerusalem THE Synod of Tyre was not yet finished when the Emperour sent a Letter to the Bishops Of Jerusalem 335. wherein he ordered them to come presently to Jerusalem to make there the Dedication of a Magnificent Church which he had built there They obeyed the Emperour's Orders and having perform'd this Ceremony with much Pomp they made a Synod there wherein they received Arius c. I know very well that Valesius affirms that Arius was then dead and that the Council received only the Followers of Arius But St. Athanasius says plainly in his Book of the Synods of Ariminum and Seleucia That Arius and his Followers were received in this Council We have in St. Athanasius the Synodical Letter of this Council written to the Egyptians and Alexandrians wherein they write to them that they had received Arius and his Party after they were satisfied that they held very Orthodox Doctrines Of the COUNCIL of Constantinople against Marcellus of Ancyra THE Council of Jerusalem being ended the Bishops came to Constantinople where they held Of Constantinople against Marcellus of Ancyra 336. also a Synod wherein they depos'd Marcellus of Ancyra as convicted by his Writings of renewing the Errour of Paulus Samosatenus and Sabellius He had been already accused of this Heresy in the Council of Jerusalem and he had promised that he would retract it and burn his Book but refusing to do it at Constantinople he was there condemned and deposed Of the COUNCIL of Constantinople against Paul Bishop of that City AFter the Death of Constantine Paul of Constantinople who had been banished returned to Constantinople Of Constantinople against Paul Bishop of that City 338. according to the permission which the Caesars had given to the exil'd Bishops to return from their Banishment But Eusebius of Nicomedia who had a mind to usurp the See of this great City and the Bishops of his Party being Enemies to Paul because he was a Defender of St. Athanasius stirr'd up against him his Priest Macedonius who accused him of leading a Life unbecoming the Priesthood and they presently assembled a Synod at Constantinople wherein they deposed him and chose in his room Eusebius of Nicomedia Of the COUNCIL of Alexandria in behalf of St. Athanasius ST Athanasius being returned from Triers whither Constantine had banished him re-entred upon Of Alexandria in behalf of St. Athanasius 340. the possession of the See of Alexandria and notwithstanding the Condemnation of the Council of Tyre was acknowledged as their lawful Bishop yet being oppos'd a-new by the Eusebians under the Empire of Constantius he caused a Council of a 100 Egyptian Bishops or thereabouts to assemble in the Year 340 who wrote in his Favour to all the Bishops of the World and cleared him from the Accusations that were laid against him This Letter is extant in the Second Apology of St. Athanasius Of the COUNCIL of Rome under Pope Julius in behalf of St. Athanasius THE Eusebians desiring to obtain the Favour of Pope Julius sent Deputies to him about the Of Rome in behalf of St. Athanasius 341. end of the Year 339 to request of him a Council to judge the cause of St. Athanasius and declared to him at the same time That if he pleased they would make him Judge of their Difference Julius answered them That it was just a Council should be assembled in what place they pleased That there they might propose their Accusations against St. Athanasius and answer what he had to say against them The Eusebians without waiting for this Synod where they could not be Judges any more than St. Athanasius assembled often times at Antioch where they ordained one Gregory to fill the See of Alexandria and sent him to seize upon it by main Force St. Athanasius understanding what they had done retired to Rome where he was kindly received by Pope Julius who wrote immediately to all the Eastern Bishops that they should come to Rome on the Day which he appointed there to appear before the Synod which was to be assembled about the end of the Year 341. The Eusebians never appeared and detained the Pope's Legates who brought this Letter till the Month of January in the next Year However the Bishops of Italy assembled in a Church of Rome and examined the Cause of St. Athanasius and that of Marcellus of Ancyra All the Accusations which had been alledged against the former were proposed and after he had proved them all to be false he was declared Innocent Marcellus of Ancyra persuaded the Bishops that his Faith was Orthodox and declared that his Books were mis-understood and so was acquitted also At last the Council prayed Julius to write to the Bishops of the East which he did in the Year 342 after the return of his Legates We have often already spoken of this Letter of Julius and therefore it is not necessary to say any thing more of it here Of the COUNCILS held at Antioch THE Eastern Bishops having quitted the Design they had of appearing before a Council of the Of Antioch 341. 342. West or of taking the Pope for Judge of their differences with St. Athanasius assembled at Antioch in the beginning of the Year 341 and there held a Synod of Ninety Bishops or thereabouts The occasion of this Synod was the Celebration of the Dedication of the Church of Antioch But as it was the Custom of the Bishops when they were assembled to make
others call'd Semi-Arians made profession of believing the Son of God to be like in Substance and rejected the Errours of Arius and Aâ—tius those of this Party were 105 The other Bishops were probably Catholicks Defenders of the Consubstantiality There was an Officer from the Emperour's Court call'd Leonas present at the Council for hindering any Tumult The First Assembly was held on the 23d of September in the Year 359. Leonas required the Bishops to propose what they were to treat oâ— The Semi-Arians whereof the chief were George of Laodicea Eleusius of Cyzicum Sophronius of Pompeiopolis Silvanus of Tarsus Macedonius of Constantinople Basil of Ancyra Eustathius of Sebastea and St. Cyril of Jerusalem maintain'd That Personal Causes should be first examin'd before they handled Matters of Faith On the contrary the Arians whereof the Heads were Acacius of Caesarea George of Alexandria Uranius of Tyre Eâ—doxius of Antioch maintain'd That they should first begin with Matters of Faith and they carried it against the others They propos'd that the Nicene Creed should be rejected and a New one should be made But the Bishops of the other Party said That they received the Council of Nice and found nothing to be blam'd in it but only the Word Consubstantial Hereupon there arose a great Dispute which lasted till Night To put an end to it Sylvanus of Tarsus said with a loud Voice That it was needless to make a New Creed that they had nothing to do but Sign that which was made at Antioch by the Synod held there for the Dedication of the Church The Acacians seeing that this Proposition was approv'd withdrew and the next Day the other Bishops being shut up in the Church caused the Creed of Antioch to be Signed by all the Bishops On the Third Day Leonas re-assembled the Bishops of both Parties The Acacians desired that the Bishops who were divided from them and depos'd should withdraw they complained that they were not suffer'd to speak freely in the First Assembly and they propos'd a Confession of Faith wherein they declare That they did not refuse to approve the Creed made at Antioch but that they were obliged to reject more expresly the Terms Consubstantial and like in Substance which troubled the Church That they did also condemn those who said that the Son of God was not like the Father and that they made Profession of believing with the Apostlâ— that he was the Image and Resemblance of the Father They add That the Creed of Sirmium was perfectly like their's This Confession of Faith is related by St. Epiphanius with the Subscriptions of 39 Bishops of this Party Sr. Hilary observes That the greatest Part of those who Signed it being Anomaeans were forc'd to explain the Profession which they then made by saying That the Son was like his Father as he was his Father but he was not like him as he was God The Fourth Meeting was spent in Disputes which came to no end Wherefore Leonas seeing that there was no means left to reconcile them declared that he would put an end to the Council and that he would not be present the next Day at the Assembly of the Bishops The Acacians took occasion from thence to appear no more The other Bishops after a Citation of them depos'd Acacius George of Alexandria Uranius of Tyre and Six other Bishops of their Party and excommunicated Nine of them They restor'd Cyril of Jerusalem and ordained one named Anianus Bishop of Anâ—ioch in the room of Eudoxius but this Anianus was immediately sent iâ—to banishment The Success of what was done both by the one and the other Party in this Council depended upon the Will of the Emperour the business was who should first engage him The Deputies of the Acacians came first to Constantinople and they were quickly followed thither by those of the Semi-Arians whereof the chief were Eustathius of Sebastea Basil of Ancyra Sylvanus of Tarsus and Eleusius of Cyzicum they were assisted by St. Basil who was as yet but a Deacon The Emperour would have the Cause of the Faith discuss'd in his own presence 'T is said that Aëtius entred upon a Conference with Basil of Ancyra and was convicted of Heresy However this be Theodoret says that Eustathius of Sâ—bastea presented to the Emperour a Confession of Faith wherein it was said that the Son of God was not like his Father and accus'd Eudoxius of maintaining it that the Emperour having given it to this Bishop he denied it and said that it was Aetius's and that Aetius having acknowledged it for his was driven out of the Palace While these things are doing the Nicene Creed which was Sign'd at Ariminum was That made in Nicé a City of Thrace brought to Constantinople and the Emperour having propos'd it it was Sign'd by all the Bishops of both Parties Of the COUNCIL of Constantinople THE Acacians having stay'd at Constantinople assembled there a Council of 50 Bishops in the Of Constatinople 360. beginning of the Year 360. Thither they invited the Bishops of Bithynia who were of their Party and they approv'd and publish'd in this Synod the Creed of the Council of Ariminum changing only a few things in it Afterwards they condemn'd Aetius and excommunicated three Bishops who would not Consent to his Condemnation But as they condemned this Heretick only out of Policy that they might obtain the favour of the Emperour who could endure him no longer so they revenged themselves afterwards upon all the Bishops which oppos'd them in the Synod of Seleucia and depos'd the Heads of the Semi-Arian Party who were Macedonius of Constantinople Basil of Ancyra Eleusius of Cyzicum Eustathius of Sebastea Heortasius of Sardis and Dracontius of Pergamus In the Second Session they added to these Silvanus of Tarsus Sophronius of Pompeiopclis Elpidius of Satala and Cyril of Jerusalem They alledg'd many Pretences for deposing of them and ordain'd in their room Persons of Aâ—tius's Party Eudoxius possess'd himself of the See of Constantinople Of the SYNOD of Melitine THere is mention made in the Council of Constantinople whereof we have just now spoken of a Of Melitine 357. Synod held at Melitine about the Year 357. This Synod was compos'd of Bishops of Acacius's Party since they alledge his Authority in the Council of Constantinople and condemn Elpidius for having received a Priest who had been depos'd in this Synod St. Basil in Letter 74 testifies That Eustathius of Sebastea was depos'd in this Council St. Cyril was present there if we may believe the Bishops of the Council of Constantinople This is all that we could learn of this Synod of which we have very little in Antiquity Of the SYNOD of Antioch THE Church of Antioch continuing vacant by the departure of Eudoxius Meletius was ordain'd Of Antioch 361. Bishop of it by a Synod which Constantius call'd in 361. 'T is said that some time after being invited to preach before the Emperour upon these words of
They testifie also by a Fourth Letter which precedes these how much they could have wished that the Council which they desired had been held and how necessary it would have been These Letters do not properly belong to the Council of Aquileia but were written some time after in the name of those Bishops which were there assembled and for executing what they had Order'd For which Reason it was thought necessary to mention them here Of the COUNCIL of Saragosa WHile the Bishops of Italy were thus labouring to procure the Peace of the Church of Rome Of Saragosa 381. those of Spain were no less busied in allaying the Commotions which were rais'd upon occasion of Priscillian and his Disciples The Council of Saragosa was assembled upon this account about the Year 381 where having condemned Priscillian and his followers they made some Canons against their Practices The 1st forbids Women to meddle with Teaching and Expounding Articles of Faith The 2d pronounces an Anathema against those who fasted on Sundays from a superstitious or false Principle and against those who entred not into the Churches during Lent but hid themselves in their Houses or in the Fields The 3d. anathematizes those who having receiv'd the Eucharist did not eat it in the Church The 4th forbids any to be absent from the Church from the 15th of December until the Epiphany The 5th forbids Bishops under pain of Excommunication to receive those who are excommunicated by their own Bishops The 6th declares That those of the Clergy must be cast out of the Church who abandon the Ministry out of vanity to turn Monks The 7th declares That it is not lawful for any to take to himself the Title and Name of Doctor but only those to whom it is granted The 8th forbids Virgins to be veiled that are devoted to Jesus Christ except they be Forty Years old 'T is easy to perceive that all these Canons are made against the Priscillianists who affected a singular Way of living Of the COUNCIL of Sida in Pamphylia ST Amphilochius assembled in 383 a Council of 25 Bishops at Sida a City of Pamphylia against Of Sida in Pamphylia 383. the Heresy of the Massalians or the Euchaitae This Council condemned the Errors of these Hereticks and wrote a Synodical Letter to Flavianus Bishop of Antioch It is not now extant Photius had read it and he tells us of it in Volume 52 of his Bibliotheca The same Photius speaks in this place of a Synod held against these Hereticks at Antioch by Flavianus There were present in it Three Bishops and 30 Priests and Deacons of the Church of Antioch There Adelphius a Ring-leader of the Heresy of the Massalians was condemned and they would not receive him tho' he should have abjur'd his Heresy because they were persuaded that he would not do it sincerely these Hereticks making no scruple of renouncing their Doctrine with their mouth Flavianus sent an account to the Osroënians of what pass'd in this Synod Of the COUNCIL of Bourdeaux THIS Council was assembled by the Order of the Emperour Maximus and condemned Instancius a follower of Priscillian and had condemned Priscillian himself if he had not appeal'd to Of Bourdeaux 383. the Emperour See what we have said upon this Subject p. 191. 'T is said That afterwards there was a Council held at Triers where St. Martin was present But this Assembly of Bishops who came to Court to desire the Condemation of the Priscillianists deserves not the Name of a Council See Sulpitius Severus's Account of it in his Dialogues of the Life of St. Martin The same Sulpitius Severus at the end of his Second Dialogue mentions a Council held at Nismes in St. Martin's time but he acquaints us with nothing that pass'd in it Of the COUNCIL of Capua THE Council of Capua was assembled by the Emperour Valentinian in the Year 390 to determine Of Capud 390. the Difference which was between Flavianus and Evagrius the Successor of Paulinus in the See of Antioch In it Theophilus of Alexandria and the Bishops of Egypt were named for Judges of this Cause But Flavianus would not acknowledge them for Judges and told the Emperour boldly who had order'd him to come to Constantinople that he might send him to Alexandria Sir if they accuse my Manners or my Faith I am ready to submit my self to the Judgment of my Accusers themselves but if they would have my Primacy and See I will have no dispute with any body about it neither will I resist those who aspire to this Dignity And therefore give the See of Antioch to whom you please This resolute Answer made the Emperour wonder who sent him back to Antioch to govern his Church But tho' the Synod of Capua had not been assembled but for this Affair yet in it they treated of other things Bonosus a Bishop was informed against there because he had the boldness to affirm that the Virgin Mary had Children by Joseph after the Birth of Jesus Christ. The Council referr'd this Cause to Anysius Bishop of Thessalonica and the other Bishops of Macedonia They forbid him to enter into his Church This Bishop being disgraced by this Judgment consulted St. Ambrose whether it were lawful for him to enter into it This Saint answered him That he ought to do nothing contrary to the Judgment given by the Bishops of Macedonia And they desiring to ratify their Judgment by the Opinion of the Bishop of Rome wrote an account of it to Siricius who answered them That the Council of Capua having referred this Cause it did not belong to him to judge of it but to them to determine it We learn all this from the Letter of Siricius which was formerly attributed to St. Ambóse This Synod treated also of Re-baptization of Re-ordinations and Translations of Bishops as it is observ'd in the 48th Canon of the Code of the Canons of the Church of Africa which is conceiv'd in these Words We have declared what was Ordained in the Council of Capua That it was not lawful to use Re-baptization Re-ordination and the Translation of Bishops This is all we know of this Council Of the COUNCILS of Rome and of Milan against Jovinian SIricius condemned Jovinian and his followers in a Synod of his Clergy and his Condemnation was Of Rome and of Milan against Jovinian 390. confirmed by a Synod of Milan We have the Letters of these Two Synods In the First it is determined That tho' we ought not to despise nor condemn Marriage yet Virgins are more to be honoured The Second contains the Proofs of this truth and in it is shown That the Blessed Virgin lost not her Virginity by bringing forth Jesus Christ into the World Of the COUNCIL of the Novatians held at Sangarus SOcrates mentions in the 21st Ch. of the 5th B. of his History a Council of the Novatians held at Of Sangarus 390. Sangarus about the end of this Century wherein it
the Deacon should look upon himself as the Minister of the Priest as well as of the Bishop The 38th That he may give the Eucharist to the People in the presence of the Priest if necessity enforce it and the Priest be willing The 39th That he shall not sit down but with the Priest's leave The 40th That in a Meeting of Priests he must not speak but when he is ask'd The 41st That he shall not make use of a Surplice but at the time of Oblation The 42d That a Minister who discharges faithfully his Ministry ought to be preferr'd to a higher Dignity The 43d That Christians who suffer for Religion ought to be honoured and their necessities provided for The 44th forbids Clergy-men to suffer the Hair of their Heads or Beards to grow The 45th exhorts them to make known their Vocation by their Modesty in their Apparel and Countenance and forbids them to distinguish themselves by their Habit or their Shooes The 46th forbids them to co-habit with Strange Women The 47th and 48th forbids them to walk in publick Places and appear at Fairs The 49th deprives them of their Rewards who are not present at Vigils The 50th declares That those Ministers should be depriv'd of their Ministery who do not do their Duty or do it negligently The 51st 52d and 53d require all Ministers how able soever they be to earn their living by an honest Trade yet without failing in their Duty The 54th forbids the Advancement of those Ministers higher who envy the Prerogative of others The 55th commands Bishops to excommunicate those who accuse their Brethren unjustly and forbids the admitting of them into the Clergy even tho they should amend The 56th ordains those Ministers to be degraded who are Traytors or Flatterers The 57th obliges Slandering Ministers to make Satisfaction The 58th declares That his Testimony is not to be received without Examination who often goes to Law The 59th That the Bishop ought to reconcile those Ministers that are at difference and that he who will not obey him shall be punished by the Synod The 60th declares That a Minister ought to be remov'd from his Ministry who speaks lascivious words The 61st That those Ministers ought to be reprimanded who Swear by the Creatures and if they continue to do it they must be excommunicated The 62d That the same severity must be us'd to a Minister who sings at Meals The 63d is against those Ecclesiasticks who break a Fast without inevitable necessity The 64th declares That he ought not to be accounted a Catholick who fasts on Sundays The 65th That the Feast of Easter ought to be celebrated on the same day The 66th That an Ecclesiastick who believes that his Bishop has condemned him unjustly may have recourse to the Judgment of the Synod The 67th That seditious Persons Usurers and revengeful Persons ought not to be Ordain'd The 68th That those must not be ordain'd who are in the Rank of Penitents and that if a Bishop has ordain'd any of them through mistake they ought to be deposed but if he knew their condition he shall be deprived of the Power of Ordination The 69th makes a Bishop liable to the same Penalty who shall ordain a Widow or a Woman divorced The 70th enjoins Ecclesiasticks to shun the Society and Feasts of Hereticks and Schismaticks The 71st Ordains That the Name of a Church shall not be given to the Assemblies of Hereticks The 72d That none shall Pray or sing with them The 73d That those shall be Excommunicated who shall Communicate or Pray with them The 74th That the Bishop shall impose Penance upon him that desires it without respect to the Quality of the Person The 75th That negligent Penitents shall be later received The 76th declares That if a Person having desired Penance perceive himself to be seiz'd with a Disease and lose his Understanding before the Priest can come to him Penance shall be granted him upon the Testimony of those who affirm that he desired it and if it be thought that he will quickly die he shall be immediately reconciled and the Eucharist shall be put into his Mouth but yet if he recover his health he shall be put under Penance The 77th That Penitents who fall sick shall receive the Viaticum that 's to say the Eucharist The 78th That those who are thus receiv'd ought not to think themselves absolv'd if they recover their health without Imposition of Hands The 79th That if Penitents die in a Journey or at Sea before the Communion can be given them yet they shall still be commemorated in the Prayers and Oblations The 80th That Imposition of Hands shall be given to Penitents during all the times of Fasting The 81st That Christian Burial shall be given to Penitents The 82d That Penitents ought to use Kneeling even at those times when the Faithful are exempt from it The 83d That the Poor and Aged must be honoured The 84th That the Bishop ought not to hinder any Person to enter into the Church whether he be a Heretick Jew or Pagan until the Mass of the Catechumens begins The 85th That the Catechumens who would be baptized ought to give in their Names and after that be prepar'd for Baptism by abstaining from Wine and Meat and by Imposition of Hands The 86th That Novices or those who are newly baptiz'd ought for some time to abstain from Feasts and Shows and to live in Continence The 87th contains the Sentence of Excommunication against a Catholick who carries his Cause just or unjust before a Judge of another Religion The 88th excommunicates him who forsakes the Assembly of the Church to be present at Shows The 89th casts those out of the Church who practise Sooth-saying or Enchantments and who are addicted to Jewish Superstitions The 90th declares That the Exorcists ought every day to lay Hands on the Possess'd The 91st charges the Possess'd to take care that the Churches be swept The 92d declares That the Exorcists shall feed the Possess'd who continue in the Churches The 93d That Oblations shall not be received from the Brethren that are separated from the Church The 94th That their Presents shall be rejected who oppress the Poor The 95th blames those who refuse to give in Memory of the dead wherewithall to feed the Poor The 96th says That in judging a Cause the Faith and Conduct of the Accuser and Accused must be inquired into The 97th That the Superiour of Nuns ought to be approved by the Bishop The 98th That a Lay-man ought not to teach in the presence of Priests unless they command him The 99th That a Woman how Skilful and Holy soever she be ought not to take upon her to teach in an Assembly The 100th That she ought not to take upon her to baptize The 101st That the young Widows which are weak ought to be maintain'd at the Expence of the Church to which they belong The 102d declares That it is the
of the Church built there 255. JESUS CHRIST His Divinity 44. Images defaced by St. Epiphanius at Anablatha Incarnation of JESUS CHRIST Explication of that Mystery 5. 7 8. 44. 47. 111. 149. 170 171. Its Causes and Effects 9. 43. Instantius a Priscillianist 190. 275. Joy of a Christian in Afflictions 151. Ischyras a false Priest His History 29. Ision a Meletian Bishop 29. Italy Council of Italy in 362. against the Synod of Ariminum 266. Ithacius or Idacius Bishop A Spanish Author Enemy of the Priscillianists 191 192. Judgment Last In what place it will be made 75. 77. Judgments Ecclesiastical 249. 257. 278 279 c. Julian the Apostate Succeeds Constantius and concerns not himself in the Affairs of the Christians 31. Sends an Order to Alexandria to drive St. Athanasius thence and what followed thereupon 31 32. Declaration against Julian 162 163. St. Julitta Her Martyrdom 151. Julius Bishop of Rome Assembles a Council at Rome and declares St. Athanasius innocent 51. His Judgment in favour of that Saint 30. 40. History of the Life of this Pope 51. His Writings ibid. His Letters upon the Incarnation and his Decretals supposititious 52. Death ibid. Just. Of the State of their Souls between their Death and the last Judgment 165. Justina an Arian Persecutes St. Ambrose 200. 223 c. Justinian Emperor Become Master of Italy Treats the Popes hardly 18. Justinian the Younger Causes Pope Sergius to be banished 19. Juvencus a Christian Poet. His Life and Writings 20 21. K. KIngs Respect and Obedience due to them 39. 41. 91 92. Ought not to meddle with Matters of Faith 41. 224 225 226. Ought to protect Religion 222. L. LAmpsacus Council there in 365. under the Emperors Valens and Valentinian 266. Laodicea Council celebrated between 360. and 370. the Canons of it received by the whole Church 268 c. St. Lawrence History of his Martyrdom 207. A good Action of his ibid. Law of the Jews but for one Nation 6. Leo Isauricus Would have killed Pope Gregory II. 19. Leontius Governor of Rome puts Pope Liberius in Prison 19. Liberius Bishop of Rome Successor to Julius 60. Imprisoned by Constantius 18. Letter to the Bishops of the East attributed to him is not Genuine 60. Maintains the Party of St. Athanasius with Vigour 61. Therefore banished ibid. He signs the Condemnation of St. Athanasius approves an Heretical Profession of Faith 62. and c. Returns to Rome and changes his Opinion 63. Defends St. Athanasius and the Faith of the Church ibid. His Death ibid. and d. Letters and Writings ibid. A Judgment upon this Bishop ibid. Liberty of the Christian Religion where first allowed 12. Licinius Emperor of the East Loses a Battel against Constantine in Pannonia 12. Second Battel in Thrace between them ibid. Publishes Edicts against the Christians and persecutes them ibid. Overcome at the Siege of Nicomedia throws himself at Constantine's Feet who gives him his Life ibid. Put to Death afterwards by Constantine at Thessalonica ibid. Longinus first took upon him the Quality of Exarch or Vice-Roy of Italy 18. Lord's Day Celebration of the Lord's Day 12. 14. f. 17. 26. Not to fast on it 203. Succeeded the Jewish Sabbath 45. Lucifer Bishop of Calaris Deputed by Pope Liberius to Constantinople 79. Assists at the Council of Milan and vigorously defends St. Athanasius ibid. His Constancy and Steadiness causes his Exile ibid. Genius and Writings ibid. Unadvisedly ordains Paulinus Bishop of Antioch 80. Separates from the Church ibid. Judgment upon his Style ibid. Subject of his Writings ibid. Lucilla a Lady of Carthage her History 89. Lucius Bishop of Alexandria an Arian Author of some Letters touching the Feast of Easter and of some Books upon several Subjects 106. Ludovicus Pius Son of Charlemaigne Sends Bernard to Rome and why 19. Luitprandus King of the Lombards 19. M. MAcarius Priest of Alexandria Defends St. Athanasius before Constantine 29. Accused of breaking a Chalice ibid. The Macarii How many of them 55. Their Works 56 57. Rules attributed to the Macarii 58. Maccabees Their Panegyrick 167. Macrobius a Donatist Priest Author of a Book addressed to Confessors and Virgins 53. Magick Canons against Magicians 269. Mamas Martyr His Panegyrick 156. Marcellus of Ancyra Wrote against his Brethren and why 3. i. 6. Life Fortune and Actions 50. St. Athanasius always defended him ibid. Fragments of his Works ibid. Judgment upon his Doctrine ibid. Refutation of his Errours 6. Marcellus Bishop in Campania Sent by Pope Liberius to the Council of Arles 61. Marcellinus Bishop of Rome Never sacrificed to Idols Marcellina St. Ambrose's Sister 210. Marriage Not forbidden 47 110. Canons against Marriages forbidden by the Laws See St. Basil's Canons of Penance 140. and c. In what manner married Persons ought to behave themselves 110. Marriage between Brother and Sister-in-Law forbidden 137. 140. Divorce 237. Polygamy forbidden 197. Of the Marriage of Children under the Power of their Parents 142. 229. Second and Third Marriages 140 141 142. Marriage with Infidels forbidden 223. Martyrs History and Commendation of the Forty Martyrs 156. Martyrs may be saved without Baptism 110. Matter not Eternal 5. Matronianus a Priscillianist 190. Maxentius Tyrant Destroys Rome afterwards Conquered by Constantine 11. Maximus Philosopher of Alexandria 186. His Panegyrick 167. Procures himself to be Ordained Bishop of Constantinople 160. His irregular Manners 169. His Writings 186. Meletius His Life Ordination and Actions 187. Melitius Author of the Sect of Melitians condemned by Peter of Alexandria 26. 242. Melitians Schismaticks 28. and f. Judgment of the Council of Nice concerning them 251. Melitine Synod there about the Year 357. 265. Metropolitan His Authority and Rights 257. 269. 277. 278. Ought not to assume the Quality of Prince of Priests or Sovereign Priest 278. Messiah Came into the World for all Mankind 6. Milan Council there in 346. To find means of terminating the Differences between the Bishops Another Council in 355 under Pope Liberius Another against Jovinian 390. Monks Institution of Monks 53. Precepts and Instructions for Monks 124. 156. A good Description of Monks anciently 164. Of their Habits and of the Austerity of their Life 165. Might be Ordained Bishops 45. Musculus a Protestant His Translation of Eusebius's History what 4. Mysteries hidden from Catechumens and Pagans 48. N. NArses Count. Delivers Italy from the Tyranny of the Barbarians 1. Nature Not Evil of its self 59. Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople His Death 195. A Judgment upon this Author ibid Neocaesarea Council there in 314. 248. Canons 248 249 c. Nice in Bithynia History of the Council of Nice and Circumstances concerning it 2. 7. 12. 15. 23. 250 c. The Nicene Creed the only Rule of Faith 42. Nicephorns Callistus composed an Ecclesiastical History and when 4. Put many uncertain and Fabulous Stories into it ibid. Nisibis a City of Mesopotamia 49. Nismes Council held in that City in the Time of St. Martin 275. Nonna Mother of St. Gregory Nazianzen 166.
Lastly he declares That the trouble he was in when they spake of making him Bishop made him resolve to hide himself He sets forth this trouble by two Comparisons the one by describing the vexation which a Princess incomparable both for Beauty and Vertue might be in who being passionately beloved by a Prince should be forced to marry a mean and contemptible Man the other by describing the astonishment of a Clown that was forced to take upon him the Conduct of both a great Land-Army and of a Navy that was ready to give Battel to a dreadful Enemy He concludes by comforting Basil who was afflicted to see himself ingaged in so hard an Employment and loaded with so heavy a Burden Some say that he writ these excellent Books when he was very young which is not likely Others think with Socrates That he composed them while he was a Deacon but it seems rather that he made them in his Retirement before he was ordained Deacon about the Year 376. The three Books in defence of a Monastical Life against those that blamed that state were the first fruits of S. Chrysostom's Retreat In the first he argues for a Monastical way of life because of the usefulness and necessity of separating from the World In the Second he answers the Gentiles who complained that their Children forsook them to retire into desart places and then he comforts the Christians who were troubled to see themselves bereaved of their Children that embraced a Solitary Life to dwell in Wildernesses He affirms in these Books That a Monk is more glorious more powerful and richer than a Man of the World representing the great difficulty of saving our selves in the World and how hard it is to bring up Children to Christianity and comparing the condition of a Monk with that of Saints and Angels The short Discourse upon the comparison of a Monk with a Prince is upon the same Subject He shews That Men are mistaken who preferr the condition of Kings before that of Monks and retired Men. First Because the greatness of Kings ends with them whereas the advantages of a retired Life continues after death 2. Because the advantages of Retirement are much more considerable than the Fortune of Great Men. 3. Because it is more glorious for a Man to command his Passions than to rule whole Nations 4. Because the War of a Monk is nobler than that of a great Captain and his Victory more certain the one fights against invisible Powers and the other against mortal Men the one engages for the defence of Piety and the honour of God the other for his own Interest or Glory 5. Because a Prince is a charge to himself and to others by reason of those many things which he needs whereas a Monk wants nothing does good to all and by his Prayers obtains those Graces which the most powerful Princes cannot give 6. Because the loss of Piety may sooner be repaired than the loss of a Kingdom Lastly Because after death a Monk goeth in splendor to meet Jesus Christ and entreth immediately into Heaven whereas tho' a King seems to have ruled his Kingdom with Justice and Equity a thing very rare yet they shall be less glorious and not so happy there being a great difference in point of Holiness between a good King and a holy Monk who hath bestowed all his time and care upon praising God But if this King hath lived ill who can express the greatness of those punishments that attend him He concludeth in these words Let us not admire their Riches nor preferr their happiness before that of these poor Monks Let us never say that this rich Man is happy because he is cloathed with sumptuous Apparel carried in a fine Coach and followed by many Footman These Riches and great Pomps last but for a time and all the Felicity that attends them ends with the Life whereas the Happiness of Monks endures for ever It was likewise in his Solitude that he writ the two Books of Compunction of Heart whereof the first is dedicated to Demetrius and the second to Stelechius In these Books he discourses of the necessity and conditions of a true and sincere Repentance affirming That Christians ought to have their sins always in view to abhorr them with all their Heart to lament and continually beg of God the forgiveness of them That this sorrow ought to be a motion of that Charity which the Holy Ghost inspireth into our Hearts and to be animated with the fire of a Divine Love which consumeth sin and is accompanied with a Spirit of Mortification and Disinteressedness from the Goods of this World with an esteem of the Treasures of Heaven and of Spiritual Vertues He saith in the first Book That it is not Grace only which makes us do good since we ought our selves to contribute on our part all that depends upon our Wills and Strength wherefore saith he God's Grace is given to every one of us but it abideth only in the Hearts of them that keep the Commandments and departeth from them that correspond not with it neither doth it enter into their Souls who begin not to turn to the Lord. When God converted S. Paul he foresaw his good Will before he gave him his Grace The Three Books of Providence were composed by S. Chrysostom when he came out of his Solitude and returned to Antioch There he comforteth a Friend of his one Stagirius who having quitted the World was so tormented with an Evil Spirit that he was ready to fall into Despair exhorting him to look upon that affliction as a Grace of God rather than a Punishment for as much as it appears by the most notable Examples both of the old and of the new Law that from Adam to S. Paul Troubles and Afflictions have commonly been the lot of the Saints and Righteous Men For this reason these Books are intituled Of Providence because they clear that great Question which so much perplexed the learned Gentiles Why the Righteous are afflicted and persecuted if there be a Providence over-ruling the things of the World He sheweth there that this Question hath no difficulty if Men believe that there is another Life a Heaven and a Hell For saith he since every one is punished or rewarded in another World to what end are we concerned at what happens in this If wicked Men only were persecuted here we should easily believe that out of this World there is neither Punishments nor Rewards and were there none but good Men in affliction Vertue might be looked upon as the cause of Adversity and Crimes the reason of Prosperity Of necessity therefore there must be in this World righteous and wicked Men some happy and others unhappy He adds That by God's permission the Righteous are afflicted to expiate their sins and to correct them for their faults He saith further That God makes use of the Righteous Man's Fear to oblige others to look to themselves and to
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
He observes that before these Homilies there was one upon Psalm 4. Printed in the Seventh Volume of the Eaton Edition of S. Chrysostom pag. 431. which he likewise attributeth to the same Asterius I confess I mis-trust very much the Quotations of these Catenae and I should rather believe that these Commentaries belong to Asterius the Philosopher who according to the Testimony of the Ancients writ a Commentary upon the Psalms than to the Bishop of Amasea who is not said to have written upon that Subject Cotelerius pretends that the Conformity both of Stile and Doctrine demonstrate that these Homilies were written by Asterius Amasenus But tho' I pay a great deference to the Judgment of that learned Man yet I find no such Resemblance however I would not be believed upon my own word but leave it to those to judge who will take the Pains to compare them The Stile of Asterius Amasenus is plain but with a great deal of natural Beauty His Characters and Descriptions are excellent His Sermons would be esteemed in this Age where those things are extremely valued He is very severe in his Morals the Reflections he makes are exact and solid He explains the Scripture-Parables after an ingenious manner and draws from them very useful Thoughts He doth not excite his Auditors by violent Motions as great Orators do but insinuates into their minds Christian Truths by his agreeable and natural way of proposing them and infensibly begets in them an Abhorrency of Vice and a love of Vertue only by a bare Picture lively drawn ANASTASIUS ANASTASIUS was chosen Bishop of Rome after the Death of Pope Siricius Anno. 398. He was an illustrious Person as commendable for neglecting his private Interest as for his Anastasius Pastoral Vigilance Under his Pontificate Flavianus and the Eastern Bishops were reconciled to the Church of Rome and to the other Western Churches The business of the Origenists making a great noise in the Church he thought it his Duty to declare his Sense of that matter He therefore made a Decree after the Example of Theophilus whereby he condemned both the Works and the person of Origen and being informed that Ruffinus the Priest was his chief Defender he cited him to come to Rome and appear before him but Ruffinus deferring to appear he condemned him as an Heretick in the Year 401. at the Sollicitation of a Lady called Marcella who produced Evidences against him her self and shewed the Errors that he had left in the Translation of the Books of Origen's Principles as S. Jerom says Ep. 16. John of Jerusalem having heard of this Judgment writ him a very civil Letter wherein after abundance of Commendations he spake in Ruffinus his behalf Anastasius having returned him thanks for his Complements answered That he could not but condemn Ruffinus his conduct because he had translated the Books of Origen's Principles with a design that the People should read them as Catholick Books that the Fear he was in least they should corrupt the Doctrine of the faithful in his Church obliged him to condemn them that he was informed that the Emperours had made an Edict to forbid the reading of Origen's works that Ruffinus having approved in his Translation the Opinions of Origen deserved to be treated after the same manner as he that first published them Lastly he declares that he will hear no more of him that he might seek for Absolution where he pleased for his part he looked upon him as an excommunicated person This is the only true Letter of Anastasius the two others are written by Isidore The first directed to the German and Burgundian Bishops is dated Fourteen years before Anastasius was Pope Those of Burgundy to whom it is directed were not then converted It is made up of several passages of the Letters of Innocent S. Leo and Flavianus c. It is full of Faults and far from the Stile of the true Anastasius The second addressed to Nectarius is dated Fourteen years after Anastasius his Death and is taken out of Innocent S. Leo Gregory c. We have not the first Synodical Letter of Anastasius wherein he condemned Origen's Books nor the Letter wherein he cited Ruffinus nor that directed to Venerius of Milan whereof he speaks in his Letter to John It is believed that he writ a Treatise of the Incarnation directed to Ursinus whereof some Fragments are found at the latter end of Liberatus's Breviary But it is certain that they belong to Anastasius This Pope died in the beginning of the Year 402 and left Innocent his Successor CHROMATIUS Bishop of Aquileia CHROMATIUS Bishop of Aquileia whom S. Jerom in his Preface to the Chronicles calleth the most Holy and Learned Bishop of his time writ and preached several Sermons There is Chromat Bishop of Aquileia but one Discourse of his extant upon the Beatitudes upon Christ's Sermon on the Mount and upon the words of S. John to Jesus Christ I ought to be baptized of thee Which probably is a Fragment of a Commentary composed by this Saint upon the whole Gospel of S. Matt. He explaineth the Letter of the Gospel insisting particularly upon the Moral Precepts thereof In the Exposition of what the Gospel saith concerning Divorces he seems to have believed That a Man might Marry another Wife after being divorced for the cause of Adultery but he condemneth those that abandon their Wives upon any other Account and Marry again tho' he confesseth that humane Laws allowed it He expounds the Lord's Prayer and recommends the Exercise thereof the Love of our Neighbour Alms-deeds Fasting and other Vertues spoken of in Christ's Sermon upon the Mount In the last Fragment he discourseth of the Efficacy of Christ's Baptism The Stile of this Author is not very lofty but his words are well chosen his Notions just his Expositions literal and his Reflections useful He was one of the most famous Bishops of the West and held Correspondence with the Learnedest men of his time He is one of the Three to whom S. Chrysostom directed the Letter to demand help of the Western Bishops and he subscribed the Letters written for him to the East His Works were printed by themselves at Basil in 1528. and at Lovain in 1548. and afterwards in the Bibliotheca Patrum I say nothing of a Letter bearing the Name of Chromatius directed to S. Jerom in which he desires to have the Martyrology of Eusebius It being certain that both this Letter and the pretended Answer of S. Jerom are spurious as Baronius evidently proves in the Seventh Chapter of his Preface to the Roman Martyrology GAUDENTIUS Bishop of Brescia SAint Philastrius Bishop of Brescia who composed the Book of Heresies mentioned in the foregoing Century dying in 386. in the Year 387 the Bishops of the Province together with Gaudentius Bishop of Brescia S. Ambrose did with the Consent of the people chuse for his Successor Gaudentius who was gone to travel in the East But fearing
one to Adonis in Bethlehem to blot out the Memory both of Christ's Birth and Passion That these Temples stood till the time of Constantine That the Empress Helena destroyed the Temples and Idols of false Deities and erected Churches in those places and that in one of them the Prints of Christ's Feet when he ascended up to Heaven were visible upon the Sand. That after this the Empress desirous to find out where the Cross of Christ lay sent for Christians and Jews to learn of them the Place where it might have been hid and that when she was shewed the Place she caused the Ground to be opened and contrary to all mens Expectation having dug deep they found three Crosses planted in the Ground as formerly that the Joy of finding what they sought after was much abated by the Difficulty of Discovering which of the three was the Cross of Christ but that in this uncertainty it came into the Empress's Mind to bring thither a dead Corps being perswaded that Jesus Christ would manifest by the Resurrection of that Man which of these three Crosses was his The thing being immediately done the Body which had been laid upon the two others of the Thieves to no purpose returned to Life as soon as the Cross of Christ touched him He adds That this Cross does not diminish though Chips are constantly cut off from it In the Thirty second Letter to Severus there are Verses concerning a Picture which Severus Sulpicius had placed in a Church of his own Building which represented S. Martin and S. Paulinus The latter out of Humility saith that S. Martin represented innocent Persons but he represented Sinners He likewise makes a Description in Verse of the Church which he was building at Nola and writ Inscriptions for both Churches Here is a Description of the Churches that were built at that time Both these Letters are of the year 403. or thereabouts The following Letter to Alethius hath nothing worth taking Notice of but they have joined with it a Treatise directed to the same Alethius which is one of the most Excellent Pieces in Antiquity concerning Almâ—deeds It is intituled of Ecclesiastical Treasure because he shews there that the greatest Treasure that a Man can get and the best Gain that he can make is to give Alms It is Lending to God who payeth great Use for it and who gave Wealth to the Rich upon no other Account than that they might communicate to the Poor as he hath made the Poor and Destitute that the Rich might not want Opportunity of exercising Mercy and Charity This small Treatise is full of such Notions about the Excellency and Necessity of Alms. It is believed that this Treatise was sent to Alethius by Victor with the foregoing Letter in 403. In the Thirty fifth and Thirty sixth Letters to Delphinus and Amandus he recommends to their Prayers the Soul of his Brother whom he had formerly baptized desiring them not to forget it Delphinus being dead in 404. as appears by S. Paulinus's Twenty seventh Poem The Date of this Letter cannot be set backwarder Victricius Bishop of Rouen having been at Rome and Paulinus not being able to see him this Saint writ him the Thirty seventh Letter to tell him that his Sins must needs have been the Cause of his being deprived of that Happiness and there commends the Faith and Watchfulness of that Bishop This Letter was written after Victricius's Journey into Italy in the Year 404. In the Thirty eighth to Aper S. Paulinus exalts that Man's Conversion exhorting him to rejoice rather than be sad because the World hates and despises that sort of Life which he had embraced charging him to serve God with the same Zeal that he had served the World This Letter is supposed to be of the Year 404. Aper and his Wife Amanda having declared to S. Paulinus that they were obliged to take care of their Estate because of the Lands belonging to their Children he answereth them that they ought to be perswaded that the Divine Providence had left them that Care for the Exercise of their Vertue He saith further that a man may advance towards Perfection by the Exercise of Country-Business and learn to improve his Soul by the manner of tilling Ground Here one may find an excellent Comparison of Agriculture with the spiritual Life and an ingenious Allegory upon those four kinds of Beasts that eat up the Fruits of the Earth spoken of by the Prophet Joel which he applies to passions of the Soul In the fortieth Letter S. Paulinus answereth very modestly to the Letter sent him by Sanctus and Amandus he treateth there of the great need he had to bewail his Sins and applies to this Subject what is in the Hundred and first Psalm concerning the Pelican the Owl and the Sparrow The Forty first to Sanctus is a Treatise of Christian Watchfulness upon the Parable of the Ten Virgins In the Forty second to Florentius Bishop of Cahors he thanketh this Bishop for the Honour he had done him in writing to him assuring him of his Friendship he commendeth him and desireth his Prayers That Letter is full of Noble Expressions to extol the Dignity and Merits of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ saith he is that Rock containing that Spring of living Water which we happily find not far from us when we are very thirsty in this World This is it that refreshes us and keeps us from being consumed by the Heat of Lust. This is the Rock upon which standeth that House that shall never fall This is the Rock which having been opened at the Side cast out Water and Blood to make us taste of two wholsome Fountains the Water of Grace and the Blood of the Sacrament which proves at the same time both the Spring and the Price of our Salvation These last Letters are of the year 405. The Forty third is written to Desiderius who desired an Exposition of the Benedictions of the Patriarchs he answers him that he is better able to expound them himself than he of whom he desireth the Exposition He only gives by the bye an Explication of the Parable of the Withered Fig-Tree He sent this Letter in 406. by Victor lately recovered of a long and dangerous sickness He gave him likewise two Notes which he had written long before with a Letter to Severus not now extant Desiderius his Request gave him Occasion to require it of Rufinus who gave him that Satisfaction The Letters he writ upon that Subject are among Rufinus's Works and among these the Forty sixth and Forty seventh were written in 408. In the Forty fourth he admires the Spirit of Onction and Piety which he finds in Aper's Letters Then he commends the Vertues of his Wife and wishes that her Children may be well brought up In the Forty fifth to S. Augustin S. Paulinus returns him Thanks for the Book that Quintus had given him at Rome as from him Afterwards he commends Melania then in Affliction
King's Library The Psalter of Pope John made at Vienna John the XXIId is thought to be the Man meant by that Title The following Treatise upon the Magnificat is a Fragment of the Treatise of Hugo de S. Victore upon this Hymn That of the Virgin 's Assumption is a Sermon of some Author of the Twelfth Century or thereabouts which teacheth that the Blessed Virgin is in Heaven both Soul and Body Both the Discourses concerning Visiting the Sick contain useful Rules to teach Priests how they should behave themselves towards Sick Persons but they are very late Both the Discourses of the Comfort for the Dead are of the same Nature and it may be of the same Author The Treatise of Christian Behaviour is a Collection of Notions taken out of St. Eloi or Eligius Bishop of Noyon and Caesarius The Discourse upon the Creed is likewise a Collection of Remarks drawn out of Rufinus Caesarius St. Gregory Ivo Carnutensis and others The Sermon upon Easter-Eve about the Paschal-Lamb and that upon the * What this Book upon the 41st Sermon shou'd be I cannot tell it is false Printed in all probability but not having this Benedictine Edition of St. Augustin by me I could not alter it 41st Sermon are among the Books falsly attributed to St. Jerom. The three Sermons to the Novices concerning Unction Baptism and washing of the Feet are not like St. Augustin's Writings though they are attributed to him in very ancient Manuscripts The Treatise of the Creation of the first Man is inserted entire into the Book of the Spirit and the Soul It is among St. Ambrose's VVorks entituled a Treatise of the Dignity of the first Man and among Alcuinus's it is intituled Thoughts of the Blessed Albinus a Levite upon these words of Genesis Let us make Man after our own Image The Sermon of the Vanity of this present Age is inserted into the Treatise of Christian Behaviour The Author of the Sermon upon the contempt of the World is not known That about the Advantage of Discipline belongs to Valerianus Cemeliensis It is not known who was the Author of the Sermons of Obedience Humility Prayer Alms and that of the Generality of Alms-deeds The small Discourse of the Twelve Prayers spoken of in the 21st Chapter of the Revelations belongs perhaps to Amatus a Monk of Mount-Cassin or rather an Extract of Bede's Commentary upon that Passage in the Revelations Finally The Sermons to the Brethren that live in the Wilderness are the Work of some Modern Monk who was so imprudent as to publish them under St. Augustin's Name though it be as clear as the day that they are not of this Father Baronius observes That they were Compos'd by an Impostor and that they are full of Fables Falsities and Lyes Bellarmin saith That the Stile of them is Childish Course and Barbarous There are several Passages out of St. Augustin Caesarius and St. Gregory It is probable that the Author was a Flemming The SEVENTH TOME THE Seventh Volume contains St. Augustin's great Work of the City of God He undertook Tom. VII it about the Year 413. after the taking of Rome by Alaric King of the Goths to refute the Heathens who attributed that Misfortune to the Christian Religion This VVork held him several Years by reason of many intervening Businesses which he could not put off so that he did not finish it before the Year 426. It is divided into Two and twenty Books whereof the first Five refute those who believe that the worship of the Gods is necessary for the good of the VVorld and affirmed That all the Mischiefs lately happened proceeded from no other cause but the abolishing of that Religion The next Five are against those who confessing that the same Calamities have been in all Ages yet pretend that the worship of the Heathen Divinities was profitable to a future Life Thus the Ten first Books are to Answer both those Chimerical Opinions which are contrary to the Christian Religion But lest they should reproach him with having refuted the Opinions of others without establishing the Christian Religion the other part of this VVork is allotted to that purpose and it consists of Twelve Books though he sometimes establisheth our belief in the former Ten and so in the Twelve others he sometimes correcteth the Errors of our Adversaries In the Four first of these Twelve he describes The Original of the two Cities the one of God and the other of the VVorld In the Four next their Progress And in the Four last their Ends And so though all the 22. Books do equally treat of both Cities yet this VVork has its Name from the better and they are commonly called The Books of the City of God This is the Account which St. Augustin gives both of the Subject and of the Occasion of these Books in his Retractations Let us now examine more particularly what is most remarkable in each Book for it is a VVork made up of a great variety of very learned and very curious things In the First Book he shews That instead of imputing to the Christians the Desolation and the taking of Rome the Heathen ought rather to ascribe to the special favour of Jesus Christ That the Barbarians only out of reverence to his Name spared all those that had retired into the Churches He pretends That there are no Examples in the VVars of the Heathen to shew That the Enemies who spoiled a Town taken by Storm spared those who took Sanctuary in the Temples of their Gods This puts St. Augustin upon asking why this Favour of God was extended to those Ungodly Men that fled into the Churches who feigned themselves to be Christians and why the good were involved in the same Mischief with the wicked He confesses That both the Good and the Evil Things of this VVorld are common both to Good and Evil Men but the difference consists in the Use which they make of them He observes That perhaps good Men probably are punished with the wicked because they took no care to reprove St. Augustin Iâ—me VII and to correct them and that however good Men lose nothing by losing the good things of this World That a Christian ought to be easily conforted for want of Burial seeing that this doth him neither good nor hurt And he comforteth the Virgins that had been ravished in that disorder shewing That they lost neither the Chastity of the Soul nor the Purity of the Body He excuseth those that killed themselves rather than endure that dishonour But he shews at the same time That this Action so much admired by the Heathen is contrary both to Reason and to the Laws of Nature and that it is never lawful to kill our selves upon any account whatsoever He answers the Examples of some holy Women who threw themselves into the River to escape the Violence of those that would have ravish'd them He saith That they might have been induced to that by
them were banished out of Italy by the Imperial Law and deposed by the decrees of the Synods and that some of them having acknowledged their Error were received and confirmed by the Holy See Mercator adds That Pelagius and Coelestius had been already condemned by Innâ—cent Zosimus's Predecessor and to prove it he goes back to the Original of the cause of the Pelagians Pelagius saith he retired into Palastine after the taking of Rome His Writings falling into the Hands of some Bishops they found many things in them contrary to the Catholick Faith and they sent them into Africa where they were read and examined in three Councils who wrote them to the Holy See The Bishop of Rome condemned these Books and excommunicated Pelagius and Coelestius Pelagius was also accused to a Synod held at Jerusalem but he escaped the Condemnation which he deserved by deceiving the Bishops with his Subtletics and Shifts He was condemned in a second Synod wherein Theodotus Bishop of Antioch was President as the Letter written in the Name of this Bishop and Prailus Bishop of Jerusalem convinces us He then recites the particular Errors of Pelagius condemned in this Synod and ends his Commentary with an earnest request to Julian and his Adherents to condemn Pelagius and Coelestius who have been convicted of so many Errors The third Work of M. Mercator is another Commentary against the same Hereticks written after the death of S. Austin In it he describes the Original of the Error of Pelagius of which he makes some Syrians and principally Theodorus of Mopsuesta the Authors He adds That Rufinus who was a Syrian also who brought it first to Rome not daring to publish it there taught it to Pelagius * A Welch-Man an English Monk who inserted it in his Commentaries upon S. Paul That Coelestius a Person of Quality and Wit but who was born an Eunuch had joyned himself to Pelagius and had comprized his Doctrine in 6 Articles which he dispersed among the People That altho' his Errors had been condemned Julian had undertaken to defend them in large Books to which S. Austin had opposed long and effectual Answers That after he had read these Works he had also made some short Observations upon the Writings of Julian which he had collected and made publick to satisfie the desire of Pientius the Priest He chiefly opposes 4 Errors of Julian in it 1. That Concupiscence is not the consequent or effect of the Sin of the first Man but it is natural to Man 2. That Death entred into the World by the Sin of Adam but that it passed upon other Men only because they imitate the Sin of Adam 3. That the Sin of the first Man hath not descended to his Posterity 4. That Baptism pardons the Sins of those who have them and as for Infants that have none it perfects their Natures by the Gifts of Grace M. Mercator recites the Passages of Julian where he expresly lays down these Propositions and then confutes them by close Notes in which he mixes sharp and biting Expressions against Julian He passes not over any suspicious Sentence and whereas he uses the word Innovation for Renovation he blames him for it tho' S. Austin hath made use of both He observes that the Orthodox do not assert That Sin is natural to Man but that Original Sin cleaves to the corrupted Nature of Man He shews him That he contradicts himself in saying That Death passed upon all for Adam's Sin and yet it hath Dominion over them only who imitate his Transgression Lastly he proves by all that is said in Holy Scripture concerning the Redemption of Jesus Christ and of Baptism that it necessarily supposes That all Men yea Infants themselves are in Sin before they are renewed and regenerated by that Sacrament M. Mercator is not contented to oppose the Authority of the Church against Julian and the Pelagians but he also brings the Testimony of Nestorius against them who received them so well and wrote in their favour to Pope Coelestine and sent a consolatory Letter to Coelestius Next he produces with the 3 Letters of Nestorius written for them the Extracts of 4 Sermons preached by that Bishop in the presence of the Pelagians wherein he affirmed 1. That the fall of Adam hath been the cause of all the Miseries to which the nature of Man is subject and of the bondage by which it hath been brought under the Tyranny of Satan 2. That Jesus Christ is come to redeem Man from his Sins to blot out the Hand-writing that was against him and set him at liberty 3. That it is by the Sacrament of Baptism that he works these things and that Catechumens are always subject to the Curse of Sin till they have received this Sacrament The Third of these Sermons is in Greek among the Works of S. Chrysostom of Savil's Edition Tom. 7. And F. Garner hath caused it to be printed with the Extracts of Marius Mercator But because Julian might brag That Theodorus of Mopsuesta Bishop of Cilicia was for him M. Mercator undertakes to shew That this Bishop had Heretical Opinions about the Incarnation And to prove it he translates a Creed attributed to Theodorus of Mopsuesta and at the end annexes an Observation shewing That the Doctrine contained in that Creed is Heretical and that it supposed That Jesus Christ is made of two Natures and not of two Natures united in one and the same Person He confutes that Error and proves the Doctrine of the Church by Texts of Holy Scripture He demonstrates also in another Writing the agreement there is between the Error of Nestorius and of Paulus Samosatenus And for the more full Conviction of Nestorius and his Followers he rehearses long Extracts of Nestorius's 5 Sermons a Letter to S. Cyril and the Extracts of his Books and he opposes to them the two Letters of S. Cyril to Nestorius and a third Letter of the same Person to the Clergy of Constantinople He also examines the Aphorisms of Nestorius opposed to S. Cyril's and when he hath consuted them in order he delivers briefly the Faith of the Church concerning the Incarnation and discovers the different Errors of those that have opposed it For the confirmation of what he was about to propound he produces out of the Acts of the Council of Ephesus whatsoever is most direct and convincing against the Heresie of Nestorius He joyns to this a Translation of S. Cyril's two Apologies made for the defence of his Anathema against the Orientals He endeavours to render the Doctrine and Person of Theodoret odious by reciting the Extracts of his Treatises and Letters He treats him as an Heretick and a wicked Man altho'he owns That he did at last approve of S. Cyril's Doctrine tho'he would not condemn Nestorins He relates a Fragment of the Council against Domnus of Antioch where Theodoret is accused to have spoken against the Memory of S. Cyril saying That the Aegyptian Heresie was buried with
are united in one only Person That there is but one Christ one Son But say they Theodoret in his last Dialogue rejects such Expressions as are consequent upon the Hypostatick Union for he is against the Phrases God hath suffered God is dead God is risen which are most true in the sence of the Orthodox It is then truly said That he opposes at least indirectly the Hypostatick Union But if they consider well Theodoret rejects not these Expressions but in the bad sence that they are capable of and as they understand them of the Divine Nature it self He opposes these Expressions in the Reduplicative sence God hath suffered as God and in the abstract Terms The Divine Nature the Divinity hath suffered But he owns That the Person who hath suffered was God altho' he could not suffer as God but as Man Jesus Christ saith he is not a meer Man he is both God and Man We have often made Profession of it but he hath suffered as Man not as God This is the Doctrine of Theodoret in his Dialogues It is so true that this Work was of Orthodox Principles that the most zealous of his Party found fault that he had cited Theophilus and S. Cyril but had not mentioned Diodorus and Theodorus of Mopsuesta so that â—heodoret was obliged to justifie himself in this point which he did in his 16th Letter to Ireâ—…s wherein he tells us That he did it not because he was not willing to make use of any Witnesses suspected by his Adversaries Also Theodoret alledges that Book in his Letter to Dioscorus as a proof of the purity of his Faith and of the respect that he bore to the Memory of Theophilus and S. Cyril Had he been well advised to quote S. Cyril with so much Commendation if he had opposed his Opinions as Heretical In sum there never were any but Eutychians who have condemned this Work of Theodoret. 'T was by their Craft that Theodosius banished him by his Edict in which he approves the Doctrines and Outrages that Dioscorus and Eutyches had set on foot in the sham Council of Ephesus But the Emperor Marcian revoked that Decree and tho' afterwards they quarrelled with Theodoret upon the Account of the Writings which he composed against S. Cyril yet we never saw him attacked for his Dialogues The 5 Books of Heretical Fables * These Books have been printed alone in â—reek at Rome in 1â—â—8 are a no less Authentick Proof of the Learning than Faith of Theodoret. He composed them sometime after the Council of Chalcedon at the desire of Sporatius an Officer of the Emperor who was Consul in 452. He gives us in 5 Books an Abstract of the Doctrines of the Hereticks to which he opposes in the last an Abridgment of the Orthodox Doctrine of the Church The first Book contains an History of the Heresies which have opposed the Divinity by admitting many first Causes All the Hereticks believed That the Son of God took the Humane Nature in appearance only He begins with Simon and ends with the Manichees In the 2d he speaks of those who did truly acknowledge That there was but one first Cause but make Jesus Christ to pass for a meer Man This Sect of Hereticks begins with Ebion and ends with Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus The 3d. Book contains the History of those Hereticks who had other Errors such as the Nicolaitans Montanists and Novatians The 4th Book describes the new Heresies of Arius Eunomius and ends with those of Nestorius and Eutyches It is doubted Whether the Chapter which concerns Nestorius where that Heretick is so much inveighed against be really Theodoret's F. Garner believes That it is a forged Piece and brings many plausible Conjectures to prove it He saith first that if we compare what the Author of this Chapter says of Nestorius with what Theodoret hath written of him we shall be convinced that it can't be his for Theodoret hath always excused Nestorius he hath always spoken honourably of him he never condemns him but with regret On the contrary the Author of this Chapter declares himself against him and treats him with all possible Severity If you will believe him Nestorius was an Instrument of the Devil and the scourge of Aegypt he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Divinity and Humanity of the only begoâ—en Son of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was an Hypocrite who studied nothing 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and get the Affections of the People by a shew of Religion He was 〈◊〉 sooner 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 Power in the Imperâ—al City but he changed the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into a 〈◊〉 Government and abusing his Power by an unbridled Liberty he made known the Iâ—â—iety of his Heart and pronounced publickly horriâ— Blasphemies 〈◊〉 the Son of God In a word he was a Man who had blotted out of his Memory the 〈◊〉 of the Apostles and their Holy Successors Secondly the Author of this Chapter 〈◊〉 contrary to Theodoret not only touching the Doctrine of Nestorius but also about the 〈◊〉 of his Life The Author of this Fragment says That he knows not what was the 〈◊〉 of Nestorius Theodoret knew well that he had been the Scholar of Theodâ—â—us He saith further That Nestorius had changed his Abode before he came to Antioch Theodoret knew that he had lived in the Monastry of S. Euprepius and likewise That he had been baptized at 〈◊〉 He adds That Nestorius had shewn in the beginning of his Episcopacy after what manner he ought to manage himself and speaks of him as a contemptible Man Theodoret on the other side speaks of him always as a very Learned and Holy Personage Thirdly Theodoret having promised That all the Heresies of which he hath spoken in the former Books should be conâ—uted by him in the 5th doth not count the Nestorians among those Hereticks who were in an Error concerning the Incarnation Fourthly this Chapter seems not to be 〈◊〉 Style It is swelling figurative full of aggravations The beginning seems to be nothing to the purpose and disagreeable to the following part of the History Fifthly this Chapter is taken out of the Letter to Sporatius which contains besides this History a long refutation of the Doctrines of Nestoriâ—â— Now this Letter is an evident piece of Forgery for 1. 'T is a Writing which hath no form of a Letter as being without beginning or end 2. Why should Theodoret write a Letter to Sporatius at that time when he dedicated a Book of Heresies to him 3. The Author of this piece directs his Speech to Nestorius but uses the Phrases of S. Gregory Naz. â—4 'T is not Theodoret's Stile 5. 'T is quoted by no ancient Author 'T is then a forged piece from whence in all probability the whole History of Nestorius is taken and put into the Book of Heretical Fables where Theodoret has not spoken of that Heresie Some Person seeing that he ended his Work with the Heresie of Eutyches and that
him wherein he tells that he was grieved to hear that he was angry with him for the Letter which he wrote to the Monks of Aegypt but he ought to consider that it was not that Letter that had raised such disturbances in the Church but the Papers which went about under his Name that had caused so great a Scandal that some Persons would not call Jesus Christ God but the Organ and Instrument of the Divinity that it was this that obliged him to write That he had been sent to from Rome to know who was the Author of those Writings that all the West was in an Uproar about them that he might appease the disturbances by explaining himself and retracting what was attributed to him that he ought not to refuse to give the Virgin Mary the title of the Mother of God because by this means he would restore the Churches Peace This Letter was carried to Nestorius by one of S. Cyril's Priests who was very urgent with him for an answer to it He gave him one but without an Explication of his Doctrine and telling p. 1. c. 7. St. Cyril that though he had acted contrary to the Rules of Brotherly Charity yet he would forget it and did by this Letter give him the tokens of Union and Peace Saint Cyril having informed Nestorius that his Writings were carried as far as Rome and that they met with an unwelcome reception there Nestorius thought it his Duty to write to St. Caelestine about it And to do it the more handsomely he took an Occasion to write to him about four Pelagian Bishops Julian Florus Orontius and Fabius who had fled to Constantinople and had presented their Petitions to the Emperor in which they complained of the ill usage they had received in the West He assures the Pope that he had answered them according to his Office and p. 1. c. 16. Duty although he was not informed of their Case but that he ought to make it clear that they may have no cause to importunt the Emperor and 〈◊〉 him up 〈◊〉 have compassion on them for if it be true that they were Condemned fâ—â— endeavouring to maâ—… a new Sect they deserved no manner of Pity He adds that having found at Constantinople some Persons who corrupted the Orthodox Faith he laboured to recover them by 〈◊〉 means although their Heresie came very near Arius and Apollinarâ—…s for they confounded and mixed the two Natures in Jesus Christ making the Divine Nature to be born of Mary and the Flesh of Jesus Christ to be changed into his Godhead that upon this ground they gave the Virgin the Mother of Christ the Title of the Mother of God that this term although it be improper might be endured upon the account of the Union of the Word with the Manhood if it be not understood of the Divine Nature and if we do not suppose that the Virgin Mary is the Mother of the Word of God which is intollerable He sent this Letter with the Copies of his Sermons by Antiochus Saint Cyril not being satisfied with Nestorius's answer wrote another Letter to him wherein he delivers to him his own and the Churches Doctrine And to gain the greater Credit to his p. 1. c. 3. Explication he grounded it upon the Creed made by the Nicene Council where it is said That the only Son of God begotten of his Father from all Eternity came down from Heaven was made Man suffered rose again from the Dead and is ascended into Heaven He says that we ought to be contented with this Decision and believe that the Word of God was Incarnate and was made Man That he saith not that the Nature of the Word was changed into Flesh nor the Flesh into the Nature of the Word but that the Word was United by an Hypostatick Union to the Manhood insomuch that the same Jesus Christ is both the Son of God and Son of Man yet without any confusion of the Natures That it may not be said that the Virgin hath brought forth a Man into the World into whom the Godhead is since descended but that from the instant of his Conception the Godhead was United to the Manhood insomuch that it may be said that God is born according to the Flesh and in the same sense that he hath suffered and is dead not as though the Word hath suffered in him but because the Body which he assumed hath suffered and was laid in the Sepulchre In fine that it is in this sense that we say that the Virgin is the Mother of God because she brought into the World the Body of Jesus Christ to which the Godhead is Hypostatically United Saint Cyril having thus explain'd himself exhorts Nestorius to embrace these Sentiments that he may preserve the Peace of the Church and an uninterrupted Union among the Bishops This Letter raised the Dispute Nestorius was highly offended and in his answer to it accuses p. 1. c. 9. St. Cyril of putting a false interpretation upon the words of the Council of Nice and broaching several Errors He says that he Explains the Council of Nice ill because this Council doth not say that the Word was born suffered or is Dead but it says this of our Lord Jesus Christ the only Son of God words which equally agree to the Humanity and Divinity He commends St. Cyril for acknowledging the distinction of the two Natures in Jesus Christ but he accuses him of destroying this truth consequentially and making the Godhead passible and mortal He owns the Union of the two Natures but he holds that upon the account of that Union we may not attribute to either of them the Qualities that belong to the other only and he affirms that as often as the Scripture speaks of the Death and Passion of Jesus Christ it appropriates them to the Humane and never to the Divine Nature Lastly He tells him that he hath been surprized by the Clergy infected with the Heresie of the Manichees who were at Constantinople and had been deposed in a Synod for it Upon this occasion it was that the Adherents of Nestorius published the Book which Photius wrote against St. Cyril's Letters to the Monks with another Piece bearing this Title Against those who upon the Account of the Union debase the Godhead of the Son by Deifying the Manhood These Writings were sent to St. Cyril by Buphas Martyrius a Deacon of Alexandria and Saint Cyril's Agent at Constantinople Nevertheless Anastasius the Priest pretended not to disapprove wholly of St. Cyril's Letter to the Monks and alledged this Reason that he confessed in that Letter that no Council had mentioned Act 1. p. c. 12. the term of the Mother of God Saint Cyril being afraid that those of his Party who were at Constantinople should be ensnared by this Artifice wrote a large Letter upon that subject wherein he labours to prove that Nestorius and his party divided Jesus Christ into two Persons He advises them to
give this reply to those that accuse them of troubling the Church and not submitting to their Bishop That 't is their Bishop that is the cause of this trouble and scandal because he teaches strange Doctrine In the next place he complains of his behaviour towards him and of the Calumnies they made use of to defame him He says that he is ready to defend himself before any Judicature but yet he was not against Peace provided the Orthodox Faith be secured Lastly He tells them that he had sent them again the Petition which they had sent to him but he had changed and mollified the terms lest Nestorius should say that he had accused him before the Emperor That in that which he had framed he had rejected Nestorius as being his Enemy He desires them to present this Petition if need be and says that it Nestorius goes on still to persecute him he will send some Wise and Prudent Persons to deâ—end his own and the Churches cause being resolved to suffer the utmost rather than abandon it He wrote also at the same time two Letters to justifie himself that he had engaged in this affair against Nestorius because he thought himself obliged to do it for the defence of the Faith He says that 't was not p. 1. c. 10. 11. he but Nestorius that was the Cause of the trouble and that 't was not he but Nestorius that had hindred that Peace was not again restored to the Church Nestorius not receiving an Answer from Pope Caelestine wrote another Letter to him in which he earnestly desires him to give him an answer about the Case of those Bishops of whom he wrote to him He speaks also of those pretended Hereticks who confounded the two Natures in Jesus Christ and attributed to the Manhood that which agrees only to the Divine Nature and to the Godhead that which belongs to the humane Nature only This Letter was carried to Rome by Count Valerius Caelestine had not returned an Answer to Nestorius's first Letter because he thought it necessary to Translate and Examine the Sermons which he sent him It is probable that this task was imposed upon Cassian and indeed the Books of this Author against Nestorius were made about this time and are written as we have observed against one of Nestorius's first Sermons Saint Cyril suspecting that Nestorius might have written to Rome sent Possidonius thither with a Letter p. 1. c. â—4 in which he relates all that had passed to that time in the business of Nestorius About the end of the Letter he tells S. Caelestine that he did wait for his Judgment to determine whether he should receive Nestorius to Communion which for that reason he had neither hitherto granted him nor absolutely refused Lastly He exhorts him to let them know his Opinion in the East that all the Churches might be United and joyn together in one and the same Doctrine With this Letter he sent some Papers which contain'd the principal heads of Nestorius's Doctrine Besides this he gave Possidonius a Paper of Instructions which is published by M. Balugius in which he lays down Nestorius ' Doctrine after this manner The Doctrine or rather the Nov. Col. Conc. tom 1. p. 378. Heresie of Nestorius is to believe That the Word of God foreseeing that the Person who was to be Born of Mary should be Holy and Great did therefore make choice of him to make him to be born of a Virgin and bestowed such Graces upon him as that he was rightly called the Son of God Our Lord and Christ that he made him Dye for us and then raised him from the Dead that this word was Incarnate because he always was with the Man as he also had been with the Prophets but in a more special manner That Nestorius confessed that he was with him in the Womb of the Virgin but he will not acknowledge that he was a God by Nature but he was called so upon the account of the extraordinary favour which God had always shewed him and that it was the Man that died and rose again After this manner S. Cyril delivers Nostorius's Doctrine which being done he thus explains his own We believe and confess that the Word of God is Immortal yea Life it self but he became Flesh and being united with a Body * enlivened animated with a Rational Soul suffered in the Flesh as the Scripture says and because his Body suffered we say that he hath suffered although he be of a Nature * impossible incapable of sufferings and because his Body is risen we say He is risen But Nestorius is not of that Judgment for he says that it is the Man who is raised and that it is the body of the Man which is offered to Us in the Holy Sacrament We believe on the Contrary that it is the Flesh and Blood of the Word that giveth life to all things He says afterward that Nestorius had suborned Caelestius to accuse Philip of being a Manichee but Caelestius not daring to appear Nestorius had found out another pretence and Deposed Philip for having Celebrated the Sacrament in his House although all the Clergy of Constantinople said that it was a thing ordinarily done as often as occasion required Possidonius departed to go to Rome with these Instructions but had order not to deliver Saint Cyril's Letter to the Pope unless he understood that Nestorius's Letter was come to his Hands Before Passidonius was arrived at Rome S. Cyril wrote to Acacius Bishop of Beraea that his Friend p. 1. c. 22. Nestorius had given Scandal to all the Church by suffering Dorotheus to deny that the Virgin was the Mother of God and maintaining that Doctrine And that because he would not abet that error Nestorius had declared himself against him and filled the World with Calumnies against his Reputation He tells Acacius that he was sorry that such a subtle and difficult Question had e'er been started and Preached to the People for which Moral Discourses and Instructions were much more suitable Acacius answered that he approved of this Judgment of Saint Cyril and that he was as throughly persuaded as himself that such things ought not to be disputed but he advised him not to reprove with so much passion a word which Dorotheus had Ibid c. 23. spoken unawares and inconsiderately for fear of embroyling the Church and desires him to appease this Quarrel by his Silence intimating to him that it was the Opinion also of John Bishop of Antioch Possidonius being arrived at Rome Pope Caelestine who had received Instructions from both sides 1. A Council at Rome had assembled a Council in August Anno. 430 in which after they had read and examined Nestorius's Writings his Letters and S. Cyril's they disapproved Nestorius's and approved Saint Cyril's Doctrine We have a fragment of the Acts of this Council related in Arnobius's conâ—eâ—erence with Serapion which contains some part of St. Caelestine's
against another that he could find no means to reconcile them The Eastern Bishops gave Count John a Letter to send to the Emperor In it they desired that he would 〈◊〉 S. Cyril's 12 Chapters and that he would be contented to have the Nicene Creed without any Additions signed by them They wwrote also to Acacius and sent a Synodical Letter to the Clergy and People of Antioch wherein they bragged that it was reported that all they had done was confirmed by the Emperor's Authority These Letters are in Lupus's Collection Chapt. 17 18 and 19. The Bishops of the Council on their part wrote also to the Emperor to complain of his Sentence and to assure him that they wondered at his Religion who was persuaded that S. Cyril and Memnon had been justly Condemned They told him at the same time that they would not communicate with the Eastern Bishops unless they would condemn Nestorius and earnestly besought him to release S. Cyril and Memnon and that he would get information of the whole affair from Persons unsuspected They wrote also to the Bishops which were at Constantinople and to the Clergy of that Church complaining of the ill Usage they met withal and that they underwent many hardships by being kept at Ephesus Wherefore they desired them to pray the Emperor to free them from that Prison and to remove them to Constantinople or send them home to their own Churches again They represent the sad condition that they were in in the Memoir which they sent to the Abbot Dalmatius Saint Cyril also wrote himself to the Clergy and People of Constantinople and to the three Aegyptian Bishops residing there The Letter of the Council with the Relation was carried by * A trusty Person in the Habit of a Beggar a Beggar in †Which was made of an Hallow Read his Staff this was delivered to Dalmatius who was an Abbot in great reputation for Sanctity who presented it to the Emperor to whom he was well known He also read the Letter of the Council to the People of Constantinople and the People cryed out Anathema to Nestorius The Clergy of Constantinople presented a Petition to the Emperor in the behalf of S. Cyril and Memnon Dalmatius and the Bishops who were at Constantinople gave the Council an Account of what they had done by Letter In fine the Emperor resolved and Ordered That they should send some Bishops of both sides to Constantinople that the Affair might be terminated by the cognizance of the Cause There were eight Deputed by each side On the Councils side Philip a Priest the Pope's Legat with these Bishops Arcadius who was also a Legat for the Holy See Juvenal Bishop of Jerusalem Flavian Bishop of Phillippi Firmus Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia Theodotus Bishop of Ancyra Acacius Bishop of Melitina and Euoptius Bishop of Ptolemais The Commission which the Council gave them was That they should demand the Restauration of S. Cyril and Memnon and that they should not re unite with John and the Bishops of his Party till they had Subscribed the Condemnation of Nestorius begged Pardon for what they had done and S. Cyril and Memnon were restored With these Instructions the Council gave them a Letter to the Emperor for the justification of S. Cyril and the Council The Eastern Bishops sent also eight Deputies viz. John Bishop of Antioch John Bishop of Damascus Himerius Bishop of Nicomedia Paul Bishop of Emesa Macarius Bishop of Laodicea Apringius Bishop of Chalcis and Theodoret Bishop of Cyrus †Helladius Bishop of Tarsus was perhaps the 8th Bishop for the Eastern They were left at Liberty to act as they saw convenient but they recommended it to them to endeavour to make S. Cyril's twelve Chapters should be rejected as Heretical The Emperor a little after gave a Second Order commanding That Nestorius should withdraw into his Monastry and that Cyril and Memnon should continue in restraint till their Cause was examined The Praefect wrote to Nestorius that he might retire to his Monastry and that he had taken Order that he should be furnished with Carriages Nestorius received this Order with a seeming Joy and told the Praefect That he accounted this Order of the Emperor a Kindness believing nothing more honourable than to be forced to retreat for the defence of Religion but he pray'd him to take effectual care that the Emperor do condemn S. Cyril's Chapters by his Publick Letters This Retirement of Nestorius discovered that there was no hopes of his Restauration as that the Cause of the others was yet dubious The Deputies arrived at Chalcedon about the end of August where they received an Order to stay for they could not come to Constantinople because of the disturbances which the Monks raised From hence the Deputies of the Eastern Bishops sent a Petition to the Emperor wherein they desired that he would not allow any other Confession of Faith but that of the Council of Nice and that he would be Judge of the Contests between them and that they might set down their Reasons on both sides in Writing Or at least if he were not at leisure to examine this affair that he would dismiss all the Bishops to their Dioceses They complained also in this Memoir of the attempts of Juvenal Bishop of Jerusalem upon Phaenicia and Arabia But they said that they would not have any thing done against him for Peace sake and for fear of troubling the Church with Personal Contests The Emperor a little after came to his Country-House near Chalcedon and sent for the Deputies Sept. 4. to him and heard them with an abundance of Patience The Legats for the Eastern Bishops thought they had an Advantage And therefore spake against S. Cyril's Chapters and accused Acacius of having said that the Godhead was passible and did so much by their Insinuations that the Emperor and his Council seemed favourable to them The Bishops of S. Cyril's Party spake more modestly and contented themselves to intreat the Emperor to send for S. Cyril that he may give an Account himself both of his Faith and Conduct The Emperor propounding it to both sides to deliver him their Judgment in Writing the Deputies for the Eastern Bishops said That they had no other Confession of Faith but that of the Nicene Council wherefore they Signed that and presented it to him They wrote all that had passed to the Bishops of their Party who in their Answer shew the great Joy that they had for the good Success they were likely to have telling them that their Adversaries domineered as before Judged Caused sent their Sentences of Deposition every where Ordained Bishops and disturbed the Churches They exhort their Deputies to oppose Novel Opinions courageously and to insist upon the Condemnation of S. Cyril's Chapters They joyned to this Letter a Petition to the Emperor in which they give him thanks for his favourable reception of their Deputies and implore him not to suffer them
Troop of Soldiers Monks and Guards that would not suffer him to escape their hands but upon condition that he would go with them that there was the Grand Silentiary of the Palace who demanded entrance as coming from the Emperor They suffered him to come in immediately with Eutyches and he delivered to the Council the Emperor's Letter which imported that his Majesty desirous to uphold the Peace of the Church and the Faith of the Nicene Council which was confirmed at Ephesus by the Bishops who condemned Nestorius and to hinder any Scandal from rising in the Church of Jesus Christ had nominated Florentius Patricius who was a Person of known Faith and Honesty to be presrnt at the Synod because they debated upon a matter of Faith while the Letter was reading there were several Acclamations made in the Praise of the Emperor The Council testified their Approbation of the Emperor's Choice in naming Florentius and were well pleased he should be at the Council They asked Eutyches whether he was willing with it who answered That he would agree to any thing that pleased the Council and that he left himself entirely to the Bishops They prayed the Grand Silentiary to put Florentius in mind of it and when he was come they read over again the Acts of the Council When they came to a place of Saint Cyril where it was said that there is an Union of the two Natures in Jesus Christ Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum interrupted them and told them that Eutyches did not consent to that truth Florentius desired that Eutyches might be interrogated about it but Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum fearing that he would own it desired them to make an end of reading the Acts and said That it ought not to be any prejudice to him although he should now acknowledge this truth since it is evident that he hath denied it He discovered That he was afraid of him and that with reason because he was Poor and of no Credit whereas Eutyches was Rich and in great Credit and had threatned him to cause him to be banished to Oasis Flavian promising him faithfully that Eutyches's Confession should be no disadvantage to him Eusebius then asked him if he confessed the Union of the two Natures Eutyches said Yea. Eusebius pressed him further and asked him if he acknowledged two Natures in Jesus Christ after the Incarnation and whether he owned that Jesus Christ was of the same substance with other Men according to the Flesh. Eutyches answered That he came not to Dispute but to deliver his Judgment which was set down in the Paper which was in the Hand which he entreated them to read Flavian bid him read it himself and because he said he could not they bid him declare his Opinion with his Mouth Wherefore he said that he Worshipped the Father as the Son and the Son as the Father and the Holy Ghost as the Father and the Son That he acknowledged that he dwelt with us in the Flesh having taken Flesh of the Virgin and he was really Incarnate for our Salvation Flavian asked him if he believed that Jesus Christ was con-substantial with the Father according to his Divinity and with us according to his Humanity Eutyches answered That he had delivered his Judgment and they need not ask him further about it Flavian demanded if he agreed that Jesus Christ was of two Natures He answered That he would not dispute about the Nature of his Master and Lord. Flavian further asked him if he believed him of the same Substance with us according to the Humanity He replyed that hitherto he had never asserted that the body of Jesus Christ was of the same Substance with ours but that the Virgins was But because they urged him further shewing him that if the body of the Virgin was of the same Substance with ours and Jesus Christ assumed his body of the Virgin the body of Jesus Christ was also of the same Substance with ours He answered that since others affirmed it he was very willing to assert it but hitherto he had called it the body of God Lastly Florentius bid him speak plainly whether Jesus Christ after the Incarnation was of two Natures He answered boldly that before the Union there was two Natures but after the Union he acknowledged but one The Synod required him to Curse this Doctrine He answered that he would be willing to submit to the Judgment of the Council but he could not Curse the contrary Opinion because if he did it he should Curse the Holy Fathers They urged him to pronounce them Accursed who would acknowledge but one Nature in Jesus Christ after the Incarnation but he stoutly maintain'd that he would not do it because it was the judgment of S. Cyril and S. Athanasius When they saw that he stuck at this the Synod pronounced him deprived of his Priest-hood of the Communion of the Church and the Office of Abbot and ordered that all those who should accompany with him and assemble with him should be Excommunicated as well as those who should espouse his Sentiments This Sentence was signed by 29 Bishops and 24 Abbots Eutyches having heard this Sentence pronounced against him thought it best to appeal to a Council where the Patriarchs of Rome Alexander and Jerusalem the Bishop of Thessalonica and several other Bishops should be present But he did not make this Appeal publickly and in the presence of the Synod but the Assembly being dissolved and after the Sentence pronounced against him he wrote immediately to Pope Leo that Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum having a design to ruin him and to disturb the Câ—urch had presented a Petition to Flavian and some other Bishops who were met at Constantinople in which he accused him for being an Heretick That being Summoned to Answer to the Accusation although his Age and Sickness ought to have excused him yet he had been forced to appear knowing well enough that they had combined together to destroy him That he had immediately presented a Confession of his Faith in Writing Subscribed with his own hand That Flavian had not nor would receive it nor cause it to be read but had urged him to confess that there were two Natures in Jesus Christ and to pronounce them accursed that would not That being unwilling to add any thing to the Faith of the Council of Nice and knowing that Julius Faelix S. Athanasius and S. Gregory rejected the two Natures he dared not to discourse of the Nature of the Word of God who in the last days came down into the Womb of the Virgin without any change in himself in such manner as he pleased and that he knew that he was not a Man in shew only that he would not Curse the Fathers and that he had required them to write to his Holiness and leave it to him to Judge him promising to submit to his Determination That the Synod not regarding these Propositions had dissolved themselves and had published a Sentence of
concluded that the Acts of the Condemnation of Eutyches should be read without more ado They read them all along with the acknowledgment that had been made of them at Constantinople When these Acts were read the Bishops declared That Eutyches having always professed the Faith of the Fathers of the Council of Nice and Ephesus was Orthodox and had been unjustly Condemned The Monks of the Monastery of Eutyches afterwards presented a Petition against Flavian in which they complain That this Bishop having unjustly Condemned their Abbot because he would not approve as he had done Errors contrary to the Faith of the Councils of Nice and Ephesus had sent Theodotus a Priest to them who enjoined them not to obey their Abbot to have no Society with him and not permit him to have the Management of the Revenue of the Monastery that the Altar which Flavian himself had Consecrated for them six months since had remained without a Sacrament that they were still themselves bound by that unjust Sentence that some of their Brethren were dead without receiving the Sacrament that they had always strictly followed the Orders of a Monastick life according to their Rule but had been deprived of their Sacraments that they had passed the Festivals of the Nativity Epiphany and Easter and continued 9 months in that Estate but Flavian had no Mercy on them that they prayed the Synod to have some pity on their Misery restore them to the Communion and to judge him with rigor who had passed that unjust Sentence upon them This Petition was Subscribed by 1 Priest 10 Deacons 3 Sub-deacons and 21 Ordinary Monks They questioned them about their Faith who answering That they received the Faith of the Councils of Nice and Ephesus the Faith of S. Athanasius S. Gregory and S. Cyril and that they agreed to the Confession of Faith that Eutyches had read they declared them Absolved and they received them to Communion Lastly They read the sixth Action of the former Council of Ephesus that they might get a pretence to condemn Flavian and when it was read and approved by the Bishops Dioscorus declared That Flavian and Eusebins Bishop of Dorylaeum having been the Cause of a Universal Scandal endeavouring to add to the Faith of the Council of Nice contrary to the Prohibition of the Council of Ephesus ought to be Deposed His Opinion was followed by Juvenal Domnus Thalassius and the Bishops who Signed the Condemnation of Flavian and Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum While Dioscorus gave his Judgment Flavian said aloud That he rejected him and Hilary the Deacon said That he opposed the Sentence of Dioscorus Some of the Bishops contradicted it others cast themselves at Dioscorus feet begging of him to spare Flavian but they were compelled by the threats of the Soldiers whom they had admitted to subscribe the Acts of the Council The next day Dioscorus Deposed Ibas Bishop of Edessa being accused of having spoken this Blasphemy That he envied not Jesus Christ the Title of God because he could himself become such if he pleased Nor did they spare Theodoret although he was denied the Liberty of coming to defend himself The reason of his Condemnation was That he had written against S. Cyrils Chapters and had heretofore taken Nestorius's part Labinianus Bishop of Paros was also Deposed and lastly Tho. Domnus Bishop of Antioch had Signed the Condemnation of Flavian and consented to all that Dioscorus desired yet he was also condemned under a pretence that he had heretofore written a Letter to Dioscorus against S. Cyril's 12 Chapters Dioscorus made use of the opportunity of his absence from the Council upon the account of some indisposition which took him suddenly Flavian Appealed from this Judgment given against him by â—he Synod The Reasons for his Appeal were these That they would not hear his Defence That Dioscorus had been an absolute Commander in it to order what he pleased That all things passed by force and contrary to the Canons That they had forced the Bishops by Threats to Subscribe That they would not read S. Leo's Letter That no regard was had to the refusal which he made against Dioscorus nor to the opposition made by the Popes Legats This Appeal was presented to the Popes Legats but it was referred to a General and Free Council and there to be Prosecuted This appears by the Letters and Carriage of S. Leo who in persuit of this Appeal did not concern himself with the Judgment of Flavian's Cause before his own Tribunal but importuned the Emperor to call a Council of the Eastern and Western Bishops to make void the Judgment given at Ephesus against all sort of Justice and Equity Dioscorus and those of his Faction being provoked by this Appeal set upon Flavian with a design to banish him and did it with so much violence that he died a little time after 'T is probable that having received several blows on his Feet when he was apprehended and afterward being hardly used in his Journey by those that carried him into Banishment he died a little after he came there of the ill usage and blows he had received Thus Liberatus and Evagrius relate his Death and this shews that it was not without Reason that Dioscorus was accused in the Council of Chalcedon of having been the Cause of Flaviau's Death because though he did not himself smite him yet it was by his order that he was so badly used Anatolius was ordain'd in the place of Flavian Maximus of Donnus Nonnus of Ibas and Athanasius of Sabanian They ordained none in the place of Theodoret Bishop of Cyrus and Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum for they were only thrust out of their Dioceses The first desired help of the Pope They did not spare the very Legats of S. Leo who were the only persons who shewed any Courage for the defence of the Innocent They were apprehended but Hilary found out a way of escape and having passed through many dangers they got safe to Rome During these transactions S. Leo was much perplexed about the success of this Affair He knew Ep. 35. that Eutyches was very considerable at Court and that Dioscorus and the Egyptian Bishops favoured him and was afraid that they would not have that respect to his Letter and Legats that they ought Flavian's silence increased his Grief and he could not but let him know it As soon as he understood by Hilarius the Deacon how things went he called a Council and wrote to the Emperor Theodosius in his own and Brethren's Name That the Council which he had caused to be held at Ephesus had depraved the Purity of the Faith and Discipline of the Church That Ep. 39. all things were carried according to the Humour of Dioscorus who had allowed the Bishops no Liberty and who had made them pass a very unjust Sentence He conjured his Majesty by the name of the Holy Trinity to leave all things in the same state that they were before the assembling of
this Council until he could call a Council of a greater number of Bishops from all parts of the World He says that all the Churches and all the Western Bishops did implore him with Tears and Sighs that since the Legats of the Holy See have opposed it and Flavian presented them with an Appeal his Majesty would call a General Council in Italy which may either wholly remove or mitigate the Causes of the discontent insomuch that there may remain no Scruples about the Faith nor any Division contrary to Charity by summoning the Bishops of the Eastern Provinces to this Council He adds that 't is unavoidable after an Appeal put in and also conformable to the Laws established in the Council of Nice They are the Canons of the Council of Sardica that he means and uses to shew that in the Case of an Appeal a Synod ought to be called to examine the Cause already judged and not to shew that he had a right himself to review Ep. 40. Ep. 41. it This Letter is dated Octob. 13. He repeats the same Complaints and Requests in another of the 15th of the same Month. He also addresses himself to Pulcheria to obtain what he desired by her means In the mean time he comforts Flavian telling him That he will not omit any thing for the defence of the Ep. 42. Common Cause and exhorts him to suffer patiently He congratulates the Bishop of Thessalonica because he was not at the Council of Ephesus and admonishes him to continue in Communion Ep. 43. with Flavian Lastly He exhorts the People and Clergy and Abbots at Constantinople to be still united with Flavian and explains to them what they ought to believe concerning the Incarnation Ep. 44 45 46 47. of Jesus Christ by rejecting the Sentiments of Eutyches In fine He brought it to pass that the Emperor Valentinian and the Empresses Placidia and Eudoxia did joyn with the Western Bishops to entreat Theodosius to suffer a General Council to be held in Italy We have the Letters they wrote to Theodosius in which they much extol the Authority of the Holy See and insist much upon Flavian's Appeal But Theodosius gave this Answer to these Letters That he had assembled Ep. 50. a Council at Ephesus where the thing had been examined and judged That Flavian was found Guilty and therefore was condemned and that 't was needless nay impossible to do Ep. 54 c. any thing more Saint Leo also wrote about it to Pulcheria and made her write to him by the Empress Placidia He refused to communicate with Anatolius and renewed his suit afresh in beginning of the next Year that he would hold a Council in Italy He sent Legats also into the East to demand it but could not effect any things as long as Theodosius lived Marcian who Marcian succeeded him in the year 450 entred upon the Throne with another Opinion because * Theodosius ' s Sister Pulcheria by whose Marriage he was advanced to that Dignity had a great Veneration for the Bishops of Rome So that the four Legats which S. Leo had sent being arrived at Constantinople a little after the Death of Theodosius were very kindly received there Anatolius foreseeing that it would not be for his advantage to continue in Communion with Dioscorus and maintain his separation from S. Leo's sought all means to joyn with the Latter and to procure that he should acknowledge him Lawfully ordained although it was done by Dioscorus and he had been put into the place of a Bishop unjustly and violently deposed He made use of his Interest with the Emperor and Empress to bring this about and that he might himself engage S. Leo's favour and persuade him of the Purity of his Faith he called a Council of such Bishops as were then at Constantinople and invited the Pope's Legats to be present at it In it he caused S. Leo's Letter to Council of Constantinople Act. Abundii apud Bar. ad Anno 449. Act. 4. Conc. Ch. Flavian to be read with the Testimonies of the Greek and Latin Fathers and caused all the Bishops to sign it pronounced Anathema against Nestorius and Eutyches and condemned their Doctrine sent the Letter of S. Leo to the Metropolitans that they should sign it and that they should cause all the Bishops of their Provinces to sign it In this Synod they also decreed that the Bishops who were fallen into an Error by approving the Acts of the Council of Ephesus under Dioscorus and had separated themselves from the Communion of the Church should have Communion with no Church but their own and be deprived of the Communion of other Bishops The Pope's Legats proposed it to him to blot out the Names of Dioscorus and Juvenal out of the Dypticks Anatolius having celebrated this Council sent Deputies to S. Leo to assure him of the Purity of his Doctrine and communicated to him what they had proposed in the Council The Emperor Marcian and the Empress Pulcheria wrote to S. Leo and she tells him That they intended soon to celebrate a Council in the East and desired him to send the Western Bishops to it She adds that she had caused the Body of Flavian to be brought to Constantinople where they Enterred it honourably in the Apostles Church which was the ordinary burying place of the Bishops of Constantinople and had given those Bishops who were banished upon the Account of the Council of Ephesus leave to return to their own Dioceses Saint Leo thanked the Emperor and Empress for the Protection they had afforded to the Faith Ep. 58 59 60. he received Anatolius with Joy acknowledged him for a Lawful Bishop allowed him to receive those Bishops to the Communion of the Church who being forced to give place to the Violence used in the Council of Ephesus were sorry for what they had done and confessed the Faith of the Church As to Dioscorus Juvenal and Eustathius Bishop of Berytus he bids Anatolius to consult with his Legats about it and to do as they should judge Convenient provided it be not prejudicial to the Memory of Flavian 〈◊〉 That as to himself he thought it Unjust to put the Name of his Persecutors among the number of the Bishops of the Church so long as they remain in their Error and it seemed reasonable to him either to punish them for their perfidiousness or make them acknowledge their fault Lastly He recommends to him Julian of Coos Eusebius Bishop of Dorylaeum and those of the Clergy who have always been favourers of Flavian He wrote particularly to Julian B. of Coos that he ought not to receive those Bishops who had assisted at the Ep. 61. Council of Ephesus under Dioscorus till they condemn what they have done and that they should punish those who persist in it These Letters are dated April 13. 451. The Emperor Marcian and S. Leo were both of the same mind as to the calling of
and the other Prayers shall be repeated unto them That if any alledge any Crime against those who are chosen the Accusations shall be examin'd that if the Accuser do not convict him of it or do not appear at the Trial he shall be Depos'd if a Clergy-man and severely punish'd if a Lay-man After this Justinian renews the Order which enjoyns Provincial Councils to be 〈◊〉 but he reduces them to one only in a year in the Month of June or September He Ordains That all Causes shall be heard in this Council which concern the Faith or Discipline or the Persons of Bishops of Priests of Deacons of other Clergy-men of Abbots and Monks He enjoyns also that without staying for the time of the Councils when any of those Persons are accus'd the 〈◊〉 shall take 〈◊〉 of tâ—◠〈…〉 â—gâ—inst â—he Metropolitan the Metropolitan shall judge of tâ—â—t 〈◊〉 〈…〉 â—â—d the Bâ—â—â—op of that which concerns the Clergy and Abbots Diâ—… Exiguns He 〈…〉 the People with a â—oud Voice and after 〈…〉 of the Oblâ—tion and the Prayers of Baptism In fine he commands the Governours of Provinces to take in hand the Execution of these Orders and to constrain the Bishops to hold Synods The 140th Novel restores the ancient Câ—â—tom whereby married Persons were allow'd to separate with the Coâ—sent of one another without any other Formâ—… The 146th Novel allows the Jews to read the Bible in the Hebrew and in Latin according to the 〈◊〉 bu◠〈◊〉 them to use any other Greek Version but that of the Septuagint It Ordains also that those of the Sect of the Sadducees who teach that there is no Judgment nor Resurrection shall not be peâ—…â—o â—oâ—d any Aâ—â—embly Besides these Novels 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which regulate almost all the Discipline of the Church in his time we have also of his a Letter and Confeâ—sion of Faith in Latin which he sent to Pope John and 〈◊〉 〈…〉 Agâ—… of which we have already spoken another Letter to the fifth Council and two Letters concerning an Enquiry to know whether the name of Theodorus of Mopsuesta was in the Dyptiâ—… regâ—â—ter'd 〈◊〉 the Actâ— of the fifth Council His Novels were printed by themselves â—n Greek by 〈◊〉 at Paris in 1553 octâ—vo by Schringerâ—â— ibid. 1558. Gr. Lat. at 〈◊〉 15â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 399. We have in Greek and Latin his Treatise and Letter against the Errors of Origen the Confession of Faith in opposition to the thâ—ee Chapters and a particular Letter against Theodâ—rus of Mopsuesta without including his Edict against Anthimus that are printed in the Council under Mennâ—â— which makes the 41th Novel We shall have occasion to speak of these Monuments when we give the History of the fifth Council We must not imagine that Justinian coâ—poâ—'d these Acts and Treatises himself who if we may believe Suidâ— had little oâ— no Learning But it must be consess'd that the Persons whom he employ'd were very learned and understoood very well the Discipline of the Church and the Canons that they wrote in such a manner as was very worthy of the Majesty of a Prince for there is nothing better dictated then the Laws the Edicts and Letters which go under the name of Justinian In them you may see the marks of Gravity Wisdom and Majesty which are not to be found in the Laws of other Princes This Emperor begun his Reign in 527 and died in 565. DIONYSIUS EXIGUUS DIâ—… surnam'd Exiguâ—â— was born in Scâ—thia a Monk by Profession flourish'd after the beginning of the sixth Age till the Yeâ—r 540 He understood very well Greek and Latin and had also studied the Holy Scripture Cassiâ—dorus who convers'd with him wrote his Panegyrick in the 23th Chapter of his Book of Divine Learning At the desire of Stephen Bishop of Salenae he made a Collection of Câ—â—onâ— that were â—â—â—ely translated which contains besides these which were in the Code of the Universal Church the 50 first Canons of the Apostles those of the Council of Saâ—dicâ— and 138 Canons of the Councils of Afric This Code of Canons was approv'd and received by the Church of Râ—mâ— according to the Testimony of Cassiodorus and by the Church of France and other Latin Churcâ—eâ— according to that of Hinemarus It was printed by the care of Mr. Justel in 1628 with a Versâ—on of the Letter of St. Cyril and of the Council of Alexandria against Nestorius which is also the Translaâ—ion of Diâ—nysius Exiguâ—â— This Work being finish'd he thought fit to joyn with them the 〈◊〉 of the Popes and therefore made a Collection of them which begins with those of Siricius which are the â—â—rst and ends with those of Anastaâ—ius There has been since added to them â—â—ose of Hilary Simpliciâ—â— Felix and other Popes down to St. Gregory This second Collection wâ—â— insâ—rted by 〈◊〉 into his Bibliâ—theea of Canon Law At the beginning of this Collection there are the Epiâ—tles of Popes a Letter of the Author address'd to Julianus a Priest by the Title of St. Anastaâ—â—a wherein he praiseâ— Pope Gelasius This Dionyâ—â—â—â— Exigâ—â—s was the first who introduc'd the way of counting the years from the Birth of Jeâ—â—â— Christ anâ— who fix'd it according to the Epecha of the vulgar Aera which is not therefore the â—rue one He wrote also two Letters upon Eâ—ster in 525 and 526 which were publish'd by Father â—â—tavâ—us and by Bucherius and made a Cycle of 95 years F. Mabiâ—…on publish'd a Letter of hâ—â— written to Eâ—gippius about the Translation which he made of a Book of Gregory Nyssen concerning the Creation of Man p. 2. Aâ—…ct p. 1. 〈◊〉 assures that he understood the Greek so perfectly that casting his Eyes upon a Greek Book he could read it in Latin and a Latin Book in Greek This Talent of his makes it very probable that he Translated Greek Books well Yet we have nothing under his Name but the Versions of the Canons the Version of the Letter of St. Cyril the Version of a Letter of Prâ—terius about Easter the Version of the Life of St. Pachomius the Version of a Discourse and two Letters of Proclus and the Version of the Treatise of St. Gregory Nyssen about the Creation of Man There is also Cassiodorus attributed to him the Translation of the History of the Invention of St. John Baptist's Head written by the Abbot Marcellus He gives the sense faithfully and intelligibly but his words are not always well chosen CASSIODORUS MArcus Aurelius Cassiodorus a Senator descended of an illustrious Family born at Squillaca a City of Calabria about the Year 470 was promoted to the chief Offices at Court by Odoacer King of the Herculi This King being vanquish'd by Theodoric King of the Goths Cassiodorus had no less Reputation in the Court of this last Prince then of the former He was made Governor of Calabria and afterwards preferr'd many times to the Dignity of Questor Master of the Palace Profect Praetorio and was made Consul in 514. He was
Jesus Christ and made Profession of believing one Christ only compos'd of two Natures pronouncing an Anathema against â—…se who admit two Forms in Jesus Christ who did not acknowledge that the Miracles and Sufferings belong'd to one and the same Christ and did not own that the Word suffer'd and particularly against Paulus of Samosata Dioscorus Theodorus and Theodoret. Baronius and Binius endeavour to make incredible that this was not Vigilius's but Liberatus is more to be believ'd then they and Vigilius was certainly capable of doing it The second Letter of Vigilius address'd to Eucherius is that of the first day of March in the Year 538. He answers this Bishop about certain Aâ—…es concerning which he had consulted him 1. He condemns those who under pretence of Abâ—…ence superstitiously refrain from eating any Meat thinking it forbidden and evil in it self 2. He orders the Canons of the H. See to be observ'd concerning the solemn Administration of Baptism and reproves those who cut off the Particle And in the Gloria Patri between the Son and the H. Spirit singing Gloria Patri Filio Spiritus Sancto instead of Spiritus Sancto 3. He says that he had sent to him who writes the Ecclesiastical Canons taken out of the Archives of the Church of Rome made with respect to those who having been baptiz'd in the Church were re-baptiz'd by the Arians when they return'd to the Church He adds that nevertheless their Penance may be diminish'd in proportion to their fervor but that they must not be receiv'd by that Imposition of Hands which is us'd to cause the Holy Spirit to descend but by that which is us'd to reconcile Penitents 4. He thinks that a Church must not be Consecrated anew which is rebuilt upon the same Foundations but that it is sufficient to celebrate Mess in it This Consecration was made by throwing Holy Water upon it for to show that it was not necessary to consecrate it anew he uses this Expression Nihil Judicamus officere si per eam minime aqua benedicta jactetur 5. He fixes the Day of the Feast of Easter approaching he says that Divine Service is perform'd after the same manner in all the Feasts that some Chapters only are added which agree either to the Mysteries or to the Saint whose Feast it is He sends Reliques to him to whom he writes Here this Letter should end for he declares that he had answer'd all the Demands of this Bishop and makes him a Complement wherewith it was usual to conclude a Letter Yet there are in it two other Articles which have no relation to the preceding nor any connexion with the remainder of the Letter The first condemns the Priests who name not the three Persons in administring Baptism the second is about the Primacy of the Church of Rome It affirms that there is no doubt but the Roman Church is the Foundation Form and Principle of all the Churches because tho all the Apostles were chosen after the same manner yet St. Peter had the Pre-eminence above the other which made him be call'd Cephas because he is the Head and Prince of the other Apostles that therefore the Church of Rome has the Primacy among all the Churches and that 't is necessary that the Causes which concern the Persons of Bishops or the important Affairs of the Church should be communicated to him and that the Appeals of these Causes should be reserv'd to him 'T is very probable that these two Articles are added In the third Letter Vigilius makes Answer to Caesarius Bishop of Arles about King Theodebert's Consulting him concerning the Penance which should be impos'd upon one who had married his Brother's Wife Vigilius had already written to the King that this Crime could not be expiated but by a great Penance But because 't is convenient that the Penance should be regulated by the Bishops upon the place since none but they can know the condition of the Penitent he commits this care to Caesarius with whom he leaves full power to regulate the Time and Order of this Penance But he admonishes him to require that he commit no more such things for the future and to hinder him and her who were thus married from dwelling together The fourth Letter is address'd to Justinian There he praises the Piety and Faith of this Emperor who had written to him that he would inviolably adhere to the Faith establish'd in the four General Councils and in the Letters of St. Celestin and St. Leo. He testifies to him that he is of the same Judgment and that he approves what his Predecessors Hormisdas John and Agapetus had done against the Hereticks and that he condemns the Persons whom they had condemn'd He recommends it to this Prince that he would maintain the Priviledges of the See of Rome which could not be attack'd without violating as one may say the Faith In the following Letter he congratulates Mennas for being of the same Judgment This is dated Sept. 17th 540. The sixth seventh and eighth Letters are address'd to Auxanius Bishop of Arles In the first he grants him the Pallium In the second he makes him his Vicar in the Kingdom of Childebert and annexes two Prerogatives to this Title The first is to examine and judge the Causes of the Bishops of this Kingdom provided notwithstanding that if any Causes of Faith or of difficult Matters happens they shall be reserv'd to the Decision of the Holy See The second is that no Bishop shall go out of his Country without taking Literae Formatae from him He exhorts him afterwards Caesarius Bishop of Arles to pray for Justinian and to preserve the Peace and good Understanding between King Childeber and the Emperor In the third Letter to Auxanius Vigilius commissions him to Judge the Affair of Pretextatus The first of these Letters is dated Octob. 18th 543 and the other two May 22th 545. The same day he wrote a fourth to the Bishops of the Kingdom of Childebert and to those who were accustomed to receive their Consecration from the Bishop of Arles wherein he gives them to understand that he had made Auxanius his Vicar and sets forth the Rights which he had granted him After the death of Auxanius he gave the same Title and the same Priviledges to his Successor Aurelianus as appears by the Letters ten and eleven written in 546. The other Letters and Treatises of Vigilius having a relation to the History of the fifth Council of which they make a part we shall reserve them to be spoken of upon that Head CAESARIUS Bishop of Arles CAesarius born at Chalons upon the River Sone a Monk and Abbot of Lerina and afterwards Bishop of Arles was one of the most famous Bishops of France in his time He was honour'd with divers Letters from the Popes who made him their Vicar He assisted at many Councils of France in which he caused very excellent and useful Canons to be made
Re-union or to assemble at Ravenna to enter upon a Conference there These Letters not prevailing with the Bishop of Aquileia and his Brethren to return to the Church Pelagius sent to them a third Letter larger then the former It was written by St. Gregory who was yet but a Deacon There he represents to these Bishops the Evils which cause the Schism and Division and afterwards resutes the Reasons which induc'd them to believe that Justinian had violated the Authority of the Council of Chalcedon by causing the three Chapters to be condemn'd He maintains that St. Leo did only approve the Articles of Faith defin'd by this Council and that perhaps he was deceiv'd as to Matter of Fact He answers to the Opposition that was made by Vigilius of the Occidentalists That it was no wonder if the Latins who did not perfectly understand Greek found it difficult to know the Errors of those Authors who were thought worthy of Condemnation But distrusting this Answer he brings the Example of St. Peter to excuse the Conduct of Vigilius and says That if this Holy Apostle chang'd his Opinion and Behaviour about the Observation of the Jewish Ceremonies it was not so much to be blam'd in Vigilius that he had chang'd his Judgment and Conduct in the Affair of the three Chapters This Comparison is of little force but that which follows has yet less Do we not read says he that God himself changes his Designs He uses afterwards the Testimony of St. Austin to show that the Dead may be anathematiz'd After this he proceeds to the Examination of the three Chapters He relates the passages of Theodorus of Mopsuesta which appear most agreeable to the Error of Nestorius and the Testimonies of the Holy Fathers who condemn it He shows That the Letter of Ibas reproaches St. Cyril and the Council of Ephesus and that it favours the Error of Nestorius He adds That the Bishops of the Council of Chalcedon did not approve it and that tho they had done it yet the Matters of Faith ending in the sixth Action of this Council what was done afterwards had not the same Authority Lastly he says about the third Chapter That all the Writings of Theodoret are not condemn'd but only those which are compos'd against St. Cyril In fine in answer to the favourable Testimonies which John of Antioch may have given to Theodorus he observes That the Fathers oftentimes praise Hereticks and quotes particularly those who commend Origen He concludes with exhorting the Bishops of Istria to reconcile themselves to the other Orthodox Bishops and prays God to inspire them with the desire and love of Peace to which he exhorts them These are the true Letters of Pelagius In the three last the style of Gregory who succeeded him may be discern'd Eulogius There are in Ivo of Chartres and in Gratian some Decrees attributed to Pelagius which are printed in the fifth Tome of the Councils p. 954 955 and 956. They appear to me to be ancient and genuine In the first he wishes that Monks may not be chosen for a Guard to the Church because the discharge of that Office is very different from the Monkish Life A Monk should live in quiet and employ himself in Prayer and Working with his Hands all which are very remote from his Employment who is entrusted with the Affairs of the Church And therefore it is more convenient to promote an old Monk to the Priesthood then to make him one of the Guards In the second he allows That a Man may be ordain'd Deacon who having left his Wife had Children by a Maid-servant without espousing her altho it be against the Laws and the Canons meerly upon the account of the want of such as were dispos'd to be Clergy-men He ordains also That this Maid-servant shall be put into a Monastery to make there Profession of Continence The third is about the Election of a Bishop The fourth forbids the Bishops of Sicily to exact more then two shillings of the Parishes of Sicily The fifth and sixth require that Ecclesiasticks should still be judg'd by Ecclesiastical Judges according to the Civil Laws EULOGIUS EUlogius who sate in the See of the Church of Alexandria from the Year 581 to the Year 608 was well vers'd in Ecclesiastical Matters and wrote many Books The Bibliotheque of Photius has preserv'd to us the Memory and Arguments of them In Vol. 182 and 208 he speaks of six Books of this Author against Novatus or rather against Novatian but the Greeks always confound these two Persons and were very little inform'd in their History This appears by what this Author relates He says that Novatus was Arch deacon of the Church of Rome under Pope Cornelius that he was to succeed him according to the custom of that Church that Cornelius having observ'd that Novatus was too proud and discover'd that he had a Design upon his Life had Ordain'd him Priest on purpose to take from him all hopes of arriving at the Bishoprick of Rome That he in revenge had taken occasion to separate from him because Cornelius admitted to the Communion of the Holy Mysteries those who had fall'n into Crimes after they had been punish'd with a Penance proportionable to the greatness of their Sin That he accus'd him of receiving Sinners and that he became the Head of a Party who were call'd Cathari or Puritans Eulogius opposes this Allegation of Novatus in the four first Books of his Work In the fifth he defends the Veneration due to the Reliques of the Saints which the greater part of the Novatians of Alexandria could not approve In the last he opposes the Writings of the Novatians and particularly that which was entitled The Dispute of Bishop Novatus a Work very contemptible for its manner of writing and the Matters contain'd in it For it relates that under the Empire of Decius the Officer Perennius had forc'd many Christians by the violence of Torments to worship Idols That Macedonius Bishop of Rome had sacrific'd and was follow'd in so doing by nine Priests of the Church of Rome That Novatus was the only Person who refus'd and upon this occasion he recites what he had answer'd to the Judge 'T is pretended that many Bishops joyn'd with Novatus and separated from those who had fall'n into Idolatry and lastly that the Bishops of Alexandria did not acknowledge him for Bishop Eulogius refutes these Fables in his third Book Photius assures us That the style of this Author is indifferently exact as to words but altogether barbarous as to construction but that his Work is useful that he explains very well the passages of Scripture which fully confute the Error of his Adversaries and lastly that it is pleasant and persuasive He speaks also of some other Works of Eulogius in Vol. 225 and 226. The first is a Treatise divided into two Books which contain an Apology for the Letter of St. Leo and the Accusation of Timothy and Severus who
Pope Vigilius and to the Patriarchs of Alexandria of Antioch and Jerusalem He subjoyns to this Letter the Propositions extracted out of Origen and nine Anathematisms against the preceding Errors together with a tenth against the Person of Origen He wrote also at the same time another Letter to the Bishops who were to assemble wherein he exhorts them to read his Letter to condemn the Errors which he had related in it and to anathematize Origen and all those who are of his Judgment in these things Menas having receiv'd this Letter call'd an Assembly at Constantinople where the Emperor's Orders were exactly obey'd as appears by the Synod's Letter to the Emperor reported by Evagrius B. 4. of his Hist. ch 38. Theodorus of Caesarea out of hatred to whom Pelagius resolv'd to procure the Condemnation of Origen thought it his best way to be reveng'd to make use of a like Artifice He was of the Sect of the Acephali i. e. of the Eutychian Opinions and an Enemy to the Council of Chalcedon The Empress Theodora favour'd this Party but the Emperor Justinian would have the Decrees of the Council of Chalcedon put in execution and prepared to publish an Edict against the Acephali Theodorus of Caesarea being desirous to avoid this Blow and at the same time to be reveng'd for what was done against Origen represented to Justinian That it was needless to make an Edict against them assuring him that they would all be re-united and approve the Council of Chalcedon if he would give order to Anathematize Theodorus of Mopsuesta and his Writings to condemn the Writings of Theodoret against St. Cyril and the Letter of Ibas which was read in the Council of Chalcedon Theodorus of Caesarea had two designs in making this Proposal The first was to be reveng'd on those who had procured the Condemnation of Origen by causing Theodorus of Mopsuesta to be Anathematiz'd also who had written against him and was hated of the Origenists The second was to weaken the Authority of the Council of Chalcedon by causing those Persons and Writings to be condemn'd which it seem'd to have approved The Emperor who did not penetrate into the depth of these Designs imagining that he might do much good to the Church in procuring the reconciliation of many Persons by condemning three dead Writers whose Reputation was very doubâ—ful made no scruple to promise Theodorus what he desir'd But he fearing lest the Emperor who was naturally inconstant should change his Resolution when he should foresee the Scandal which this Undertaking would produce did cunningly ingage him to publish an Edict containing a Condemnation of the three Articles we have just now mention'd which were afterwards so famous under the Name of the three Chapters This Edict was publish'd toward the end of the Year 545 and is related after the Acts of the fifth Council p. 683. 'T is entituled The Emperor Justinian's Confession of Faith against the three Chapters and address'd to the Assembly of the Catholick and Apostolick Church 'T is indeed a very large Exposition of Faith which the Emperor proposes to all the World endeavouring to re-unite all Sects to the true Faith First He explains in a few words the Doctrine of the Church concerning the Trinity but he enlarges very much upon the Mystery of the Incarnation which he does very exactly explain rejecting all the contrary Errors and chiefly those of the Nestorians and Eutychians He subjoyns to it Anathematisms for condemning them yet more formally He pronounces an Anathema against Arius Eunomius Macedonius Apollinarius Nestorius and Eutyches If he had stop'd there his Edict had been very useful and had not been the cause of any Disturbance But he adds lastly three other Anathematisms one against the Doctrine and Person of Theodorus of Mopsuesta another against the Writings of Theodoret and the last against the Letter of Ibas to Maris Persanus Now since these three last Anathematisms were the moving Cause which made Justinian undertake to publish this Confession of Faith it is not to be wondred that he endeavours to justifie them First he labours to prove that the Council of Chalcedon did not approve the Letter of Ibas and that it was impious Afterwards he proceeds to Theodorus of Mopsuesta and because many scrupled to Condemn him upon the account of his being dead he endeavours to show that the Dead may be anathematized This he proves 1. Because the Church has many times anathematized Hereticks after their death 2. Because the Council of Constantinople anathematized Arius and Macedonius by name whom the Council of Nice had not nam'd 3. Because the Church of Mopsuesta had already remov'd out of the Diptychs the name of Theodorus 4. Because Theodorus having taught an impious Doctrine could not be partaker of the Kingdom of Heaven and consequently ought to be anathematized He adds That Damasus and the Bishops of Sardica had anathematized the Bishops who departed from the Faith of the Nicene Council the Dead as well as the Living that the Council of Chalcedon had condemn'd Domnus after his death for believing only that he must not speak of the twelve Chapters of St. Cyril that besides it was not true that St. Cyril had prais'd Theodorus of Mopsuesta but on the contrary he had condemn'd him that tho he should have prais'd him yet this would noâ— justifie him since many Fathers have commended Hereticks as St. Athanasius and St. Basil who wrote in praise of Apollinarius and St. Leo who praised Eutyches before they knew of their Impiety That the Letter of St. Gregory Nazianzene to Theodorus is not to him of Mopsuesta but to him of Tyana in Cappadocia Lastly That the practice of the African Church authorizes the Condemnation of the Dead That St. Austin had declar'd That if Caecilian were found guilty of the Crimes whereof he was accused that he would pronounce an Anathema against him tho he died in the Communion of the Church and that it was ordain'd in a Synod of Africa That the Catholicks who should leave their Possessions to a Heretick should be anathematized even after their death That Dioscorus had been anathematiz'd by the Roman Church after his death tho he had done nothing contrary to the Faith but only to the Discipline of the Church That if an impious Person dying in his Impiety could not be anathematized then the Anathema pronounc'd against an innocent Person if he died under it could not be revok'd and yet the contrary was very justly practised with respect to St. John Chrysostom Justinian did not only make this Edict but would have it approv'd in a Synod of Bishops and that it might have the more Authority he caused one to be assembled at Constantinople to which he addressed the Letter which is in Greek after the Edict of Justinian In it he testifies That the Emperors have always taken care to procure the Condemnation of Heresies and to maintain the Faith and Peace of the Church by calling Councils He brings
St. Gregory 100 R RHeims Vicaracy granted to St. Reâ—â— Archbishop of Rheims by the Pope Hâ—rmisdâ—s 10 Relicks The true Crolâ— 5. Veneration due to Relicks 87. Filings of the Chains of St. Peter and St. Paul ibid. Relicks used in the Consecration of Churches ibid. Their Honour defended by Eulâ—gius 66. They ought not to be put in Chappels where they cannot be honoured 116. Proof of them made by putting them in the fire 160 Repentance and Penance Remission of sins not to be obtained but in this Life and in the Church 15 and in making a true Repentance 16. Repentance useless out of the Church 19. How Remission ought to be demanded and to whom granted 111. True Repentance consists in sinning no morâ— 74. Rules concerning Repentance 156. The Benediction of Penance granted to one on his Death-bed hinders not but that afterwards he must do Penance 115. It is not permitted to the Priest to give the Benediction to the Penitent 112. Those that forsake it punished 113. Death-bed Repentance not useless to all the World but serves nothing to those that return to their Irregularities 4 5. Penance of Clerks for divers sins 74 84 116 127 Clerks fallen into the sin of Incontinence may be restored 118. Those that abandon Penance excommunicated 116 128. Absolution not to berefused to any at Death 117. The Resolution of a Bishop to make a Man do Penance that had abused a young Woman 6 Regulation of the Names of the Clergy of England described by Gildas 64 Ecclesiastical Revenues Use that ought to be made of them 81 92 113 148 Rogatiâ—â—s Institution of Rogations 6. When and how they ought to be celebrated 114 115 Rome The Jurisdiction of the Holy See over Illyrium established 122 Bishop of Rome Primacy of the Church and Bishops of Rome in what it consists 76. Authority of the Pope in Ecclesiastical Judgments ibid. His Authority over the Bishops of the Vicariate 77. Respectful Terms to the Pope 5. He is called Bishop of the Universal Church ibid. He cannot be judged by his Inferiors according to the Opinion of Avitus 5. Priviledges of the Bishops of Rome inviolable 48. Priviledges of the Pope not to be judged by a Council if it be not assembled by his Authority 9. A Paradoxal Proposition that a Pope became holy ibid. Rusticus Deacon of Rome Of his Writings and his Opinions 56 S SAbinus Bishop of Lanusa wrought Miracles 99 Sacrifice of the Altar It is not only offer'd to the Father but to the Word also 15 Schism of the Church of Rome after the Death of Anastasius 1. c. Council of Rome against Schismaticks 108. Another Schism after the death of Felix IV. between Boniface and Dioscorus 30. Another Schism between Silverus and Vigilius 46 Holy Scripture Rules and Critical Reflections upon the Canonical Books 57. Catalogue of the Canonical Books ibid. Severus of Antioch His Ordination and Deposition 132. He divides the Eutychians ibid. Anathematized in the Council under Mennas 133. His Error and his Writings 27 Severus Priest raised one dead 99 Severus Bishop of Malaga Author of a Treatise against Vincent an Arian 104 Sees Apostolick Their Consideration 78 Silverus Pope His Election was made with Freedom 46. His Persecution and Death 47. His Letters supposititious ibid. Simony It is forbidden to take any thing for holy things 161. It is forbid to demand Money for Ordination or other holy things 125 151. It is forbidden in all its parts 82 Slaves Regulation to hinder Christian Slaves from serving Jews 87. Regulation concerning the Christian Slaves belonging to Jews 130. Forbidden to be made Clerks without permission of their Masters ibid. Souls Spiritual Souls 100. State of the Souls after Death ibid. Divers apparitions of Souls ibid. A fabulous History of the Soul of Trajan 102. Question concerning the Original of Souls undecided 18. What we ought to believe of the Nature of the Soul ibid. They act and appear after death 105 Stephen of Larissa Acts of the Council held at Rome upon his Affair 122. Agapetus would that his Cause be instructed by his Legats 31 Another Stephen Accused of Incest and Condemned by the Council of Lyons 117 Symmachus His Ordination 1. Contested by Lawrence ibid. Confirmed ibid. His Letters 2 3. Accused and absolved 2. His Apology 3. Supposititious Letter 3. His Absolution forbidden by Ennodius 8. Councils held upon occasion of this Pope and under him 108 T TEtradius hath written a Rule for Monks 51 Tetradia Wife of Eulalius Count of Auvergne Her History 158 Theft In what manner it ought to be punished 92. Theft in a Clerk punished 111 Theodorus of Mopsuestia His Writings defended 53 Abstracts of his Works alledged against him in the fifth Council 141. Authorities alledg'd against him ibid. Inquest made against him ibid. Accusations and Invectives against his memory 60 Theodorus the Reader His Writings 27 Theodoret. Defence of his Doctrine and his Person 53. Letter attributed to this Author against St. Cyril 142. His Writings defended 146. Concerning an Image of Theodoret carried about with pomp 144 Theodoricus Labours to appease the Schism of Lawrence 1. He names a Visitor to the Church of Rome 2 Theology The true Principles of Divinity 13 Three Chapters By whom and upon what design invented 131. Condemned by Justinian ibid. by a Council 137. Commotions which followed excited by Vigilius 138. Council held at Constantinople upon that occasion 139. Justinian's Letter to the Council against the Three Chapters ibid. The Council send for Vigilius 140. Examin the Question in his absence 141. The Transaction of that Affair 140 c. to 143. Vigilius defends them by Writing 143. Judgment of the fifth Council by which they condemned the Three Chapters 144. Vigilius approves the Condemnation 145. Pelagius pursues the Execution of this Decree ibid. Impartial Judgment upon the whole Affair 145 146. Defence of the Three Chapters by Facundus 53. Defence of the Three Chapters 22. Against the Defenders of the Three Chapters 89. Admonitions to the Bishops of Istria who were separated by reason of the Condemnation of the Three Chapters 65. The Condemnation of the Three Chapters maintained against them ibid. The Bishops of Istria and others Condemned for separating themselves upon the Affair of the Three Chapters 59 Timothy Aelurus His History 132 Traditions The Church hath its Traditions which are not in Scripture 68 Trifolius His Life and Writings 24 Trisagion Addition to the Trisagion 4 34 Trinity Scholastical Explication of this Mystery by Boetius 26. Divinity of the Three Persons of the Trinity 18. If the Three Persons of the Trinity are separable 20. Why we say that the Son Reigns with the Father in the Unity of the Spirit ibid. Rusticus says that it is uncertain if the Holy Ghost from the Son 56. Agnellus assures the contrary 59 Trojanus Bishop of Saintones His Letter 50 V VIctor Capuensis His Writings 55 Victor Turmonensis His Chronicle 58 Vicar Bishop of Rheims made Vicar of Gallia by Pope
is evident that he was not Bishop of Constantinople when the Council began no Author says He was Deposed or Expelled for that Heresie neither is it probable that it was the cause of his leaving his See seeing George who was put in his room was also a Monothelite Secondly Put the case Theodorus had been condemned by the Council how is it likely that he durst have ventured to falsifie the Acts of the Council it self And tho' he durst do it it had been enough for him to cross out his own Name without substituting that of Honorius and put even the case he could have taken that resolution can it be thought that he could have brought it about How could he falsifie all the Copies of the Acts of this Council sent out to all the Patriarchal Sees How could he bring the Emperor the other Patriarchs and all the Bishops to consent to this Cheat Why did not the Legates and the Popes complain of this falsification Why did they acknowledge after that Honorius was condemned in the 6th Council Why did they not discover this Imposture by the Copy of the Acts of the Council which the Deputy of the Holy See brought and which the Popes Agatho's Successors communicated to the Western Bishops and which he sent into Spain If they were corrupted when he brought them why did he suffer that Corruption And why did the Popes use them If they were not corrupted why did they not use them to discover the Fraud of the Enemies of the Holy See Thirdly Honorius is found condemned in some places where they could not have spoken of Theodorus In the 13th Action his Letter to Sergius is particularly censured as contrary to the Apostolick Doctrine and the Definitions of the Councils It cannot be said this was spoken of Theodorus In the 14th Action his Letter to Sergius is again condemned as perfectly agreeable to the Doctrines of the Hereticks In the 18th Action his Letter is condemned to be burnt as containing the same Heresie and Impieties as the other Writings of the Monothelites In the same Session he is condemned together with Sergius Anathema to Sergius and Honorius and after Anathema to Pyrrhus and Paul If Theodorus's Name had been put in the room of Honorius's they would not have placed him before Pyrrhus and Paul but after them Lastly He is almost every where called Bishop of Rome All this shews there is nothing more unwarrantable than Baronius's conjecture Fourthly 'T is a plain matter of Fact that Honorius was condemned in the 6th Council And of this we have proofs more than sufficient The Council it self owns it in its Letter to the Pope the Emperor in his Edict declares it Agatho who was one of the Notaries testifieth it in a relation which is in the end of a Manuscript of the 6th Council Leo the Second Agatho's Successor asserts it in Three of his Letters the whole Church of Rome acknowledges it in the forms of the Oath which the Popes newly Elected are to take and in her Ancient Liturgy the Two General Councils following look upon this condemnation as true Lastly No Body ever questioned it and consequently Baronius's fancy must pass for a matchless piece of rashness You will yet be more sensible of it when you shall see the weakness of the proofs whereon he founds his bold conjecture The first is a place of Pope Agatho's Letter which says the Apostolick Church of Rome did never swerve from the way of the Truth and that his Predecessors did always confirm the Faith of their Brethren This Letter says he having been read and approved in the Council how is it likely that after this they durst have condemned one of Agatho's Predecessors as an Heretick or favourer of Heresie If this Popes Letter had contained but that one point or it had been read in the Council to justifie Honorius this Objection might have some strength But this being said but by the by in Agatho's Letter containing a long Exposition of the Faith of the Catholick Church and a very great number of the Fathers Testimonies and Reasons against the Error of the Monothelites and the Council having caused it to be read on purpose only to know the Doctrine of the Holy See and the Western Churches It is evident their approbation does not fall upon this particular place of his Letter but upon the Exposition of Faith and the Doctrine it contained And tho' we should suppose that the Council had taken notice of the Commendation which Agatho maketh of his Church and his Predecessors and had perceived that it was not absolutely and strictly true they ought not upon this account to have refused their approbation of his Letter nor excepted against this place of it It were a silly thing to imagine that a Council called to decide a Question of Faith should busie it self to wrangle about a Commendation slipt in by the Pope in his Letter in behalf of his Predecessors But Pope Agatho's praises of his Predecessors in general ought not to be taken in a strict sense for if we understand them so all the World will see that they cannot be true because it cannot be denied but Liberius and Honorius did but weakly defend the Faith as well as tolerate Error they must then be understood in general of almost all Agatho's Predecessors and not of all in particular so that no exception could be made to it Besides it were an easie thing to retort Baronius's Argument upon himself For if the commendations of Agatho's Letter ought to be taken strictly as also the Council's approbation of it so that it was not lawful for them to condemn those whose Religion and Piety he commends How durst Baronius charge the Emperor Justinian with Heresie Perfidiousness and Impiety since he is commended in Agatho's Letter as a most Religious Orthodox and Godly Prince whose Memory is had in Veneration among all Nations But I stand too long upon so weak an Objection He makes one more which is not harder to solve How is it possible saith he that the Pope's Legates who were present in this Council should say nothing to vindicate Honorius But why would he have them to engage in a bad cause Honorius had approved Sergius's Letter had consented that they should speak neither of One nor of Two Operations had asserted but One Will in Christ had silenced Sophronius who would have defended the Faith These Facts were evident by the very reading of his Letter there is enough for his condemnation and they could not stand up in his defence without furnishing their Adversaries with Arms. The same Reasons which they should have used to justifie him might have been urged also to justifie Sergius and the rest therefore in forsaking Honorius they took the right course they did the same thing in the Roman Council under Martin the 1st for when they read Paul's Synodical Letter who defends his own Error by the Authority of Honorius neither the Pope nor any of
he did busie himself about it in the West more than Irene had done in the East In the 15th Chapter he answers this Objection They Honour the Statues Medals and Pictures of Princess why shall they not Honour those of Christ and the Saints He answers it I say by maintaining that the former ought not to be Honoured In the 16th Chapter he answers another Reason of the Council that the Honour of the Image passeth to that which is represented by it He says first of all that he cannot apprehead how a Cloth and some Colours have any Relation to 〈◊〉 St. in Heaven that it is not so with Pictures as with Relicks which have a natural relation to the Saints that it depends upon the Painters Fancy to make folks believe that a Picture represents a Saint or a false God He asks whether those that have most resemblance deserve more Honour than those of a more precious matter He says that if the latter 't is then the matter that they Respect and if the former it seems an unjust thing to prefer them before those that are more valuable Lastly he confesses that the Learn'd may indeed Honour Images without any abuse by referring the Honour not to what they are but to what they signifie but he believes that they can be nothing else but a cause of Offence and a stumbling block to the ignorant who Reverence and Adore nothing but what they see from whence he concludes it 's better quite to Abolish the use of them This shews that the dispute between the Greeks and the French was not so much a dispute about Doctrine as practice In the 17th Ch. he condemns an expression of Constantiu's Bishop of Cyprus but it was badly Translated for whereas that Bishop had said that he Honoured Images and Adored the Trinity he maketh him say that he Honoured Images with the Honour due to the Trinity So it 's an Error of Fact In the following Chapters he reproves the Opinions of some Bishops In the 21st he derides the instance Polemon's of Picture The two next Chapters are against the Praises given to the Art of Painting In the 24th he pretends there 's no comparison to be made between the Relicks of Saints and their Images In the 25th he says That the Miracles done by Images are no Argument that they are to be Adored for then Thorn-Busnes should be Adored because God spake to Moses out of a burning Bush Fringes should be Adored because Jesus Christ healed the Woman with the bloody Flux by the Fringe of his Garment and shadows too because St. Peter's Shadow wrought Miracles In the 26th he Laughs at Theodâ—sius Bishop of Myra who had related his Arch-Deacons Dreams to Authorize Image-Worship In the 30th Ch. he confutes several Proofs alledged by the Cooncil because they were taken of Apocryhal Histories In the 31st He taxeth with Impiety and Folly the Answer of that Abbot who told a Monk it was better to frequent Bawdy-Houses than not to Adore the Images of Jesus Christ and the Virgin In the last Book he goes on to confute some Expressions of the Council and of particular Men in the Council He maintains no wax Candles ought to be Lighted nor Incense to be burnt before Images because they are senseless He cannot endure that the Council should compare those who do not Adore Images to Hereticks He taketh it ill that they should thus abuse their Predecessors confessing nevertheless that these last were to blame for burning and destroying Images He rejects the Story of Christ's Image sent to Abgarus as a mere Fable He makes no great reckoning of another Story of a Monk who had set up a Lamp before an Image which burnt several days He adds that tho' those Miracles were true it would not follow from thence that Images were to be Adored Lastly having deâ—ided them for many of their Arguments he maintains that that Synod was to blame for assuming the Title of Universal because whatever is Universal ought to be conformable to the Tradition and Practice of all the Churches Thus says he if it fall out that the Bishops of two or three Provinces meet together and that according to the Authority of Tradition they Establish some Doctrine or make some Rule agreeable to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Ancient Church what they do is Catholick and their Council may be called Universal because thô it be not composed of the Bishops of all the parts of the World what it does is agreeable to the Faith and Tradition of the whole Church but contrarywise if they go about to Establish some Novelty what they do is not Catholic In a word whatsoever is Ecclesiastical is Catholick and whatsoever is Catholick is Universal all that is Universal is not New Thus the Synod we speak of being contrary to the Sentiments of the Universal Church we cannot own it for Universal These Books were brought to Rome and presented to Pope Adrian by Engilbert Charles's Ambassador The Pope who maintain'd the Council having received them thought himself bound to Answer them by a Writing directed to Charles the Great himself First of all he Vindicates the Expressions of Tarasius and the other Greeks about the Holy Ghost by some passages of the Fathers which have spoken after the same manner supposing those Greeks did not differ from the Roman Church about the Procession of the Holy Ghost Then he defends the passages of the Scripture the Reasons Authorities and Histories alledged by the Synod and censured in the Caroline Books but his Answers are but weak He pretends that St. Gregory taught in his Letter to Secundinus that Images deserved some Worship He cites some passages out of the Fathers upon almost every Article but he maketh such Applications of several of them that very few would approve of and he vindicates some Reasonings that some could hardly Relish But about the end having reported all the Testimonies of St. Gregory he expresseth himself about Image-Worship after a manner which cannot be possibly condemned for he says that Images are not Reverenced but so far forth as they raise up our mind to God and that whosoever Prostrate himself before Christ's Image 't is God whom he Adores that likewise we show our Love and Affection to the Saint by the means of his Images He adds that the Nicene Synod having Established this Doctrine and rejected the false Synod which would have quite abolished Images he had received it as a Legitimate and Catholic Synod that nevertheless he had not yet written an Answer to the Emperor lest he should relaps into the Error of his Predecessors which he fear'd so much the more because writing to him to Exhort him to restore Images he had also demanded of him the Restitution of the Diocesses of the Church of Rome and of the Patrimonies also belonging to it but had received no Answer from him Wherefore he says that if Charles will give him leave in his Answer to the Greek
thought that the principal Regard ought to be had to the Text of the Gospel for fear it should cause a Scandal in the Church of God if the Opinions of the Fathers should not be well understood or the Passages taken out of them should be corrupted That it was after this manner that the disturbance which happen'd at Tours in the Presence of Gerald and in the same City in the presence of Hildebrand was appeas'd and that this Plague which began to spread it self afresh had been stop'd by the Command of the Prince and by the Authority of the Arch-bishop of Besanzon That thereupon he had taken up a Resolution to hold no more Conferences nor to enter into any Dispute upon that Subject and that he would never give his Consent for the holding of any Assembly upon that Affair That if any such should be holden he would not be at it That he would not give Audience to the Disputants and would exclude such as continu'd obstinate from the Communion because this Business had been determin'd thrice in the Province and four times by the Sentence of the Holy See At last Gregory VII willing to put an end to what he had begun whilst Legat cited Berenger to a Council held at Rome in December 1078. and gave him time to consider what The Council of Rome in 1078. under Gregory vii against Berenger he had to do till the next Council which was held the next Year in February Berenger did still adhere to his Opinion and maintain'd it very vigorously Bruno afterwards Bishop of Signi and Abbot Wolphelmus oppos'd him The Question was debated between them for three Days and at last Berenger was forc'd to make his Recantation drawn up in these Terms I Berenger believe in my Heart and confess with my Mouth That the Bread and Wine which are upon the Altar are substantially chang'd by the Mystery of the Priest and by the Words of our Saviour into the true proper and quickening Body and Blood of our The second Profession of Faith made by Berenger Lord JESUS CHRIST which came out of his Side And not only figuratively and by virtue of the Sacrament but truly properly and substantially according to the Intention of these Presents and as I have read and you understand it This is my Faith contrary to which I will not for the future broach any Doctrin So help me God and the Holy Evangelists After this the Pope conjur'd Berenger by the Almighty God and by the Holy Apostles S. Peter and S. Paul never to dispute again with any Person about the Body and Blood of JESUS CHRIST unless to undeceive those on whom he had impos'd Upon this Declaration he granted Berenger a Letter directed to the Arch-bishop of Tours and to the Bishop of Anger 's wherein he declar'd to them That he had taken Berenger into his Protection and enjoin'd them to defend him against Fulcus Richinus the Count of Anger 's who bore him an ill Will and against all his Enemies He likewise granted him a Bull which excommunicates those who should attempt any thing against his Person or Estate or should call him Heretick These Favours granted by Gregory VII to Berenger gave an Occasion to the Bishops who exhibited a Decree against this Pope in a Council held at Bresse in the Year 1080. to accuse him of being a Disciple or at least a Favourer of that Heretick But this Charge against this Pope was groundless and unjust since he had not entertain'd Berenger till after he had abjur'd his Heresy Tho' perhaps he was too easy in giving Credit to the Words of so unconstant a Man In Truth it appears that Berenger did persist in teaching his Heresy since he was forc'd to appear at a Council held at Bordeaux The Council of Bordeaux in 1080. against Berenger in the Year 1080. by Hugh the Pope's Legat at first Bishop of Dia and afterwards Arch-bishop of Lions and there to give an Account of his Faith as 't is recorded in the Chronicon of S. Maixant This is the last Scene wherein Berenger appear'd He spent the rest of his Life in the Isle of S. Cosmus near the City of Tours to which Place he retir'd after the Council of Rome and dy'd there Jan. 6. 1088. An ancient Author to be met with in the Library of Fleury William of Malmsbury Of Berenger's Repentance Matthew of Paris Vincent of Beauvais and several other more modern Authors tell us That Berenger was a real Convert and that he died a sincere Penitent being heartily sorry for having infected so many with his Error Clarius a Monk of Fleury and the Authors of the Chronicon of S. Peter the Lively of Sens and of the Chronicon of S. Martin of Tours speak very much in his Praise We have likewise two noble Epitaphs made in his Praise the one by Baudry Abbot of Bourgneil and afterwards Bishop of Dol and the other by Hildebert Arch-deacon of Mans who was afterwards Bishop of that City and at last Arch-bishop of Tours In a Word his Memory is still had in veneration at Tours where they say that the Prebendaries of S. Martins have a Custom of paying him their Respects every Year 'T is probable that these Authors who believe the real Presence would never have bestow'd so many Encomiums on Berenger if they had not been fully convinc'd of his Conversion And yet we find that Lanfrank in his Fiftieth Letter written since the Year 1080. to Reginald Abbot of S. Cyprian of Poitiers and the anonymous Author of a Treatise written in the Year 1088. and publish'd by Father Chifflet speak of him still as an Heretick without mentioning his Conversion in the least We find that after his return from Rome he was oblig'd to give an Account of his Faith to the Council of Bordeaux But that which raises the greatest cause of suspecting his Conversion is That after his second Return from Rome to France he compos'd a Treatise in opposition to his last Profession of Faith as Father Mabillon who had seen the Manuscript assures us The which being joined to the Testimony of Berthol Priest of Constance who says positively That Berenger had not chang'd his Opinion seems to destroy all that has been said about his Repentance or at least shews that it was very late and that he did not change his Opinion till a little before his Death Notwithstanding his Retractations and Repentance several of his Followers persisted in The Followers of Berenger their Error but by degrees this Heresie was extirpated One Anastasius a Monk of S. Sergius of Anger 's was forc'd to abjure it and to deliver a Profession of his Faith to Gerald Abbot of S. Aubin of that City related by Father Luke Dachery in his Notes upon the Life of Lanfrank The Fathers of the Council of Placentia in the Year 1095. condemn'd the Heresie of Berenger afresh And lastly Bruno Arch-bishop of Treves drove out of
In the Twenty Fourth he Commends Gilbert Bishop of London for living Poor whilst he enjoy'd so considerable a Benefice It is no great wonder says he That Gilbert is a Bishop but it is somewhat extraordinary that a Bishop of London should live so meanly The exalted Dignity of his Episcopacy could not augment the Glory of so great a Man when his humble Poverty has not a little advanc'd him To undergo want patiently is the effect of an ordinary Virtue but to court it voluntarily is the Sign of a great Soul In the Twenty Fifth he exhorts Hugh Arch-Bishop of Roan to Patience and to temper his Zeal by Charity A Bishop says he must not only be Patient that he may not be overcome by Evil but he must be also a Peace-maker to surmount the Evil with Good insomuch that he ought to support even the Wicked and Reform them that he supports Be you therefore Patient because you are amongst Wicked Men and a Peace-maker that you may be able to govern ill-doers Let your Charity be full of Zeal but let your severity be tempered with Reason The Twenty Sixth is a Letter to Guy Bishop of Lausane which Comprehends in few Words the necessary Qualifications and Virtues requir'd in a Bishop You have says he to him undertaken a difficult Task you need therefore to have force to go through it You have took upon you to watch over Israel you ought to have a great deal of Prudence You expose your self both to Fools and Wise Men therefore Justice is likewise necessary and in a word you will have occasion for Temperance to moderate your Passion upon the greatest Provocations The Twenty Seventh and Twenty Eighth contain much the like instructions to Arduition Bishop of Geneva In the Twenty Ninth he congratulates Stephen Bishop of Mets upon the Peace restored to his Church In the Thirtieth he exhorts Alberon of Mets to wait patiently for the execution of an affair which he was treating about with his Bishop These two Letters were written after the Year 1126. In the Thirty First he congratulates Hugh Count of Champaigne on his being made a Knight of Jerusalem of the Cross. This Count was the first founder of the Abby of Clairvaux which occasions St. Bernard to say that he can never forget the great Friendship he has for him on account of his Noble Beneficence to his Monastery The Thirty Second is address'd to Joran Abbot of St. Nicaise of Rheims who complained that the Order of Cisteaux had received into their Fraternity one of his Monks call'd Dreux St. Bernard gives him to understand that he does not approve of such a Proceeding and that if that Monk had asked his Advice he should not have counsell'd him to such an Action and that he would not have receiv'd him himself had he been Abbot of that Monastery He likewise acquaints Joran that he partakes of his Concern and would assist him to his Power but that he was able to do nothing more than to write to the Abbot of Cisteaux to restore the said Monk He moreover counsels him not to take that matter so much to Heart but to submit freely to the good pleasure of God and suppress his just Indignation The Let ters of St. Bernard by the example of a certain Saint who being sollicited to look after a stray'd Monk answer'd I shall not do it for if he be a good Christian whereever he be he is still mine St. Bernard adds further that he himself had made use of the Counsel which he gave for that having had a near Relation receiv'd by the Monastery of Cluny against his Will though he is sensibly griev'd for his Loss yet is he resolved to rest satisfy'd praying both for the Monks that they would restore him and for the Person himself that God would give him Grace to return This shews plainly that this Letter was written before Robert's return about the Year 1120. Although St. Bernard had thus written to the Abbot of St. Nicaise nevertheless his Opinion was not that this Monk was obliged to return to his Cloyster therefore having written before to Hugh Abbot of Pontigni that had receiv'd this Monk that he thought him obliged to restore him he was forc'd to write a second letter to undeceive him whereby he signified that it was never his Intention to advise him to give up this Monk but that on the contrary he commended what he had done and likewise congratulated him in it But having been powerfully sollicited by the Arch-bishop of Rheims and by an Abbot who was one of that Monks Friends he could not prevent writing that Letter and requesting what he feared should come to pass He believed at the same time that he had given some umbrage of his meaning by writing at the end of his Letter that if he chose rather to suffer Displeasure than to release this Monk he might do as he pleas'd but that for his part he would have no manner of hand in it In fine he tells him that he did him a great deal of wrong to suspect that he had a mind to seduce this Monk to his own Monastery In the Thirty Fourth he congratulates this Monk on the Resolution he had taken and exhorts him to persevere in it The Thirty Fifth is address'd to Hugh Farsite Abbot of St. John of Chartres whom he desires to recommend the cause of Humbert to the Count of Chartres He withal assures him that he has not burnt the Letter which he sent him although there were strange Notions in it concerning the Sacraments Hereupon this Abbot wrote him an Answer to this effect That he had forgot that he had given him any cause of Concern but having sent him a right Orthodox Confession of Faith St. Bernard makes known to him by the Thirty Sixth Letter that he esteemed him a very good Catholick and that he verily believes he gave wrong Sentiments of his Mind He counsels him moreover not to injure the Memory of a Holy Bishop with whom he never had any difference whilst he liv'd In the Thirty Seventh Thirty Eighth Thirty Ninth Forty and Forty First St. Bernard recommends several things to Thibaud Count of Champagne The Forty Second written to Henry Arch-Bishop of Sens is to be found among St. Bernard's Opuscula In the Forty Third and Forty Fourth he desires that Arch-bishop to do Justice to the Abby of Molesme concerning what he claim'd from the Church of Sevan which belonged to that Abby The Forty Fifth Letter is written in the name of the Abbot and the whole Order of Cisteaux to Lewis the Gross King of France concerning his persecuting of Stephen Bishop of Paris He makes them speak to this King with a great deal of freedom and declare that if His Majesty did not think fit to do Justice to this Bishop they would assuredly write to the Pope about it This King not having made satisfaction to the Bishop of Pariâ— The Arch-Bishop pronounc'd a Suspension
still put off the Meeting to Munday next being the 2d Day of March In this Session and the five following John the Theologue for the Latins and Mark of Ephesus for the Greeks disputed earnestly concerning the Procession of the Holy Spirit and after they had long contested concerning the Sense of divers Passages of the Greek Fathers each remain'd of his own Opinion without agreeing in any thing The Greek Emperor perceiving plainly That these Disputes were so far from procuring Union that they rather serv'd to exasperate their Spirits call'd his Prelats together to engage them to find out some Temper by means of which an Union might be concluded and he believ'd that he had found out an Expedient by remarking that John the Divine had said That the Father was the sole Cause of the Son and of the Holy Spirit The Greeks having search'd for divers Expedients thought at last they had found one in a Letter of St. Maximus who says That the Latins by affirming that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son do not pretend that the Son was the Cause of the Spirit and that they know very well that the Father is the sole Cause of the Son and of the Holy Spirit of the Son by Generation of the Holy Spirit by Procession but they mean only that the Holy Spirit proceeds by the Son because he is of one and the same Essence All the Greeks except Mark of Ephesus and the Archbishop of Heraclea agreed That if the Latins would approve this Letter the Union would easily be concluded The News of this was carried to the Latins who promis'd to give their Answer in the first Conference which was to be held March the 21st The Emperor would not have Mark of Ephesus nor the Archbishop of Heraclea to be there present so that John spoke alone in this Session and in the next which was held the 24th of March. The Greeks were divided among themselves some were Enemies to the Union others on the contrary desir'd it and sought out means to compass it The Emperor supported the latter and desir'd them earnestly to conclude an Union at any price whatsoever He caus'd them therefore to resolve in the Assembly that a Message should be sent to the Pope to tell him That Disputes were useless and they must find out some other way for Union The Pope made answer That the Greeks must acknowledge That the Latins had prov'd very well That the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Son or else they should have brought Testimonies of Scripture expresly contrary to this Doctrin If they did not That an Assembly must be held wherein they must make Oath upon the Gospels to speak the Truth That after this every one should give his Opinion and that Doctrin should be embrac'd which had a Plurality of Voices This Answer being reported to the Emperor he caus'd tell the Pope That this was not the way to procure an Union That this would end in a Dispute and then they must come to a Decision of it which is what they would avoid and therefore they must pray his Holiness to find out some other way In the mean time Bessarion made a Discourse concerning Union wherein he justified the Doctrin of the Latins The Emperor having a Mind to put an end to this Affair held after Easter a Meeting in the Patriarch's House where the Cardinal Julian was present who endeavour'd to persuade the Greeks to resume their Conferences but the Emperor would not hearken to this Proposal and therefore went himself to meet the Pope and agreed with him That Ten Persons should be appointed on each side who should meet and give their Opinion one after another of the Means which they thought convenient for obtaining an Union Bessarion propos'd in the first Conference That the Latins and Greeks should approve the Letter of Maximus to Marinus without any Explication but the Latins gave it a Sense which was not agreeable to the Greeks Mark of Ephesus propos'd after this That the Addition made to the Creed should be struck out others offer'd for a Model the Profession of Faith made by the Patriarch Tarasus wherein 't is said That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father by the Son In fine divers Expedients were propos'd in five Conferences which were held on this Subject but not one of them was agreed upon by both Parties After this the Latins drew up a Profession of Faith wherein they declar'd That they would not admit two Principles or two Causes in the Trinity but one only Principle which is the Action of the Father and of the Son and their Productive Power and that the Holy Spirit did not proceed from the Son as from another Principle or another Cause because there is but one Cause one Root and one Fountain of the Divinity which is the Father That notwithstanding this the Father and Son are two Persons tho' they Act by one and the same Operation and that the Person produc'd of the Substance and Subsistence of the Father and the Son is one That those who say the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father must acknowledge that there was a time when the Son was not or else separate the Substance from the Subsistence which is absurd This Profession of Faith was sent to the Greeks by the Latins April the 29th The Greeks not being satisfy'd with it the Latins sent them another which contain'd also the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son yet in such a manner that 't was said the Father was the sole Cause of the Son and of the Holy Spirit The Greeks after this gave one from their side wherein they declar'd That the Father was the Fountain and Root of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and that the Holy Spirit came forth from the Son and was sent by the Son The Latins desir'd they would explain these Terms and that they would tell in what Sense they took them if they meant them of the Eternal and Substantial Procession of the Holy Spirit or only of a Temporal Mission The Greeks made a Difficulty of doing this At last a Profession of Faith was drawn up conceiv'd in these Words We the Latins on one side do Affirm and make Profession That when we say the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son we intend not by this to deny that the Father is the Principle and Fountain of all the Divinity of the Son and of the Holy Spirit or that the Son proceeds from the Father or to admit two Principles and two Productiâ—… of the Holy Spirit but we assert and believe That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as one sole Principle and by one sole Production And we the Greeks on the other side do acknowledge That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and that he appertains to the Son that he came forth from him and proceeds substantially from these two viz. from the Father
Prosperity That than Charity Innocence Faith Piety Justice and sincere Friendship reign'd upon the Earth and that Fraud and Calumny were banish'd out of it because the Pastors instructed their People in these Vertues by their sound Doctrin and their holy Life but that Abundance having produc'd Luxury and Pride Religion grew cold by degrees and Avarice took Possession of the minds of Men and extinguish'd Charity in them that after this the Salvation and Edification of the Faithful was not design'd in the Ecclesiastical Offices of Divine Service but only the great Revenue of Benefices that the greatest part of benefic'd Men thought only of Ravishing the Profit without putting themselves to the trouble of discharging the Office Afterwards he enters upon the particular Abuses which Lust has introduc'd among the Ecclesiasticks and begins with those which the Passion of domineering and enriching themselves has introduc'd into the Court of Rome Such as are the Collations of all Benefices which the Popes have engross'd in their own Hands to the prejudice of Elections the Sums which the Apostolick Chamber hath exacted for these Collations the Promises of vacant Benefices which they have granted to unworthy Men who have rendred the Priest-hood contemptible the Rights of Vacancy the Tenths and the other Taxes of Pence which have been exacted with an unparallel'd Rigor an infinite number of Processes which the Court of Rome hath given Birth to and maintain'd by its Tricks the Pride and Pomp of Cardinals who being formerly imploy'd for burying of the dead are now so highly advanc'd that they despise not only the Bishops whom they call in derision Little Bishops but even the Archbishops the Primats and Patriarchs who heap together an infinite number of incompatible Benefices uniting in their own Persons the Titles of Monks and Canons Regular and Secular and possessing Benefices of all sorts of Order and Nature not only to the Number of two or three but even to twenty nay a hundred or more of the most considerable and richest Benefices while a great number of poor Ecclesiasticks have not whereupon to live and are forc'd sometimes to purchase Benefices of them He accuses them of being the Authors and Causes of Schism of selling their Votes of making Creatures and Dependents by the Benefices which they give After this he proceeds to other Prelats and reprehends the Ignorance and Avarice of some the absence of others from their Benefices and the neglect of discharging their Duties the Disorders of some Canons the Excesses of some Monks and the Pride of some Religious Mendicants He describes in Words very sharp and apparently passionate the Disorders which were in some Monasteries of the Regulars Lastly having compar'd together the Manners of the Christians of his time and those of the Primitive Church for fear lest what he had said should be abus'd he adds this Caution That his Intention was not to comprehend all Ecclesiasticks without Exception as being guilty of the Disorders which he had spoke of That he knew that Jesus Christ who cannot lie had said Peter I pray for thee that they Faith fail not That he was persuaded there was in each State many just and innocent Persons who have no hand in the Disorders of which he had complain'd although he believ'd that the Number of wicked Men was far greater After this he aggravates the Disorders of the Pope's Court at Avignon and the miserable Consequences of the Schism and says That we must have recourse to God and pray him to reunite his Church and heal the Breaches which were among its Members He concludes all with a Prayer directed to Jesus Christ for this purpose After this Work follows a poetical Piece in Hexameter Verse wherein he bewails the Schism of the Church and exhorts Pope Benedict XIII to extinguish it The Treatise of the Falling and Restauration of Justice address'd to Philip Duke of Burgundy is a Work rather Political than Theological wherein he shews that without Justice a State cannot be maintain'd he detests the Civil Wars the Contempt of Justice and Religion and the other Disorders which reign'd then in France and enquires after Means to remedy them The third Dogmatical Treatise of Clemangis is about the Infallibility of a General Council This he wrote when the Council of Constance was sitting and the University of Paris did vigorously maintain the Infallibility of General Councils Clemangis wrote then two Pieces by way of Conferences with a Scholastical Divine of Paris wherein he proposes the Difficulties and Doubts which there are about this Question and the Reasons which are brought to prove this Infallibility He says himself at the end of this Work That he has no design to affirm any thing but only to propose his Doubts and Difficulties that the Matter may be clear'd up and that he is ready to retract or amend what he has written upon this Subject if it shall be found contrary to Truth or be the cause of Scandal This Temper may serve to excuse what he has written so boldly in this Treatise against the Infallibility of General Councils though he does not oppose the Infallibility of Councils in Matters of Faith which he acknowledges but only in Questions of Fact about Morality or Discipline To these three Treatises must be join'd his Book about Theological Studies publish'd by Father Dom Luc Dachery in the Seventh Tome of his Spicilegium It is address'd to John of Piemont Bachelor of Divinity who had consulted him whether he should Commense Doctor He answers him in this Book That we must distinguish between him who is truly a Doctor and him who has only the external Marks of that Degree that undoubtedly he would do well to be a Doctor in the first Sense that 's to say to be capable of Teaching and doing the Office of one by his Discourses and by his Life but if he enquir'd whether he ought to take upon him the exteriour Marks of one i. e. the Degree and Cap of a Doctor he must consult himself and reflect upon his own Mind and Design because it was a thing which might be well us'd or abus'd yet he must examine what Motives mov'd him to assume this Degree and search the secret Corners of his Heart that he might discover the Springs of this Action From thence he takes occasion to explain to him what ought to be the Object and End of a Divine's Studies he blames those who study this Science out of Interest or Vanity and think of nothing but to enrich themselves by this Means He would have a Divine who is a Preacher to be in Truth the same thing which he says to live according to God and give an Example of that Life which he Preaches that his Sermons should be the Effect of the Charity of the Holy Spirit spread abroad in his Heart that he should read continually the Scriptures and the Books of the Holy Fathers He complains of the Divines of his own time that they read the Holy
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
of the Council of Nice This Letter bears Date March the 21st 453. S. Leo was obliged to write it for the satisfaction of the Emperor who had required him to give his approbation plainly to that which had been defined in the Council of Chalcedon for fear least he should take an occasion to oppose the Council because the Pope would not acknowledge the Rights which he had granted to Anatolius This S. Leo himself Testifies in the following Letter to Julian of Coos wherein he praises the Zeal of the Emperor and Empress who had restrain'd the Insolence of some Monks He also tells him That the Emperor haing privately bid him to Admonish the Empress he wrote presently to her and he desires him to let him know what was the effect of his Letter and if in short she hath approved of his Doctrine or rather S. Athanasius Theophilus and S. Cyril's As to the business of Aetius he says That he much Commiserated his Affliction but he thought he must bear it patiently for fear he seem to carry things too high In fine he tells him That Anatolius persisted in his Claim and that he understood by the Messenger that brought him the News of the Ordination of the Bishop of Thessalonica that he would make the Bishops of Illyria to subscribe it For this reason it was that he did not write to them altho ' Julian had desired him to do it because he knew by that that he would not be amended by it He sends him Two Copies of the precedent Letter the one by it self the other at the end of the Letter which was written to Anatolius that he might give that to the Emperor which he thought most convenient In the Eighty Ninth he writes to the Emperor about that which he required of him to give his Approbation of what the Council of Chalcedon had defined concerning the Faith He assures him That he had approved it already when he wrote to Anatolius but that that Bishop would not Publish his Letter because he therein reproves his Ambition He thanks God that he had given them an Emperor who knew how to join the Priestly Vigor and Royal Power together Perhaps you will wonder at this Expression but as F. Quesnel has already observed there are many such in S. Leo's Letters Constantine assumes to himself the Title of an Outward Bishop of the Church The Fathers of the Councils of Chalcedon and of Constantinople under Flavian have not scrupled in their Acclamations of Praise to the Emperors to give them the Title of Bishop S. Leo also commends Marcian because he took upon him to maintain the Decrees of the Council of Nice and that he had suppressed the Commotions of the Monks Lastly He assures him That he had declared his Judgment of the Council of Chalcedon in obedience to his Command He says a little after the same things to Pulcheria in the Ninetieth Letter Dated March the 21st 453. In the Ninety First written to Julian Bishop of Coos he tells him That he had omitted nothing that he was able to do for the defence of the Church's Cause That it belongs to the Emperor to suppress the Disturbers of Church and State He adds That the Bishops ought not to allow the Monks to Preach and therefore he wondred that Thalassius who was Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia had given that Liberty to one George who was fallen from the Monastick State by his Irregularities He says That he will write to him according to his Duty if Julian judges it convenient Lastly He exhorts him to do his utmost endeavour that the Emperor do hinder the Hereticks from troubling the Peace of the Church This Letter is Dated April the 9th in the same Year The Ninety Second Letter to Maximus Bishop of Antioch treats of several things He observes in the first place That the Catholick Faith keeps the Mean between the Two Extreams of Nestorius and Eutyches He Admonishes Maximus to be vigilant over the Churches of the East but more especially over those which the Council of Nice had entrusted him withal to prevent that Heresie be not established in them And that he might be able to do this with the greater Authority he advises him to maintain the Rights which the Council of Nice had allowed his Church and preserve to himself the third place That he will easily gain his ends by doing so because it is impossible that the Order established by the Inviolable Canons of the Council of Nice should be overthrown That Ambition might prompt to make a Change as it already hath happened in the Council where Juvenal endeavoured to usurp the Primary of Palaestine and attempted to ground his Pretensions upon some supposititious Writings and that S. Cyril being afraid of that Enterprise had written to him but that whatsoever Constitutions were made thereupon against those of the Council of Nice whensoever a more numerous Council should meet it would not nor ought to be valid That if his Legates had consented to any Decree of the Council of Chalcedon which did not concern Doctrine he declared it null because he had sent them for no other end but to defend the Faith of the Church against Heresies That all that had been handled in the Synods of Bishops except what concerned the Faith may not be received if it do not agree with the Decrees of the Council of Nice That he will see by the Copy of the Letter written to Anatolius how vigorously he defends the Council of Nice Lastly he advertiseth Maximus to prohibit the Monks and Lay-Men from Preaching and so much the more because it belongs to the Bishops only to do it This Letter is of the 10th of June In the Ninety Third Letter to Theodoret he in the first place testifies the Joy which he had when he understood by the Legates which he had sent to the Council of Chalcedon That the Catholick Faith had triumphed over the Errors of the Nestorians and Eutychians and that the Council had confirmed by its Judgment which was not subject to amendment the Doctrines which he had asserted These words are very remarkable because they evidently prove to us That there is no Judgment but that of an Universal Council which may not be re-examined and that the Judgment of the Pope himself is subject to amendment This was it that made him add That he was not troubled that some People would not accept the Judgment which he had given to evidence that the acknowledgment which the other Sees had made of his Supremacy as given to him by God was not meer Flattery That the Opposition which the Truth had met withal upon that occasion was the cause of some good because the Divine Favours are more thankfully acknowledged when they are obtained with difficulty and God's Providence brings us to the fruition of Good by a kind of Evil. That the Truth is made clearer and upholds it self with the greater strength when the examination confirms that
Faith which we have been taught and that lastly the Grandeur of the Priestly Dignity shews it self best when we respect the Authority of the Bishops that are most highly promoted yet with a Proviso that we do not in any wise encroach upon the Privileges of such as are inferior to them Afterward he invites Theodoret to rejoice with him at the Victory which the Truth had obtained He sets himself against the Outrages which Dioscorus had committed He tells Theodoret That he must equally avoid the Errors of Nestorius and Eutyches He thanks God That he hath been freed from all manner of Suspicion and at last exhorts him to be watchful for the Defence of the Faith of the Church and not permit either Lay-men or Monks to become Preachers This Letter is dared June 12. The Ninety Fourth Letter to the Emperor Marcian is about a difficult Controversie which was in the Church concerning the day on which Easter should be kept in the year 455. S. Leo says That the Ancient Fathers had imposed that Task upon the Bishop of Alexandria to find out the Feast of Easter every year and to make it known to the Apostolick See that he might give notice of it to the far distant Churches That Theophilus had made a Calendar for an Hundred years beginning at the year 380. but that the Passover in the 76th year i. e. in the year of Jesus Christ 455 is appointed upon an extraordinary day and too much advanced in the Month of April He beseeches Marcian to command That an exact Calculation be made that all Churches may celebrate this Feast at the same time The following Letter to Juliaâ— is upon the same Subject Both are of June 16. This last in the ordinary Editions is directed to Eudoxia But the manner of writing and MSS. prove to us That it was really written to Julian The Ninety Sixth Letter is addressed to the Empress Eudoxia In it he exhorts her to make use of her Authority to compel some Monks of Palaestine to submit themselves to the Council of Chalcedon In the Ninety Seventh Letter to the Monks of Palaestine he explains the Opinions which he had asserted in his Letter to Flavian and evinces That his Doctrine is clear contrary to the Error of Nestorius as well as that of Eutyches In his Ninety Eighth Letter he desires Julian to give him an exact Account of the News of what happened at Constantinople and to take effectual care that the Canons be observed It is dated June 25. 453. The Ninety Ninth bears date Jan. 9. following He gives the Emperor Thanks for appeasing the Troubles of Palaestine and restoring Juvenal Bishop of Jerusalem to his See again The following Letter to Julian is of the same date In it he shews much Joy That the Monks of Palaestine had acknowledged their Error and that Juvenal Bishop of Jerusalem was restored He adds That Proterius Bishop of Alexandria Successor of Dioscorus who was deposed did write him a Letter in which he makes known to him the Purity of his Doctrine He speaks of the difference between himself and this Bishop about the Celebration of Easter in the year 455. He says That he hath approved nothing in the Council of Chalcedon but what concerns the Faith and was much pleased that Aetius had been found Innocent In the Hundred and First Letter to Marcian S. Leo assures this Emperor That he will freely be reconciled to Anatolius and for that end had already written to him if his Letters which he hath sent him had had any effect or he had answered them yet if he will submit himself to the Canâ—ns and renounce his ambitious Pretensions he would instantly receive him to his Communion This Letter bears date March the 9th The following Letter to Julian is of the same date He lets him know That he had receiv'd a Letter from Proterius in which he shews himself well principle'd in the Faith but because he was extreamly troubled with the Faction of the Eutychians who having made a corrupt Translation of S. Leo's Letter to Flavian would perswade Men That it favoured the Error of Nestorius he desires Julian to cause it to be translated into Greek and send it to Alexandria sealed with the Emperor's Signet He commands him to get knowledge of the Emperor's Answer about the day on which the Feast of Easter is to be kept the next year and send him word of it because the time of sending the Circular Letters for the Passover is at hand The Hundred and Third Letter is written to Proterius Bishop of Alexandria S. Leo discovers to that Bishop the Joy which he had conceived when he understood by his Epistle That he is of an Orthodox Judgment and that the Church of Alexandria hath received of S. Mark the Scholar of S. Peter the same Faith which the Romans have received of his Master He exhorts Proterius carefully to defend this Faith He adds That he hath taught no new Doctrine in his Letter to Flavian nor departed from the Rule of Faith received from his Ancestors and if Dioscorus had done the same he would not have separated from the Church since he had the Works of S. Athanasius the Sermons of Theophilus and S. Cyril which ought to have encouraged him to resist the Error of Eutyches He advertises Proterius That he must carefully avoid speaking any thing which may come near the Opinions of Nestorius and that in teaching the People he must let them know That he vents nothing new but teaches what the Holy Fathers have unanimously preached and to convince them of it it is not sufficient to say so but it is convenient to prove it by bringing and explaining their Authorities to which he may join his Letter In fine S. Leo says That he applies himself to Antiquity as well in Matters of Discipline as Faith and for this reason it is That he hath opposed them who through their Ambition would rob the Church of Alexandria of her Privileges and Metropolitans of their Rights He advises Proterius to uphold the Customs which were in use in the time of his Predecessors To keep the Bishops who according to the ancient Canons are subject to the Church of Alexandria close to their Duty by obliging them to be present at his Synod at the appointed times or when there is some Business that requires their presence This Letter is of March 10. 454. It hath never been published To this Letter the Epistle of Proterius Bishop of Alexandria to S. Leo touching the Feast of Easter in the year 455. is joined He was of a contrary Judgment to the Pope who at length yielded to the Opinion of Proterius Those that are curious Inquirers after the Accounts which were then made to find out the day on which Easter was to be kept every year may find much satisfaction in it About the end he cautions S. Leo That he should not venture to have this Letter turned into Latin because it is very hard
adds a Confession of Faith wherein he inserts this Expression That the Son of God who was born of Mary and was crucified is one of the Persons of the Trinity And lastly he prays the Pope to write Letters to himself and to the Patriarch of Constantinople declaring that he receiv'd them into his Communion and all those who profess'd this Faith and that he condem'd those that did not approve of it The Pope answers him that he commends his Zeal for Religion and the Respect he testified Agapetus Bishop of Rome for the Holy See that he approv'd his Doctrine and the Confession of Faith which he had sent and that he look'd upon these as separate from the Church who would not receive it and chiefly Cyrus who had been sent to Rome on the behalf of the Monks Acaemetae Some have doubted of the Truth of these two Letters but there is no reason to reject them and they are both acknowledg'd by those that wrote them and by those who spake of them viz. by John in his Letter to the Senators and the Emperor in his Constitution to Epiphanius of Constantinople The Emperor's Letter is dated in the Year 533 and the Pope's in the next year At the same time the Pope wrote a Letter or rather a Discourse to the Roman Senators wherein he declares that he approv'd this Proposition That Jesus Christ who suffer'd is one of the Persons of the Trinity He brings some Passages of the Fathers to justifie this Expression and admonished them that they ought not to communicate with the Monks Acaemetae who are of another Opinion The same Pope wrote three Letters about the Affair of Contumeliosus Bishop of Regium who was accus'd and convicted of Uncleanness The first is to the Bishops of the Gauls to whom he writes That they ought not to suffer this Bishop to perform any part of the Sacerdotal Function and that they ought to shut him up in a Monastery and name a Deputy to his Church who shall there barely celebrate the Holy Mysteries without Ordaining any Clergy-men or disposing of the Patrimony of the Church He allows him to present his Request to the Bishops that he may be admitted to do Penance by acknowledging his Fault The second is written to the Clergy of Regium wherein he acquaints them that he thought it convenient to send them a Deputy that he left the care and ordering of these things to the Bishop of Arles The third is to Caesarius of Arles wherein he testifies his sorrow that a Bishop was found Guilty of such Crimes as Contumeliosus was convicted of but he thinks it convenient that as to him the rigor of the Canons should be observ'd by Deposing him and sending him to a Monastery At the same time he recommends to him that he should send a Deputy to his Church until a Bishop could be Ordain'd for it He sent with this Letter a Memorial containing the Canons against the Bishops condemn'd by the Synod of the Province viz. The 7th Canon of the Epistle of Siricius to Himerius the 25th and 29th of the Apostolick Canons and the 4th and 15th of the Council of Antioch and the 9th of Nice I have not said any thing of the first Letter attributed to this Pope and address'd to Valerius because it is the Work of Mercator There are found in it some Scraps of the Writings of Itachius and St. Leo the style is different from that of the true Letters of this Pope and the date of the Consuls is false All the six Epistles are printed Conc. Tom. 4. p. 1741. whereof the first to Valerius is rejected by Labbee as spurious Cave p. 404. AGAPETUS Bishop of Rome AGapetus born at Rome and the Son of Gordianus succeeded to John the second about the end of the Year 534 but he was not a whole Year in that See and stay'd but a little while at Rome Immediately after his Ordination he abolish'd the Anathema which Boniface had extorted from the Bishops and Priests against the Memory of Dioscorus and caus'd it to be burnt Justinian who manag'd extremely the Holy See wrote to him upon his Promotion and sent his Letter by the Priest Heraclius After he had us'd the ordinary Complements in his Letter he declares to him that he thought it very convenient for bringing back the Arians into the Church to maintain them in the Dignities they had in the Church where they were among their own Sect and not to exclude them from rising to a higher station He writes to him also about the Cause of Stephen Bishop of Larissa who had implor'd the Aid of the Holy See under the Pontificat of Boniface against the Sentence past against him by Epiphanius of Constantinople and desires him to make the Bishop of Justinianea his Vicar in Illyricum The Pope answers the Emperor's Complements very civilly and praises his Zeal for the Re-union of the Arians but he does not approve that the New-converts should be continued in their Dignities nor that they should be permitted to rise to higher As to the Affair of Stephen he says That he takes no other part but that which is for the Defence of Innocence and Justice that what the Holy See did about that Affair proceeded from a Zeal it has always had to maintain its Rights and to reserve to it self the Cognizance of the Affairs that concern the whole Church That because the Emperor consented that this Cause should be instructed by the Legats of the Holy See he would send them a Power That he was willing at his desire to receive Achilles into his Communion who had been ordain'd in the room of Stephen but that he could not allow him to exercise the Sacerdotal Function until he had seen the Informations which the Legats should make That altho the Emperor would excuse Epiphanius for Ordaining him because he did it by his Order yet he should acknowledge that he was blame-worthy since he ought to press him earnestly with the duty which on this occasion belong'd to the Dignity of the Holy See and so much the more because he had to do with a Prince who espoused its Interests In fine he tells him That he would inform him by his Legats of the Resolution he had taken about the City of Justinianea and the Title of Vicar of the Holy See which he would bestow upon the Bishop of that City This Letter is dated Octob. 15. in the Year 534. At this time Bellisarius General of the Army to the Emperor Justinian made great progress against Theodatus King of Italy He was already become Master of Dalmatia and Sicily and was ready to pass the next Compagne in Italy Theodatus thought that the most effectual way to put a stop to his violent Motions was to interest the Pope the Senate and the People of Rome in his quarrel He threatned them therefore that they should all be put to the point of the Sword unless they obtained of Justinian a