authoritie to preach publikely and therefore such a decree is as fully authorized confirmed and approved as if all the Bishops and Presbyters in the world had personally subscribed in this manner I confirme this Decree Hereof there is a worthy example in the third generall Councell No Presbyters at all were therein not in their owne right Very many Bishops were personally absent and present onely by their Legates or Agents as almost all the Westerne Bishops and by name Celestine Patriarch of Rome Some no question upon other occasions neglected that businesse as it may be the Bishops of Gangra and of Heraclea in Macedonia who were not at this Councell Divers others wilfully and obstinately refused to come to that holy Synod as by name Nestorius Patriarch of Constantinople Iohn Patriarch of Antioch and some forty Bishops who at the same time while the holy Councell was held in the Church at Ephesus held a Conventicle by themselves in an Inne in the same Citie and yet notwithstanding the personall absence of the first the negligent of the second and wilfull absence of the last the holy x Epist Conc. Ephes ad Imper. tom 2. Act. Con. Ephes epist 17. generall Councell saith of their Synodall judgement given by those who were then present that it was nihil aliud quam communis concors terrarum orbis sensus consensus nothing else but the common and consenting judgment of the whole world How could this be when so many Bishops besides three Patriarchs were either personally or negligently or wifully absent How was there in that decree the consent of these Truly because they all even all the Bishops in the world did either personally or by their Agents expresse or else in such a tacit and implicit manner as wee declared wrap up their judgement in the Synodall decree made by the Bishops present in the Councell 28. But what if many of those who are present doe dissent from that which the rest being the greater part doe decree Truly even these also doe implicitè and are in reason to bee judged to consent to that same decree For every one is supposed to agree on that generall Maxime of reason that in such an assembly of Iudges what the greater part decreeth shall stand as the Act and Iudgement of the whole seeing otherwise it would be impossible that such a multitude of Bishops should ever give any judgement in a cause for still some in perversenesse and pertinacie would dissent Seeing then it is the ordinance of God that the Church shall judge and seeing there can no other meanes be devised how they should judge unlesse the sentence of the greater part may stand for their judgement reason enforceth all to consent upon this Maxime Vpon this is that Imperiall Law grounded Quod y Dig. lib. 50. leg 19. major pars curiae effecit pro rato habetur acsi omnes id egerint what the greater part of the Court shall do that is ratified or to stand for the judgement of the Court as if all had done the same And againe Refertur z Dig. lib. 5. tit 17. de Reg. Iuris 160. ad universos quod publicè fit per majorem partem That is accounted the act of all which is publikely done by the greater part Vpon this ground is that truly said by Bellarmine a Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 11. §. At. That whereon the greater part doth consent est verum decretum Concilij is the true decree of the Councell even of the whole Councell Vpon the equitie of this rule was it said in the Councell at Chalcedon b Act. 4. p. 90. b. when ten Bishops dissented from the rest Non est justum decem audiri It is not just that the sentence of ten should prevaile against a thousand and two hundred Bishops Vpon the equitie of the same rule did the fift generall Councell truly constantly judge c Coll. 6. p. 576. b that the Councell of Chalcedon even in that definition of faith which they all with one consent agreed upon condemned the Epistle of Ibas as hereticall although they knew that Maximus with Pascasinus and the other Legats of Pope Leo in the Councell of Chalcedon adjudged that Epistle to be orthodoxall How was it the consenting judgement of the whole Councell of Chalcedon when yet some did expresse their dissent therein How but by that implicit consent which all give to that rule of reason that the judgement of the greater part shall stand for the judgment of the whole which the fift Councell doth plainly signifie saying d Ibid. pa. 563. b. In Councels we must not attend the interloquutions of one or two but what is defined in common ab omnibus aut amplioribus either by all or by the greater part to that we must attend as to the judgement of the whole Councell But omitting all the rest there is one example in the Councell of Chalcedon most pregnant to this purpose 29. All e Haec omnes dicimus haec omnibus placent Act. 16. pa. 137. a. the Councell save onely the Popes Legates consented upon that third Canon decreed in the second and now confirmed in this fourth Councell that the See of Constantinople should have Patriarchall dignity over Thrace Asia and Pontus and have precedence before other Patriarches as the next after the Bishop of Rome The Legates following the instructions of Leo were so averse in this matter that they said f Ibid. pa. 137. b. not without some choler Contradictio nostra his gesti◠inhaereat Let our contradiction cleave to these Acts and so it doth to the eternall disgrace both of them and their master The glorious Iudges notwithstanding this dissenting of the Legates and of Pope Leo himselfe in them said g Ibid. concerning that Canon That which we have spoken that the See of Constantinople ought to be the second c. Tota Synodus the whole Councell hath approved it Why but the Popes Legates approved it not they contradicted it True in this particular they dissented But because they as all other Bishops even Pope Leo himselfe consented unto that generall Maxime That the judgement of the greater part shall stand for the judgement of the whole Councell in that generall both the Legats of Leo and Leo himselfe did implicitè and virtually consent to that very Canon from which actually and explicitè they did then dissent For which cause the most prudent Iudges truly said Tota Synodus the whole Councell hath approved this Canon either explicitè or implicitè either expressely or virtually approved it Neither did onely those secular Iudges so esteeme the whole generall Councell it selfe professed the same and that even in the Synodall Relation of their Acts to Pope Leo The universall h Sancta universal Synod Leoni Relat. Synod post Act. 16 Synod said thus We have condemned Dioscorus we have confirmed the faith wee have confirmed the Canon of the second
ready both himselfe and the Church must be to condemne his former hereticall writings When heresie commeth in his owne deformed habit it doth but little or no hurt at all who will not detest it when he reades it in the writings of Arius Nestorius Eutiches or such like condemned heretikes the odiousnesse of their names breeds a dislike almost of a truth in their mouthes but certainly of an errour But when Satan assumes the forme of an Angell of light when heresie comes palliated yea countenanced with the name of a Catholike a learned an holy a renowned and approved Bishop then and then specially is there danger of infection The reverence the love the honour wee beare to such a person causeth us unawares to swallow the poyson which hee reacheth unto us before we take leasure to examine or once make doubt of his doctrine 28. It was truely said by a Vinc. de Hâ—res ca. 23. Vincentius Lirinensis The errour of the Master is the tryall of the Scholler tanto major tentatio quanto ipse doctior qui erraret and the more learned the teacher is the greater still is the temptation which beside other he shewes by the example of Origen he was in his age a mirrour b Vincent Liâ— loc citato of gravity integrity continency zeale c Zelo dei se truncavit Hier. Epist ad PaÌ„mac Ocean to 2. pa. 194. piety of learning of all sorts both divine and humane of so d Scripturas memoriter tenebat ibid. happy a memory that he had the Bible without booke of such admirable eloquence that not words but hony e Vinc. doc cit seemed to drop from his lips of so indefatigable industry that he was called Adamantius and was said by some f Hier. lib. 2. ado Ruffin to have written six thousand bookes by g Hier. epist ad Pam. Hierome one thousand besides innumerable commentaries of such high esteeme and authority that Christians h Vinc. loc cit honoured him as a Prophet Philosophers as a Master they flocked from the utmost parts of the world to heare his wisedome as if a second Salomon had beene sent from heaven yea most would say malle se cum Origene errare quam cum alijs vera sentire that they had rather erre with Origen then thinke aright with others When such a man lapseth into heresie if his writings may scape without censure if it shall be judged a contumelie an injurie or slander to condemne his bookes for the honour which was given to his person one such man as Origen were able to draw almost the third part of the starres of heaven after him 29. And if any beleeve the Epistles going under his name Theodoret was in divers respects not much inferiour to Origen His birth noble i Nobilibus parentibus nascitur Possen in Theodor. his parents being without hope of Children vowed k Epist Theod. 81. ad Nonium extat apud Bar. an 448. nu 12. him before his conception like another Samuel unto God And accordingly even from his Cradle consecrated him to Gods service Violently l Javitus episcopus sum ordinatus ibid. drawne to the dignity of a Bishop the Citie of Cyrus in Syria where was his episcopall See he nobilitated being before but obscure though worthy m Erat in Syria oppidulum vehemeÌ„ter neglectum Cyrus nomine a Iudaeis extructum ut qualemcunque gratiam benefactori Cyro refarreÌ„t Proc. de aedific Iustin Orat. 2. in fine of eternall memorie as being one monument of the deliverance of Gods people by the hand of Cyrus out of the Babylonish captivitie So upright blamelesse and voide of covetousnesse that having beene five and twenty yeares Bishop of that place in all that time ne n Theod. Epist ad Nonium obolum mihi in tribunali ablatum aliquis conquestus est none could say that hee had exacted or received for causes of judgement so much as one halfe pennie I tooke no mans goods no mans garments nay which is a memorable token of integritie none of mine house saith he hath taken the worth of an egge or a morsell of bread So plentifull in workes of charitie That he distributed o Quae nobis a parentibus obvenerlit post eorum mortem â—atim distribui Theod. Epist ad Leonem extat inter Epistolas Leonis post Ep. 62. his inheritance among the poore repaired Churches p Theod. Epist 81. builded bridges drained Rivers to townes where was want of water and such like in so much saith he that in all this time I have q Epist Theod. ad Leonem ad Nonium provided nothing for my selfe not any land not any house no not so much as any sepulcher nothing praeter laceras has vestes I have left nothing to my selfe but onely this ragged attire wherewith I am apparelled For learning and knowledge both in divine and humane matters he was much honoured compared to Nilus r 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epig. apud Poss in Theodor. as watering the whole countrie where hee abode with the streames of his knowledge he converted eight townes Å¿ Theod. Epist ad Nonium quae est 81. infected with the heresie of the Marcionites to the faith two other of the Arians and Eunomians wherein he tooke such paines and that also with some expence of his blood and hazard of his life that in eight hundreth parishes within the Diocesse of Cyrus Ne t Jbid. unum quidem haereticorum zizanium remansit there remained not so much as one hereticall weed 30. So learned so laborious so worthy a Bishop was Theodoret and so desirous am I not to impaire any part of his honour much lesse to injure disgrace or slander him Whom almost would not the writings of a man so noble for birth and parentage so famous for learning so eminent in vertue move and perswade to assent unto him if they might goe currant without taxing without note or censure of the Church and that much more than the bookes of Origen both because Origen was but a Presbyter but Theodoret a Bishop and specially because Origen u Originem fontem Arij Niceni patres percussere damnantes enim eos qui filium negant esse de substantia patris illum OrigineÌ„ Ariumque damnaverunt Hier. Epist ad Pon. mac de error Orig. Omnis tam orientis quam occidentis Catholicorum Synodus illum haereticum denunciat Hier. Apol. 2. adver Ruff. himselfe was by the Church condemned and so the author being disgraced the authority of his writings must needs be very small but the person of Theodoret was approved by the whole Councell of Chalcedon they all proclamed x Con. Chal. Act. 8. him to bee a Catholike and orthodoxall Bishop Here was a farre greater temptation and greater danger when his writings are hereticall whose person so famous and holy a Councell commendeth for Catholike Now or never was the Church to
hundred yeares after the death of Gregory and though he prove this by the testimony of Guilielmus Tyrius yet I insist onely upon the time of Gregorie whose words are very pregnant for this and the other Canons of that second Councel the Romane Church hactenus non habet nec accipit did not till these dayes embrace nor approve them 22. Now that this same third Canon was all that time held to be of full authority and approved by the Church as a Canon of an holy generall Councell which bindeth all notwithstanding the Popes did not approve it nay did even by their Synodall Decrees reject it there are very many and cleare evidences By warrant of that Canon did Anatolius in the Councell of Chalcedon Å¿ Act. 1. et alijs ubi recensentur Episcopi and Eutichius in the fift Synod t Coll. 1. et alijs in the right of their See of Constantinople take place before and above the Patriarchs of Alexandria and Antioch none in those Councels repining thereat nay those Synods and God himselfe as is there u Ecce nos Deo volente Anatolium primum habemus Ait Pascasinus in Conc. Chal. Act. 1. pa. 8. b. said approving that precedence And whereas this order had hot beene observed in the Ephesine Latrocinie Flavianus Bishop of Constantinople being set after the Bishops of Antioch and Ierusalem the Bishops of the Councell of Chalcedon stormed thereat and said x Ibid. Why did not Flavianus sit in his proper place that is next to the Romane Bishop or his Legates By authority of the same Canon did Chrysostome when he was Bishop of Constantinople depose y S. memoriae Chrysostomus 15 Episcopos deposuit in Asia et pro eis alios ordinavit Conc. Chalc. Act. 11. in sine Zezo lib. 1. ca. 6. fifteene Bishops in Asia ordaine others in their roomes celebrate z Pallad in vit Chrys a Councell at Ephesus and call the Asian Bishops unto it none of which either could he have done or would the other have obeyed him therein had it not beene knowne that they were subject to him as their Patriarke by that Canon of the second generall Councell to which they all must obey And this was done about some twenty yeares after that Canon was made a Conc. habitum an 381. Chrysost creatus Episcopus Cesario et Attico Coss Socr. lib. 6. ca. 2. id est circa an 398 câ—jus secundo anno aut circiter haec evenerunt So quickly was the same in force and was acknowledged to bee of a binding authority In the Councell of Chalcedon when the truth of this Canon was most diligently examined Elutherius Bishop of Chalcedon said b Act. 16. pa. 136. b. Sciens quia per Canones per consuetudinem I subscribed hereunto knowing that the See of Constantinople hath these rights in Asia and Pontus as a Patriarke to governe there both according to the Canons and according to custome and the like was deposed by many Bishops of Asia and Pontus They acknowledge nay they knew there was such a Canon they knew also that the custome and practice did concurrere cum lege did concurre with the Canon whereupon the glorious Iudges after full discussing of this cause testified b and sentenced that the Bish of Constantinople had rightfull authority to ordaine Metropolitane Bishops in the Diocesses of Thrace Asia and Pontus and the whole Synod consented to them first proclaiming Haec c Ibid. justa est sententia this is a just sentence this we say all and then in the very Synodal Epistle d Relat. ad Leonem post act 16. to Leo testifying the same to wit that they had confirmed that custome to the Bishop of Constantinople that he should ordaine Metropolitanes in Thrace Asia and Pontus and thereby had confirmed the third Canon of the second Councell This was the judgement of the whole Councell at Chalcedon that is of the whole Catholike Church in that age to which have consented all Councels and catholike Bishops ever since All these doe approve and judge to bee approved that Canon of the second generall Councell which the Popes and Romane Church not onely not approved but expresly and by Synodall decrees rejected 23. About some ninety yeares e Conc. Chalced. habitum an 451 after this and an hundred sixty yeares f Conc. Constant habit an 381. after that second Synod did Iustinian the Emperour confirme the g Nov. 131. ca. 1 et 2. Canons both of that second and of al the former general Councels giving unto them force of Imperiall lawes Yea hee further commanded those Canons this third among the rest Dipticis inseri praedicari to be written in the Diptikes or Ecclesiasticall bookes and publikely to be read in the Churches in token of the publike and universall approbation of the same This the fift Councell h Coll. 2. pa. 524. a. testifieth as also Victor i In Chron. an 1. Iustin and Evagrius k Lib. 4. ca. 11. yea the Emperour himselfe also who both l Cod. l. 7. de summa Trin. professeth that he will not suffer this custome to bee taken away and signifieth m Nov. 115. that all Patriarkes are knowne to keepe in their Diptikes and to recite those Canons in their Churches The Emperor doubted not but the Romane Church Patriarke as well as the rest had done this and yeelded obedience to so holy an Edict but the Romane Church deluded the Emperour herein none of them as Bellarmine n Lib. 1. de Pont. ca. 24. § Hiâ— tels us did after Iustinians time or as he accounts after the yeare 500 reclamare contradict or speake against that Canon which their silence the Emperour and others not acquainted with the Romane Arts did interpret to be a consent but Binius o Not. in Conc. 2 §. Constantinop bewrayeth their policy they for peace and quietnes sake being loth to exasperate the Emperour did permit or connive at that honour conferred by the Canon upon the See of Constantinople yet nunquam à Romana Ecclesia approbatum fuit it was never theÌ„ not til Gregories time which is as much as I intended to prove it was never saith hee approved by the Romane Church which hee proves by a Decretall of Innocentius the third whence it is evident seeing that Canon of the second generall Councell was never as Binius avoucheth but certainly not till Gregories time approved by the Pope and yet was all that time approved by the catholike Church even by the great and famous Councell at Chalcedon al who approve it who are no fewer than the whole catholike Church it is evident I say that it is neither the Popes Approbation which maketh nor his Reprobation which hindereth a Councell or any Decree or Canon thereof to be an approved generall Councell or a Synodall Canon such as doth and ought to binde all that are in the Church 24.
The Popes Approbation it is not but what it is which makes a generall Councell or Canon thereof to be an approved Councell or an approved Canon and for such to bee righly accounted is not so easie to explane This in an other Treatise I have at large handled to which if it ever see the light I referre my selfe yet suffer me to touch in this place so much as may serve to cleare this and divers other doubts which are obvious in their writings concerning this point 25. That every Councell and Synodall decree thereof is approved or confirmed by those Bishops who are present in that Synod who consent upon that decree is by the Acts of the Councells most evident For both their consenting judgement pronounced by word of mouth and after that their subscription to their decree did ratifie and confirme their sentence In that which they call the eighth generall Synod after the sentence pronounced the Popes Legates said p Act. 10. Oportet ut haec manu nostra subscribendo confirmemus it is needfull that wee confirme these things which we have decreed by our subscribing unto them Of the great Nicene Councell Eusebius thus writeth q Lib. 3. de vità Constant ca. 13. Those things which with one consent they had decreed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they were fully authorized ratified confirmed or approved the Greeke word is very emphaticall by their subscription In the Councell of Chalcedon when the agreement betwixt Iuvenalis and Maximus was decreed they subscribed r Act. 6. in this forme That which is consented upon confirmo I by my sentence doe confirme or firma esse decerno I decree that it shall be firme and to the like effect subscribed all the rest Whereupon the glorious Iudges without expecting any other confirmation either from Pope Leo or any that was absent said This which is consented upon shall abide firme in omni tempore for ever by our decree and by the sentence of the Synod Of the second generall Councell a Synod at Hellespont said ſ Extat inter Epist post Concil Chal. pa. 168. a. Hanc Synodum Timotheus unà cum eis praesens firmavit Timotheus with the other Bishops then present confirmed this Synod The consent and subscription of the Bishops present in the Synod they call a Confirmation of the Synod In the Synod t Extat ibid. pa. 155. at Maesia after the sentence of the Synod was given they all subscribed in this forme I M.P.D. c. confirmavi subscripsi have confirmed this Synodall sentence and subscribed unto it In the second Councell at Carthage held about the time of Pope Celestine Gennadius said u Tom. 1. Conc. pa. 541. Quae ab omnibus sunt dicta propria debemus subscriptione firmare what hath beene said and decreed by us all wee ought by our owne subscriptions to confirme and all the Bishops answered Fiat fiat let us so doe and then they subscribed So cleare it is that whatsoever decree is made by any Councell the same is truly and rightly said to bee confirmed by those very Bishops who make the Decree confirmed I say both by their joint consent in making that Decree and by their subscribing unto it when it is made 26. Vpon this confirmation or approbation of any Decree by the Bishops present in the Councell doth the whole strength and authority of any Synodall decree rely and upon no other confirmation of any Bishop whatsoever when the Councell is generall and lawfull For in such a Councell lawfully called lawfully governed and lawfully proceeding as well in the free discussing as free sentencing of the cause there is in true account the joynt consent of all Bishops and Ecclesiasticall persons in the whole world No Bishop can then complaine that either he is not called or not admitted with freedome into such a Councell unlesse that he be excommunicated or suspended or for some such like reason justly debarred If all do come they may and doe freely deliver their owne judgement and that not onely for themselves but for all the Presbyters in their whole Diocesse For seeing the pastorall care of every Diocesse even from the Apostles time and by them is committed to the Bishop thereof all the rest being by him admitted but onely into a part of his care and to assist him in some parts of his Episcopall function he doth at least because he should he is supposed to admit none but such as hee knoweth to professe the same faith with himselfe whence it is that in his voice is included the judgement of his whole Diocesan Church and of all the Presbyters therein they all beleeving as he doth speake also in the Councell by his mouth the same that he doth If some of the Bishops come not personally but either depute others in their roomes or passe their suffrage as often they did in the voice of their Metropolitan then their consent is expressed in theirs whom they put in trust to be their agents at that time If any negligently absent themselves neither personally nor yet by delegates signifying their minde these are supposed to give a tacit consent unto the judgement which is given by them who are present whom the others are supposed to thinke not onely to be able and sufficient without themselves to define that cause but that they will define it in such sort as themselves doe wish and desire for otherwise they would have afforded their presence or at least sent some deputies to assist them in so great and necessary a service If any out of stomack or hatred to the truth do wilfully refuse to come because they dissent from the others in that doctrine yet even these also are in the eie of reason supposed to give an implicit consent unto that which is decreed yea though explicitè they doe dissent from it For every one doth and in reason is supposed to consent on this generall point that a Synodall judgement must bee given in that doubt controversie there being no better nor higher humane Court than is that of a generall Councell by which they may bee directed Now because there never possibly could any Synodall judgement be given if the wilfull absence of one or a few should bee a just barre to their sentence therefore all in reason are thought to consent that the judgement must be given by those who will come or who do come to the Councell and that their decree or sentence shall stand for the judgement of a generall Councell notwithstanding their absence who wilfully refuse to come 27. If then all the Bishops present in the Councell do consent upon any decree there is in it one of those wayes which we have mentioned either by personall declaration or by signification made by their delegates and agents or by a tacit or by an implicit consent the consenting judgement of all the Bishops and Presbyters in the whole Church that is of al who either have judicatory power or
many things are praised quae omnia monstrosa sunt prorsus explodenda all which are utterly to be hissed at where also he seemeth to allow the impious Art of Magicke and Divinations His approving of Appolonius and Danis two wicked Magitians who both are relegati ad inferos condemned to Hell And to omit very many of this kinde of impieties and fables which abound in Suidas His narration in verbo Iesus which not onely Baronius rejecteth but Pope Paul the fourth for that cause beside some other k Exploserit in Jndicem lib. prohib exploded the booke of Suidas and placed it in the ranke librorum prohibitorum Such even by the confession of their owne Iesuite is this Suidas a depraver of good a commender of wicked men a fabler a lyer a falsifier of Histories a Magitian an Heretike whose booke is by the Pope forbidden to bee read Such a worthy witnesse hath the Cardinall of his Suidas with whom he conspireth in reviling Iustinian as one utterly unlearned Concerning which untruth I will say no more at this time than that which Gotofrid doth in his censure l Arte lib. Instit of those words of Suidas where calling it in plaine termes a slander he rejects it as it justly deserveth in this manner Valeant calumniae nos sinceriora sequamur Away with this and such like opprobrious slanders of Suidas and Baronius but let us follow the truth 5. His second reproofe of the Emperour is for presuming to make lawes in causes of faith which for Kings and Emperours to doe brings as he saith an hellish confusion into the Church of God The wit of a Cardinal Iustinian may not doe that which King Hezekiah which Asa which Iosiah and Constantine the great the two Theodosii Martian and other holy Emperours before had done and done it by the warrant of God to the eternall good of the Church and their owne immortall fame Had hee indeed or any of those Emperours taken upon them by their lawes to establish some new erronious or hereticall doctrine the Cardinall might in this case have justly reproved them but this they did not what doctrines the Prophets delivered the word of God taught and holy Synods had before decreed and explaned those and none else did Iustinian by his Edict and other religious Emperours ratifie by their imperiall authority Heare Iustinians owne words Wee f Edict Justin in causa trium Capitul in princip have thought it needfull by this our Edict to manifest that right confession of faith quae in sancta Dei Ecclesiâ praedicatur which is preached in the holy Church of God Here is no new faith no Edict for any new doctrine but for maintaining that onely faith which the holy Catholike Church taught and the Councell of Chalcedon had decreed wherein that Iustinian did nothing but worthy of eternal praise the whole fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church approving it is a witnesse aboue exception which entreating of that which Iustinian had done in this cause of the Three Chapters the chiefe of all which was the publishing of his most religious Edict to cōdemne the same saith g Coll. 7. in fine Omnia semper fecit facit quae sanctam Ecclesiam recta dogmata conservant Iustinian hath ever done and as yet doth all things which preserve the holy Church and the true faith So the Councell Is not Baronius minde composed of venome and malice who condemnes and reviles the Emperour as bringing hellish confusion into the Church by publishing that law which to have beene an especiall meanes to preserve the Church and Catholike faith the holy generall Councell and all the whole Catholike Church with it proclameth 6. See here againe the love and respect which Baronius beares to the Imperiall lawes and to those holy and religious Emperors which were the nursing fathers of Gods Church and pillers to uphold the faith in their dayes There are extant in the Theodosian Code many laws cōcerning the Catholike faith concerning Bish Churches and the Clergy concerning Heretikes Apostates Monkes Iewes and Samaritanes concerning Pagan sacrifices and Temples concerning Religion Episcopall judgement those who flee unto Churches and many other of the same kinde lawes wholesome and necessary for those times The like titles are extant also in the Code of Iustinian In the Authenticks there are I know not how many lawes in the like causes Of the foure Councels of the Order of Patriarchs of the building of Churches of goods belonging to sacred places Of the holy Communion of Litanies of the memorials for the dead of the Priviledges of Churches of Patriarchs of the Pope of old Rome of Archbishops of Abbots of Presbyters of Deacons of Subdeacons of Monkes of Anchorites of Synods of deposing Bishops who fall into heresie that Patrons who builded Churches and their heyers shall nominate the Clerks for the same and in case they name such as are unmeet then the Bishop to appoint who he thinks sit that Heretikes shall be uncapable of any legacies and exceeding many the like Now such a spite hath the Cardinall to the Emperours and these their Imperiall lawes made concerning the affaires of the Church that like some new Aristarchus with one dash of his pen hee takes upon him to casheire and utterly abolish those lawes five or sixe hundreth at the least with such care piety and prudēce set forth by Constantine Theodosius Valentinian Gratian Martian Iustinian and other holy and religious Emperours And when these are gone whether the Cardinall meant not after them to wipe away which with as good reason and authority he may all the other lawes which are in the Digest Code and Authenticks that so his master the Pope may play even another Iack Cade that all law might proceed out of his mouth let the judicious consider This is cleare that the Cardinals malice is not satisfied with reproofe of the lawes themselves even these holy Emperors Constantine Theodosius and the rest are together with Iustinian for the making of those lawes touching Ecclesiasticall affaires and persons reproved nay reviled by Baronius as having beene presumptuous persons authors of an hellish confusion in the Church and for turning heaven into hell They and such as they make lawes of faith lawes for Bishops lawes for the Church let them heare as they well deserve and as the * An. 550. nu 14. Cardinall shameth not to upbraid to Iustinian Ne ultra crepidam Sir Cobler goe not beyond you Last and Latchet So indignly doth the Cardinall use those holy and religious Princes and that even for their zeale to Gods truth and love to his Church for that which with exceeding piety and prudence they performed to their owne immortall honor and to the peace and tranquillity of the whole Church of God 7. His third calumnie is that hee revileth Iustinian for his sacrilegious fury and persecution which hee used against Pope Vigilius partly when Vigilius h Bar. an 551.
the See S. Peters Chaire had beene too hot for him Vigilius wisely considered that it was no lesse art to keepe than to get the See he knowing that without deepe dissimulation and without faining himselfe a Catholike he could not possibly hold it much lesse could he effect that which he purposed and had both promised and sworne to performe and therefore by his private letter assuring Anthimus Severus Theodosius and Theodora of his hearty and serious intent to joyne with them and when time served to worke his feat by his other publike and orthodoxall letters to Iustinian Theodora and Mennas hee did but cast a mist before their eyes that they should not spy his heresie and under that visor of a Catholike he did labour to undermine the whole Catholike faith And thus much in his private letter he signifieth to Anthimus and the rest warning them first q Oportet ut haec quae scribo nullus agnescat Epist Vig apud Lib. of secresie lest if his powder-plot should be discovered as indeed most happily it was the sudden blow should not hit the Councell of Chalcedon and next that besides their secresie they should dissemble also no lesse than hee did they should still seeme r Sed magis suspectum me ante alios habeat sapientia vestra ut facilius possim quae caepi operari et perficere Ib. to suspect and bee jealous of him as of their onely enemy that their feare might make Catholikes secure of him and of that sudden blow which in a moment by the publishing of his Apostolike Edict for the adnulling of the Councell of Chalcedon he meant to give 36. But Bellarmine ſ Bell. lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 10. § Sciendum for all this will prove by two reasons that Vigilius was not in heart t Non fuit animo haereticus Ibid. an heretike nor did ex animo write this Epistle The former is because non palà m in ea condemnavit Catholicam fidem sed occultè he did not openly and publikely but onely in secret and closely condemne the Catholike faith for hee writes therein Vt sint omnia occulta usque ad tempus that they should keepe all private untill a fitter time Condemne then he did the Catholike faith but not ex animo because hee did secretly condemne it Ex studio occultandi saith Gretzer u Gret loc cit by his desire of concealing it Bellarmine collecteth this that Vigilius did not seriously and from his heart but dissemblingly write that impious Epistle As if one may not doe the same thing ex animo and seriously and yet doe it secretly What thinkes he of Iudas his plotting to betray Christ was close and secret his owne fellow Apostles knew not of it but sayd Master is it I his friendly conversing with Christ sitting at table and kissing was open and publike yet his outward courtesie even his kisse was dissembled and trecherous his malice treason and murderous affection which were secret and covered under those outward shewes of love were true and serious The Powder-plotters dealt closely and secretly all underboord their pretended subjection was open and yet the treason was serious their obedience but fained Bellarmine was but a meere novice in the Romane Court when hee writ this and imagined that Popes doe not seriously that which they doe secretly 37. His other reason x Bell. ubi supra to prove that Vigilius was not in heart hereticall when he writ this Epistle is because he writ it not with an hereticall minde sed propter cupiditatem praesidendi but in an ambitious desire of presidency What I pray you Is an hereticall and ambitious minde incompatible doth ambition exclude heresie or in ambition for one to teach heresie doth that hinder him from being in heart an heretike Scarce was there any Heresiarch whom ambition hath not inflamed and who in ambition layd not the foundation of his heresie Valentinus sayth Tertullian y Tert. cont Valent ca. 4. hoped for but missed a Bishopricke in revenge thereof he kindled his heresie and set fire in that Church wherein himselfe could not be governour When Marcion sayth Epiphanius z Epiph. har 42 got not the presidency he invented his heresie and puft up with pride sayd Ego findam Ecclesiam I le rend usunder your Church When Aerius b Epiph. haer 75. missed the Bishopricke which Eustathius obtained in his ambitious pride he devised his heresie that a Presbyter was all one with a Bishop Heare Cardinall Bellarmines c Bell. lib. de not Eccl. ca. 13. owne words All Arch-heretickes have one common vice and that is pride they spring up in divers places but pride is the mother of them all If Vigilius was no heretike in heart because he was ambitious neither was Nestorius nor Arius nor Aerius nor Montanus nor Valentinus by Bellarmines divinity heretikes because they were all ambitious If they notwithstanding their ambition were as certainly they were Arch-heretikes and taught their heresies with hereticall minds then not onely the Cardinals reason is inconsequent and ridiculous but Vigilius for all his ambition may not onely write that Epistle with an hereticall minde but be even an Heresiarch or rather a Pope heretike 38. Againe did he not write this with an hereticall minde why did not the Cardinall expresse what that hereticall minde is which was now wanting in Vigilius An hereticall minde is no other but a minde pertinaciously and obstinately addicted to heresie It was heresie doubtlesse which he writ in teaching with Eutyches but one nature to be in Christ That he writ this obstinately is cleare seeing he writ it against the knowne judgement of the holy Councell of Chalcedon that is of the Catholike Church which none can doe but even thereby he shewes an obstinate and pertinacious minde rebellious against the Church If this be not no hereticke in the world ever had an hereticall minde If Arius Nestorius and Eutyches when they writ or taught their doctrines with this minde were hereticall and heretikes then most certainly Vigilius who writ this Epistle with the like obstinate and pertinacious minde must needs bee judged to be rebellious against the Church and as heretically affected in minde as Arius or Eutyches himselfe Pride and insolency is so farre from excluding an hereticall minde as Bellarmine would here perswade that it is even an individuall companion yea essentiall unto it None can possibly have an hereticall but eo nomine he hath an ambitious heart the pride whereof causeth him to condemne the just sentence of the Catholike Church and prefer before it his owne fancy and opinion 39. You see now how inconsequent both these reasons of the Cardinals are seeing Vigilius might bee hereticall in heart though both his writings were secret and his minde ambitious Let us yet a little further debate this matter with the Cardinall Say you that Vigilius did not write this hereticall Epistle ex animo or from his
duty they should what to teach or knowing it but willingly teaching the contrary to their knowledge which in duty they should not even so Nestorius Macedonius Arius and Eutyches every Bishop and Presbyter when they erred they erred not simply as Bishops or as Presbyters but as persons failing in their Episcopall or Presbyteriall duties either not knowing the truth as by their office they should or wilfully oppugning and contradicting the truth as by their office they should not So by his subtilty if any applaud themselves in it not only the Bishops of Rome but of Constantinople of Antioch of Alexandria yea all Bishops and Presbyters in the world shall be as free from errour as his holinesse himselfe yea all professors of any Art Science or faculty shall plead the like Papall exemption from errour every man shall bee a Pope in his owne faculty no Grammarian speaking incongruously as a Grammarian but as wanting the skil required in a Grammarian no Iudge giving a wrongfull sentence as a Iudge no Galenist ministring unwholsome physicke as a Physitian no Artificer working any thing amisse in his trade as an Artificer but as being defective in the duties either of that knowledge or of that fidelity which is required in a Iudge a Physitian and in every Artificer If they will exempt all Bishops and Presbyters all Iudges and Physitians from erring as they are such Officers or Artificers we also will in the same sort and sense allow the like immunity to the Pope If they notwithstanding this subtilty will admit another Bishop to erre as Bishop they must not thinke much if wee exempt not the Pope as Pope For to speake that which is the very truth of them all and exactly to measure every thing by his owne line a Iudge simply as Iudge doth pronounce a judiciall sentence as a skilfull and faithfull judge an upright judiciall sentence as an unskilful or unfaithfull Iudge an erronious or unjust sentence A Bishop or Presbyter simply as Bishop or Presbyter doth teach with publike authority in the Church as a skilfull and faithfull Bishop or Presbyter he teacheth the truth of God as an ignorant and unfaithful Bishop he teacheth errours and heresies in the Church the one without the other with judicall power to censure the gainsayers The like in all Arts Sciences and faculties is to be sayd even in the Pope himselfe A Pope simply as he is Pope and defined by them teacheth both with authority to teach with power to censure the gainsayers and with a supremacy of judgement binding all to embrace his doctrine without appeale without doubt as an infallible Oracle as a skilfull or faithfull Pope he teacheth the truth in that sort as an unskilfull or unfaithfull Pope he teacheth errour or heresie with the like authority power and supremacy binding others to receive and swallow up his heresies for Catholike truth and that with a most blind obedience without once doubting of the same 48. Apply this to Vigilius his hereticall Epistle In a vulgar sense Vig. erred as Pope because he erred in those very Pōtifical duties of feeding confirming which are proper to his office In a strickt sense though hee did not therein erre simply as Pope but quatenus talis taught onely with a supreme binding authority yet hee erred as an unfaithfull Pope binding others by that his Pontificall and supreme authority to receive Eutycheanisme as Catholike truth without once moving any doubt or making scruple of the same What may wee thinke will they oppose to this If they say Vigilius doth not expresse in this Epistle that hee writ it by his Apostolicall authority Hee doth not indeed Nor doth Pope Leo in that Epistle to Flavianus against the heresie of Eutyches which to have beene writ by his Apostolicall authority and as he was Pope none of them doe or will deny that Epistle being approved by the whole Councell r Conc. Chalc. Act. 2. et 3. of Chalcedon Pope Leo by his Papall authority condemneth Eutycheanisme Pope Vigilius by his Papall authority confirme Eutycheanisme both of them confirmed their doctrine by their Papall authority both writ as Popes the one as orthodoxall the other as a perfidious and hereticall Pope neither of both expresse that their Apostolicall authority by which they both writ The like in many other Epistles of Leo and of other Popes might easily bee observed Not the tenth part of their decretal Epistles such as they writ as Popes have this clause of doing it by their Apostolicall authority expressed in them It is sufficient that this is vertually in them all and vertually it is in this of Pope Vigilius Yea but hee taught this onely in a private letter to a few to Anthimus Severus and Theodosius not in a publike generall and encyclicall Epistle written for instruction of the whole Church What is the Pope fallible in teaching of a few in confirming three of his brethren why not in foure in eight in twenty and if in twenty why not in an hundred if so why not in a thousand if in one why not in two foure or ten thousand Caudaeque pilos ut equinae paulatim vellam where or at what number shall we stay as being the least which with infallibility he can teach Certainly confirma fratres in cathedra sede pasce oves respects two as well as two millions If in confirming or feeding three the Chaire may bee erroneous how can wee know to what number God hath tyed the infallibility of it But the sixt generall Councell may teach them a better lesson Pope Honorius writ an hereticall Epistle ſ Quae recitatur Conc. 6. Act. 12. pa. 64. but onely to Sergius Bishop of Constantinople Vigilius writ this to three all of patriarchall dignity as Sergius was Honorius writ it privately as Vigilius did which was the cause as it seemes that the Romane Church tooke so little notice thereof yet though it was private and but to one it is condemned by the sixt Councell for t Vocantur istae et aliae Epistolae dogmatica scripta In eodem Conc. Act. 12. p. 65. a. et retractantes dogmaticas Epistolas à Sergio et ab Honorio ad Sergium Act. 13. pa. 67. a. et Honorius impia dogmata confirmavit Jbid. a domaticall writing of Pope Honorius for a writing wherein hee confirmes others in heresie and Pope Leo u Anathematizamus quoque Honorium qui hanc Apostolicam Ecclesiam et immaculatam fidem prophana proditione subvertere conatus est Leo 2. Epist 1 the second judged it to bee such as was a blemish to the Apostolike See such as by which Honorius did labour to subvert the Catholike faith The like and more danger was in this to these three deposed patriarchs It confirmed them in heresie it confirmed the Empresse it confirmed all that tooke part with them it was the meanes whereby the faith was in hazard to have beene utterly subverted For plurality or paucity it is
of all ages speaking by the mouthes of al general Councels of Fathers of Popes of al Catholikes this holy Church condemneth and accurseth the assertion of Pope Vigilius The Cardinall was too diminutive in his extenuations when he spake so faintly The holy Church doth not so generally receive it 11. Let us beare with the Cardinals tendernesse of heart the Popes sores must not be touched but with soft and tender hands Seeing the Cardinall hath brought the Pope and the holy Church to be at ods and at an unreconciliable contradiction the Pope denying the Church affirming that a man after his death may noviter be condemned it is well worth the labour to examine whether part the Cardinall himselfe will take in this quarrell you may be sure the choyce on either part was very hard for him he hath here a worse matter than a wolfe by the eares This is dignus vindice nodus a point which will trie the Cardinals art wisdome piety constancy and faire dealing And in very deed he hath herein plaid Sir Politike would be above the degree of commendation The Cardinall is a man of peace hee loves not to displease either the Pope or the Church he knew that to provoke either of them would bring an armie of waspes about his eares and therfore very gravely wisely and discreetly he takes part with them both and though their assertions bee directly contradictory he holds them both to be true and takes up an hymne of Omnia bene to them both 12. First he sheweth that the Church saith right in this manner Although h Bar. an 553. nu 185. it be proved that one dyed in the peace of the Church and yet it doe afterwards appeare that in his writings he defended a condemned heresie and continuing in that heresie died therein and but dissemblingly cōmunicate with the Church the holy Church useth to condemne such a man jure even by right Having said as much as can bee wished on the Churches part the Cardinall will now teach that the Pope also saith right in this manner Pope Vigilius i Bar. an 553. nu 233. had many worthy reasons for his defence of the Three Chapters by his Constitution and among those worthy reasons this is one for if this were once admitted that a man who dyeth in the communion of the Church might after his death be condemned pateret ostium this would open such a gap that every ecclesiasticall writer though hee dyed in the Catholike Communion may yet after his death out of his writings be condemned for an heretike Thus Baronius 13. O what a golden and blessed age was this that brought forth such a Cardinall The Church decreeth that a man after his death may noviter be condemned for an heretike and it decreeth aright The Pope decreeth the quite contrary that no man after his death may noviter be condemned for an heretike and hee also decreeth aright and with good reason So both the Church saith well the Pope saith well you can say no lesse then Et vitula tu dignus hic or because the Cardinall saith better than they both and what Iupiter himselfe could never doe makes two contradictory sayings to be both true and both said well hee best deserveth let him have all the prize Vitula tu dignus utrâque 14. I told you before and this ensuing treatise will make it as cleare as the Sunne that Baronius having once lost the path forsaken that truth where only sure footing was to be found wandreth up and downe in and out in this cause as in a wildernesse treading on nothing but thornes wherewith feeling himselfe prickt he skips hither and thither for succour but still lights on briars and brambles which doe not onely gall but so intangle him that by no meanes he can ever extricate or unwinde himselfe for if one listed to make sport with the Cardinall it clearly and certainly followeth that if the Church say true then the Pope saying the contrary doth say untrue Againe if the Pope say true then the Church saying the contrary doth say untrue and then upon the Cardinals saying that they both say true it certainly followeth that neither of them both say true and yet further that both of them say both true and untrue and yet that neither of them both saith either truth or untruth 15. But leaving the Cardinall in these bryars seeing by the upright and unpartiall judgement of the whole Catholike Church of all ages we have proved the Popes decree herein to be erroneous and because it is in a cause of faith heretical let us a little examine the two reasons on which Vigilius groundeth this his assertion The former is taken from those words of our Saviour k Matth. 18.18 whatsoever ye binde on earth whence as you have seene Vigilius and as he saith Gelasius also collecteth that such as are not on earth or alive cannot be judged by the Church 16. The answer is not hard our Saviours words being well considered are so farre from concluding what Vigilius or Gelasius or both doe thence collect that they clearly and certainly doe enforce the quite contrary for he said not Whatsoever yee binde or loose concerning those that are on earth or living in which sense Vigilius tooke them but Whatsoever concerning either the living or dead ye my Apostles and your successors being upon earth or during your life time shall binde or loose the same according to your censure here passed upon earth shall by my authority bee ratified in heaven The restrictive termes upon earth are referred to the parties who doe binde or loose not to the parties who are bound or loosed The generall terme whatsoever is referred to the parties who are bound or loosed whether they be dead or alive not to the parties who binde or loose who are onely alive and upon earth Nor doth our Saviour say Whatsoever yee seeme to binde or loose here upon earth shall bee bound or loosed in heaven for ecclesiae clave errante no censure doth or can either binde or loose either the quicke or the dead but he saith Whatsoever ye doe binde or loose if the party be once truly and really bound or loosed by you that are upon earth it shall stand firme and bee ratified by my selfe in heaven So the parties who doe binde or loose are the Apostles and their successors onely while they are upon earth the parties who are bound or loosed are any whosoever whether alive or dead the partie who ratifieth their act in binding and loosing is Christ himselfe in heaven For I say unto you whatsoever ye binde on earth shall be bound in heaven and whatsoever yee loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven 17. This exposition is clearly warranted by the judgement of the whole catholike Church which as we have before declared both beleeved taught and practised this authority of binding and loosing not onely upon the living but upon the
was done as well against Cyrill and Memnon in deposing them as against Nestorius in deposing him that all this had beene in the act judgement and sentence of one and the same Councell upon which subreption and misinformation the Emperors confirmed at the first the condemnation d Et Nestorij Cyrilli et Memnonis exauctorationem à Sanctitate vestra nobis insinuatam calcuis nostro approbavimus Sacra missa ab Augusto ad Synod to 3. act Ephes ca. 15. of them all three But at length a letter being brought from the holy Synod to Constantinople by one who to avoid suspition put on the habit of a begger e Epistola ex Epheso scripta opera cujusdam mâ—ndici qui in Scipione eam inclusam gerebat tandem reddita est tom 2. act ca. 19. and carried the letter in the trunke of his hollow staffe which for that purpose he had provided as soone as the report of these strange disorders came to the Emperors eares they sent for and commanded certaine Bishops of either side personally to come before them to Constantinople that they might bee fully informed of the truth in all the proceedings and the truth after diligent examination being found the Emperors by their Imperiall authoritie adnulled all the Acts of the conventicle restored Cyrill f Platuit pientiss Regi ut Aegyptius et Memnon â—in suis locis maneant Epist Legatorum Conciliab Append. tom 3. ca. 10. pa. 791. b. et ille Cyrillus ad thronum suum redit Jbid. and Memnon approved g Legalorum Synodi sententia publicè approbata Orientales quidem condemnat Nestorio vero exilium indicit Deâ—retum Regium tom 5. act Ephes ca. 11. the judgement of the holy Councell against Nestorius adding banishment also from Constantinople to his deposition But the Synodall sentence h Quae extat tom 4. act ca. 7. of deposition against Iohn and the other Bishops of his faction that they staied and suspended for a while partly to prevent a greater schisme which Iohn was like to procure but specially in hope that Iohn and the other Easterne Bishops might in time be i Imperator decrevit ut sententia Oecumenicae Synodi contra Nestorium vim obtineret quidque in causa Iohannis constituisset suspenderetur Bin. nâ—t â—n Conc. Ephes § Verum pa. 921. reduced and brought to unitie with Cyrill and the catholike Church which in that height of their heat and stomacke could not have beene expected And thus was the Councell at Ephesus dissolved a farre greater rent by this means being left at the end then had beene at the beginning thereof and so that maladie for which it was called not cured but encreased 5. But the religious Emperor Theodosius could not bee at quiet while the Church was thus disturbed but the very next yeare after the Ephesine Councell was ended when time and better advise had now cooled the former heat of the Easterne Bishops hee began to effect that union which before he had entended and he so earnestly laboured therein that himselfe professed k Sacr. Jmp. ad Acatium Episc Ber. to 5. act Ephes ca. 10. I am certainely and firmely resolved not to desist in working this reconcilement untill God shall vouchsafe to restore unitie and peace to the Church To which purpose hee writ a very religious and effectuall Epistle l Sacr. Imp. missa per Aristol ad Iohannem tom 5. act Ephes ca. 3. to Iohn B. of Antioch by many reasons perswading and by his imperiall authoritie commanding m Iohanni mandavit ut scelerata Nestorij dogmata anathematizaret c. Epist Cyril ad Dyn to 5. act Ephes ca. 16. Imperatores literas miserunt ad Acatium Bâ—rcensem et Iohannem quibus severè praecipiunt ut turbas consopiamus Epist Pauli ad Cyril to 5. act Eph. ca. 4. him and with him the rest of the faction to subscribe to the deposition of Nestorius the anathematizing of his heresie and so to embrace the holy communion with Cyrill and the catholike Church which perswasions of the Emperor tooke indeed the intended effect for after some tergiversation for a while both Iohn and most of the Easterne Bishops before the end of that yeare relented and in a Synod held at Antioch subscribed as the Emperor perswaded them both to the deposing of Nestorius and to a truly orthodoxall profession sent unto them by Cyrill wherein they approved n Cum igitur Johannes subscripsisset caeterique qui majori authoritate apud ipsum erant eâ— Nestorij dogmata anathematizassent coÌ„munionem illis restituimus Epist Cyril ad Dynat to 5. ca. 16. the holy Ephesine Councell and condemned all the heresies of Nestorius and upon this their consenting to Cyrill and the orthodoxall faith were received into the peace of the Church and so union and concord was fullie concluded betwixt Cyrill with the other orthodoxall Bishops Iohn with most of those Eastern Bishops who before adhered unto him 6. Let us now see how Vigilius and after him Baronius under couler of this Vnion plead for Ibas his heretical Epistle In the end of that Epistle Ibas makes mention o Et communicantibus adinvicem coÌ„tentio de medio ablata est et pax iâ— Ecclesia facta Ibae verba in sua Epist of the union betwixt Iohn and Cyrill yea mentioneth it as a great blessing of p Voluit autem Deus qui suae semper curam gerit Ecclesiae Ibid. God to the Church seeing that he not onely consented but greatly rejoyced at the same Thus much is cleare and certaine by the Epistle Now because the Vnion as we have declared was made by consenting to the Catholike faith it seemes that Ibas who consented to the Vnion consented also to the Catholike faith and so was received into the communion of Cyrill and the Catholike Church Seeing then Ibas by this Epistle is shewed to approve and embrace the Vnion and embracing of the union is the proofe of a Catholike it followeth that even by this Epistle Ibas declares himselfe to be a very good Catholike and an earnest embracer of the Catholike faith This is the summe of their collection which is as any wil confesse a very faire plausible pretence and therefore more fit for the Pope and Cardinall to cloake their heresie under the shew thereof But least we seeme either to wrong them or leave out ought which is emphaticall in their reason it is needfull to heare them dispute in their owne words 7. It differeth much saith q Bar. an 448. nu 75. Baronius to say that the Epistle is Catholike or that those things which are written in it are true and to say that Ibas by this Epistle was proved to be a catholike Etenim nihil aliud inde acceperunt patres nisi Ibam tunc temporis fuisse Catholicum for the fathers at Chalcedon tooke nothing at all out of that Epistle but that Ibas at that time
which is in holding the true foundation of faith The contrary of all this falleth out unto them of the present Romane Church For not onely their sinnes are made more sinfull unto them there being no mantle to cover or hide them from the eyes of God and shield them from his vengeance but even their best and most holy actions which they doe or can performe though they should doe nothing but sing hymnes with David or feed Christs flock with Peter or give their goods to the poore and their bodies to be burned for Christ even these I say are so tainted with the venome of that Apostaticall foundation that being of themselves holy actions yet unto them they are turned into sinne and become pernicious and mortiferous For whatsoever act being in it selfe either good or indifferent any of their Church except onely the Pope himselfe who is a member transcendent doth performe because they doe it in obedience unto him whose supreme authority they make the foundation not onely of their faith but of all good actions in doing any such act there is a vertuall and implicit obedience to Antichrist an acknowledgement of his supreme power to teach and command what is to be done a receiving his marke either in their hand or forehead so that every such act is not onely impious but even Antichristian and containeth in it a vertuall and implicit renouncing of the whole faith In regard whereof none can ever sufficiently I say not commend but admire the zeale of Luther who though he was so earnest to have the Communion in both kinds contrarie to the doctrine and custome of the Romane Church yet withall he e Kemnit Exa Conc. Trid. 1. Tract de communi sub utraque specie pa 136. professed that if the Pope as Pope should command it to be received in both kinds he then would receive it not in both but in one kind onely Blessed Luther it was never thy meaning either to receive it onely in one or to deny it to be necessary for Gods Church and people to receive it in both kindes Thou knewest right well that Bibite ex hoc omnes was Christs owne ordinance with which none might dispense Thou for defence of this truth among many was set up as a signe of contradiction unto them and as a marke at which they directed all their darts of malicious and malignant reproaches Farre was it from thee to relent one hare-bredth in this truth But whereas they f Conc. Constant Sess 13. Conc. Trid. Sess 22. in decreto super petit de concessione calici◠Bell. lib. 4. de Euchar ca. 28. taught the use of the Cup to be indifferent and arbitrarie such as the Church that is the Pope might either allow or take away as he should thinke fit upon this supposall and no otherwise didst thou in thine ardent zeale to Christ and detestation of Antichrist say that were the use of both or one kinde onely a thing indeed indifferent as they taught it to be if the Pope as Pope should command the receiving in both kindes thou wouldst not then receive it so lest whilst thou might seeme to obey Christ commanding that but yet upon their supposall as a thing indifferent thou shouldest certainly performe obedience to Antichrist by his authoritie limiting and restraining that indifferency unto both kindes as now by his authority hee restraines it unto one The summe is this To doe any act whether in it selfe good or indifferent but commanded to be done by the Pope as Pope to pray to preach to receive the Sacraments yea but to lift your eyes or hold up your finger or say your Pater noster or your Ave Maria or weare a bead a modell a lace or any garment white or blacke or use any crossing either at Baptisme or any other time to do any one of these or any the like eo nomine because the Pope as Pope teacheth that they are to be done or commands the doing of them is in very deed a yeelding one selfe to be a vassall of Antichrist a receiving the marke of the beast and a vertuall or implicit deniall of the faith in Christ So extremly venemous is that poison which lyeth in the root of that fundamentall heresie which they have laid as the very rocke and Foundation of their faith 34. Hitherto we have examined the former position of Baronius which concerned Heresie His other concerning Schisme is this g Esse schismatici convicti sunt qui diversam à Romano Pontifice his decernendis sententiam sectati essent Bar. an 547. nu 30. That they who dissented from Pope Vigilius when hee decreed that the Three Chapters ought to be defended were Schismatikes A most strange assertion that the whole Catholike Church should bee schismaticall for they all dissented from Vigilius in this cause that Catholikes should all at once become Schismatikes yea and that also for the very defence of the Catholike faith I oppose to this another and true assertion That not onely Pope Vigilius when he defended the Three Chapters and forsooke communion with the condemners of them was a Schismatike himselfe and chiefe of the Schisme but that all who as yet defend Vigilius that is who maintaine the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith and forsake communion with those that condemne it that those all are and that for this very cause Schismatikes and the Pope the ringleader in the Schisme 35. For the manifesting whereof certaine it is that after Pope Vigilius had so solemnly and judicially by his Apostolicall authority defined that the Three Chapters ought to be defended there was a great rent and Schisme in the Church either part separating it selfe from the other and forsaking communion with the other First the holy Councell and they who tooke part with it anathematized h Coll. 8. talis anathema sit saepe ibid. the defenders of those Chapters thereby as themselves expound it declaring their opposites to be separated i Nihil aliud significat anathema nisi à Deo separationem Coll. 5. pa. 551. b. from God and therefore from the society of the church of God On the other side Pope Vigilius they who were on his part were so averse from the others that they would rather endure disgrace yea banishment as Baronius k An. 553. nu 221. sheweth thē communicate with their opposites But I shal not need to stay in proving that there was a rent and schisme at this time betweene the defenders condemners of those chapters Baronius professeth it saying l Ibid. The whole Church was then schismate dilacerata torn asunder by a schisme Againe m An. eodem 553. nu 250. After the end of the Councell there arose a greater war then was before Catholikes so he falsly calls both parts being then divided among themselves some adhaering to the Councell others holding with Vigilius and his Constitution Againe Many n An. eodem nu 229. relying
holding this one fundamentall position they are pertinacious in all their errours and that in the highest degree of pertinacy which the wit of man can devise yea and pertinacious before all conviction and that also though the truth should never by any meanes be manifested unto them For by setting this downe they are so far from being prepared to embrace the truth though it should be manifested unto them that hereby they have made a fundamentall law for themselves that they never will be convicted nor ever have the truth manifested unto them The onely meanes in likelihood to perswade them that the doctrines which they maintaine are heresies were first to perswade the Pope who hath decreed them to bee orthodoxall to make a contrary decree that they are hereticall Now although this may be morally judged to be a matter of impossibilitie yet if his Holinesse could be induced hereunto and would so farre stoope to Gods truth as to make such a decree even this also could not perswade them so long as they hold that foundation They would say either the Pope were not the true Pope or that he defined it not as Pope and ex Cathedra or that by consenting to such an hereticall decree hee ceased ipso facto to be Pope or the like some one or other evasion they would have still but grant the Popes sentence to be fallible or hereticall whose infallibility they hold as a doctrine of faith yea as the foundation of their faith they would not Such and so unconquerable pertinacy is annexed and that essentially to that one Position that so long as one holds it and whensoever he ceaseth to hold it hee ceaseth to be a member of their Church there is no possible meanes in the world to convict him or convert him to the truth 21. You doe now clearely see how feeble and inconsequent that Collection is which Baronius here useth in excuse of Pope Vigilius for that he often professeth to defend the Councell of Chalcedon and the faith therein explaned Hee did but herein that which is the usuall custome of all other heretikes both ancient and moderne Quit him for this cause and quit them all condemne them and then this preteÌ„ce can no way excuse Vigilius froÌ„ heresie They all with him professe with great ostentation to hold the doctrines of the Scriptures of Fathers of generall Councels but because their profession is not onely lying and contradictorie to it selfe but alwayes such as that they retaine a wilfull and pertinacious resolution not to forsake that heresie which themselves embrace as Vigilius had not to forsake his defence of the Three Chapters Hence it is that their verbal profession of Scriptures Fathers and Councels cannot make any of them nor Vigilius among them to be esteemed orthodoxall or Catholike but the reall and cordiall profession of any one doctrine which they with such pertinacy hold against the Scriptures or holy generall Councels as Vigilius did this of the Three Chapters doth truly demonstrate them all and Vigilius among them to be heretikes And this may suffice for answer to the second exception or evasion of Baronius CAP. 15. The third exception of Baronius in excuse of Vigilius taken from his confirming of the fift Councell answered and how Pope Vigilius three or foure times changed his judgement in this cause of faith 1. IN the third place Baronius comes to excuse Vigilius by his act of confirming and approving the fift Councell and the decree thereof for condemning the Three Chapters It appeareth saith hee a An. 554. nu 7. that Vigilius to the end he might take away the schisme and unite the Easterne Churches to the Catholike communion quintam Synodum authoritate Apostolica comprobavit did approve the fift Synod by his Apostolicall authoritie Againe b An. 553. nu 235. when Vigilius saw that the Easterne Church would be rent from the West unlesse he consented to the fift Synod eam probavit he approved it Again c Ibid. nu 236. Pelagius thought it sit as Vigilius had thought before that the fift Synod wherein the three Chapters were condemned should bee approved and again d An. 556. nu 1. Cognitum fuit it was publikely known that Vigilius had approved the fift Synod and condemned the three Chapters The like is affirmed by Bellarmine e Lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 5. § Coacta Vigilius confirmed the fift Synod per libellum by a booke or writing Binius is so resolute herein that hee saith f Not in Conc. 5. § Praestitit A Vigilio quintam Synodum confirmatam et approbatam esse nemo dubitat none doubteth but that Vigilius confirmed and approved the fift Councell Now if Vigilius approved the fift Councell and condemned the Three Chapters it seemes that all which wee have said of his contradicting the fift Synod and of his defending those Three Chapters is of no force and that by his assent to the Synod he is a good Catholike This is the Exception the validity whereof we are now to examine 2. For the clearing of which whole matter it must bee remembred that all which hitherto wee have spoken of Vigilius hath reference to his Apostolicall decree published in defence of those Three Chapters that is to Vigilius being such as that decree doth shew and demonstrate him to have beene even a pertinacious oppugner of the faith and a condemned heretike by the judiciall sentence of the fift Councell but now Baronius drawes us to a further examination of the cariage of Vigilius in this whole businesse and how hee behaved himselfe from the first publishing of the Emperours Edict which was in the twentieth g Bar. an 546. nu 8. yeare of Iustinian unto the death of Vigilius which was as Baronius accounteth h An. 555. nu 1. in the 29 of Iustinian and second yeare after the fift Councell was ended but as Victor who then lived accounteth i In Chron. an 17. post Coss Basil in the 31 of Iustinian and fourth yeare after the Synod And for the more cleare view of his cariage wee must observe foure severall periods of time wherein Vigilius during those nine or tenne yeares gave divers severall judgements and made three or foure eminent changes in this cause of faith The first from the promulgation of the Emperours Edict while he remained at Rome and was absent from the Emperor The second after he came to Constantinople and to the Emperours presence but before the fift Synod was begun The third in the time of the fift Synod and about a yeare after the end and dissolution thereof The fourth from thence that is from the yeare after the Synod unto his death 3. At the first k Ipso exordio asserâ—ae ab Imperatore sententiae Bar. an 546 nu 38. et 39. publishing of the Edict many of the Westerne Churches impugnabant Edictum did oppose themselves to it and as Baronius saith insurrexere made an insurrection against it and
that curse of the generall Councel The second that both Facundus Baronius do quite mistake the matter in carping at the Emperour as if by his Edict or in condemning those Three Chapters he had taught or published some new doctrine of faith he did not He taught and commanded all others to embrace that true ancient and Apostolicall faith which was decreed and explaned at Chalcedon as both the whole fift Councell witnesseth which sheweth that all those Chapters were implicitè but yet truly and indeed condemned in the definition of faith made at Chalcedon and Pope Gregorie also testifieth the same saying of this fift Councell that it was in omnibus sequax in every point a follower of the Councell at Chalcedon This the religious Emperour wisely discerning did by his imperiall edict and authoritie as Constantine and Theodosius had done before him ratifie that old and Catholike faith which the Nestorians by defending those Chapters craftily undermined at that time The third speciall point which I observe is that which Baronius noteth as the cause why Pope Vigil was so eager against the Emperor and his edict And what thinke you was it Forsooth because Iustinian primus m An. 553. nu 237. legem sancivit was the first who made a law and published a Decree for condemning of those three Chapters Had the Pope first done this and Iustinian seconded his holinesse therein hee had beene another Constantine a second Theodosius the dearest child of the Church But for Princes to presume to teach the Pope or make any lawes concerning the faith before they consult with the Romane Apollo or make him acquainted therewith that 's n Vel si rectum fuisset recte non fieret quia nulli Regum hinc aliquid agere sed solis est sacerdotibus datum Facund Bar. an 547. nu 35. Imperator est fidem coram sacerdotibus profiteri non eandem praescribere sacerdotibus Bar. ibid. piaculum a capitall a◠irremissible sinne the Pope may not endure it So then is was neither zeale not pietie nor love to the truth but meere stomacke and pride in Vigilius to oppose himselfe to the Emperours edict and make an insurrection against him A sory reason God wot for any wise man in the world much more for the Pope to contradict the truth and oppugne the Catholike faith Now if Iustinian for doing this which was an act of prudence and pietie tending wholy to the good and peace of the Church if hee could not escape so undutifull usage at the Pope his orators in those better times religious Kings may not thinke it strange to finde the like or far worse entertainment at the Popes of these dayes and their instruments men so exact and eloquent in reviling that in all such base and uncivill usage they goe as farre beyond Facundus Tertullus and them of former ages as drosse or the most abject mettle is inferiour to refined gold This is the first Period and first judgement of Vigilius touching this cause of the three Chapters in defence of which and oppugning of the Emperours edict hee continued more then a yeare after the publishing of the Edict even all that time while hee remained at Rome and was absent from the Emperour 6. As soone almost as Vigilius was come to Constantinople and had saluted the Emperor and conferred with them who stood for the Edict he was quite another man he changed cum caelo animum the aire of the Emperors Court altered the Popes judgement and this was about a yeare after o Edictū editū fuit anno 546. Bar. eo anno nu 8. Constantinopolin ingressus est an 547. propediē Natalis Domini Bar. an illo nu 26. the publishing of the Edict Now that all things might be done with more solemnitie and advise there was a Synod p Bar. an eod nu 31. 32. held shortly after his comming at Constantinople wherein Vigilius with thirty Bishops condemned the Three Chapters and consented to the Emperors Edict This Facundus expresly witnesseth saying q Ibid. nu 37. How shall not this bee a prejudice to the cause if it bee demonstrated that Pope Vigilius with thirty Bishops or therabouts have condemned the Epistle of Ibas approved by the Councell of Chalcedon and anathematized that Bishop Theodorus of Mopsvestia with his doctrines the praises whereof are set downe in that Councell Thus Facundus Besides all this Vigilius was now so forward in this cause that as before he had written bookes against the Edict in defence of the three Chapters and excommunicated those who condemned those Chapters so now on the Emperors side he writ bookes and gave judgement for the condemning of those Chapters and excommunicated some by name Rusticus and Sebastianus two Romane Deacons because they would not condemne them None can deny saith Baronius d An. 547. nu 40. that Vigilius writ a booke against the three chapters and sent it unto Mennas Bishop of Constantinople Again there e Ibid. is certaine proofe latae ab eo sententiae of the sentence of excommunication pronounced by Vigilius against Rusticus Sebastianus and other defenders of those chapters and this is so cleare ut nulla dubitatio esse possit that there can be no doubt at all but that Vigilius approved by a Constitution the Emperors sentence and condemned the three Chapters So Baronius The Epistles of Vigilius doe testifie the same In that f Extat in Coll. 7. Conc. 5. pa. 578. to Rusticus and Sebastianus he very often makes mention Iudicati nostri Constituti nostri of our judgement of our constitution against the three chapters concerning which he addeth g Ibid. pa. 580. that it was ratified by his Apostolicall authority saying that no man may doe contra constitutum nostrum quod ex beati Petri authoritate proferimus against this our Constitution which we set forth by the authority of Saint Peter The like hee testifieth in his Epistle h Ibid. to Valentinianus We beleeve saith he that those things may suffice the children of the Church which we writ to Mennas concerning the blasphemies of Theodorus of Mopsvestia and his person concerning the Epistle of Ibas and the writings of Theodoret against the right faith Thus Vigilius consenting now with the Emperor defending his Imperiall Edict and condemning the three Chapters in all which his profession was Catholike and orthodoxall 7. When Vigilius was thus turned an Imperialist and in regard of his outward profession declared in his Constitution become orthodoxall though as it seemeth he remained in heart hereticall hee fell into so great dislike of those who defended the three Chapters that they i Bar. an 547. nu 49. did proclamare proclame him to be a colluder a prevaricator or betrayer of the faith one who to please the Emperour revolted from his former judgement yea the Africane k In Chron. an 10. post Coss Basilij Bishops proceeded so farre against him that as Victor
that if you divide them into foure parts I doe constantly affirme there is no more truth in three of those foure than you have seene to bee in this fable which from a most base forgery knowne also to the Cardinall for such hee hath commended for a grave and authentike history unto us And I should grow somewhat out of patience to see the Cardinall so grosly contradict both the truth and his owne writings also but that by my long and serious tossing of his bookes I perceive this is so familiar a tricke with him that for the usuall meeting of it I have long since forgotten to be angry with him for such pettie faults This I hope which hath beene declared will serve for a caveat unto all to take heed how they credit any matter whatsoever upon the Cardinals relation either it is in it selfe untrue or it springs from some untruth or by his purpose in relating it it is made to serve but for a pully to draw you into some untruth aut aliquis latet dolus either in the header taile there is a sting beleeve him not And I would also have added somewhat for Binius who in this t Bin. Not. in Vigilij sententiam contra Theodorum tom ◠Conc. pa. 504. as in other fancies and fables applauds Baronius but I suppose that as hee sucketh his errours from Baronius so hee will thinke that the refuting of Baronius is a sufficient warning for him to purge his Edition of the Councels from such vile and shamelesse untruths Thus much of that former point which concernes the second Period in Vigilius changings CAP. XVII That Vigilius neither by his Pontificall Decree nor so much as by a personall profession consented to or confirmed the fift Councell after the end thereof or after his supposed exile 1. THE other point proposed concernes that fourth and last change of Vigilius judgement whereby as Baronius a Cum vero Vigilius graviori damno universum Orientem ab Ecclesia Rom. divisum cerneret nisi Synodo quintae consentiret eam probavit Bar. an 553 nu 235. tels us he by his Apostolicall Decree b Vigilius abrogato quod pro 3. Capitulis ediderat Constituto quinta Synodo adversanti eandem Synodum authoritate Apostolica comprobavit Bar. 554. nu 7. Vigilius hanc Synodum quintam suo Decreto suaque authoritate Pontificia confirmavit Bin. not in Conc. 5. § Praestitit et Decretū Vigilij vocat Bar. an 553. nu 231. confirmed the fift Councell when about a yeare Quo anno 554. Vigilius praecibus Narsetis liberatur exilio Bar. an 554. nu 1. necesse est dicere id à Vigilio factum id est quintam Synodum comprobatam hoc tempore an 554. cum ab exili◠solutus est Bar. ibid. nu 4. Idem ait Bin. not in Conc. 5. § Praestitit after the end thereof he returned out of exile That such a change of Vigilius can no way helpe Baronius or his cause though it should be granted unto him we have before d Sup. ca. 15. declared but because al which we then said was onely spoken upon a supposall and admission of this Baronian change we will now more nearly examine the whole matter and try whether there was indeed any such Decree ever made by Vigilius and whether he did at any time after the end of the fift Councell change his judgement in such sort that he became a condemner of the Three Chapters and an approver of the fift Synod And truly I could wish so much good to Vigilius as that there might appeare some cleare and ancient records to testifie his renouncing of heresie and condemning of his owne hereticall and Cathedrall decree published in the time of the Councell for defence of the Three Chapters But the truth is more precious unto me than the love of Vigilius or any Pope whatsoever because it is the truth alone which causeth me to discusse this point I must needs confesse that I can finde nothing at all which can effectually induce mee to beleeve it but there are many and pregnant reasons which inforce me to thinke that Vigilius never made any such Decree or Change as Baronius fancieth but that this whole fourth Period and change of Vigilius so gloriously painted out by Baronius is nothing else but another fiction and peece of the Cardinals owne Poetry which without all warrant or ground from any ancient writer hee like a Spider onely out of his owne braine hath woven and devised 2. That Vigilius made no such Decree the reason which Bar. gives in this very case may declare he to prove that Vigilius made not this decree either during the time of the Synod or shortly after the end thereof hath these words e Bar. an 553. nu 223. If Vigilius had then assented by his letters utique literae illae Actis fuissent intextae verily those letters purchased with so great labour would have beene inserted among the Acts of the fift Synod and a great number of copies would have been taken thereof spred abroad and made knowne to all Churches as well in the East as West even as the Epistle of Leo was because by those letters validarentur quae à Synodo sancita those things which the fift Synod had decreed the Pope contradicting them and thereby they being invalid should now be made of force the Pope consenting to them Thus Baronius Doth not the same reason as effectually prove that he made no such decree at al or not a yeare after as that he made it not within one or two moneths after the end of the Synod with what labour at what price would not the Bishops of the fift Synod have purchased that decree how gladly would they have annexed it to their Acts as the Decree of Leo is to the acts at Chalcedon How many copies and extracts would they have taken of it and dispersed them every where both in the West and East to testifie the truth of their Synodall judgement and that the infallible Iudge had consented to their sentence and confirmed the same Or would they have done this within a month and not a yeare after the end of the Synod what odds to the point in hand can that small difference of time make in the cause specially considering that the very Epistle of Leo f Ea est Epist Leonis 61. quae incipit Omnem fraternitatem whereof the Cardinall speaketh was not written till five g Conc. Chalc. desijt 28. Oct. Coss Martiano aut 1. Novemb. ut patet ex ult Sess Epistola vero Leonis scripta est 21. Martij Coss Opilione ut patet ex sine Epist moneths after the end of the Councell at Chalcedon and yet was it annexed to the acts thereof If then the Cardinalls reason bee of force to prove that hee writ not this Decree shortly after the Synod it is altogether as effectuall to prove he writ it not at all nor
their head for neither did Vigilius resist their assembling but freely and willingly consented unto it neither was hee excluded from the Synod but most undutifully absented himselfe from it and though the members at that time wanted the Popes head-peece yet they had his heart his minde and his Apostolicall direction among them to bee a Cynosure unto them in that cause which alone is able to supply both his personall and Legantine absence in any Councel 17. The other objection of Baronius is taken from the decree of this Synod The sentence saith he y An. 553. nu 219. given by it was contra ipsius decretum against the decree of Vigilius and therefore their assembly deserved not the name of a generall no nor so much as of a private Synod it was no Councell at all Cardinall Bellarmine explaines this more fully saying z Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 11. §. Ac de Such Councells as define matters against the Popes instruction Reprobata Concilia dici debent are to bee called or accounted Rejected Councells for it is all one saith he whether the Pope doe expresly reject and reprobate a Councell or whether the Councell deale contra Pontificis sententiam against the Popes sentence either of both such Councells are reiected and so of no authoritie at all So Bellarmine What shall we answer to the perversnesse of these men If this rule be admitted the Church hath for ever and inevitably lost this fift Councell and by their second Nicen collection the sixt the seventh and all that follow And I verily am perswaded that none can possibly excuse either Baronius or Bellarmine from this crime of expunging the fift Councell and all which follow it from the ranke and number of generall or approved Councels For it is as cleare as the sunshine at noone day that the sentence pronounced by the fift synod was contradictory to the definition and Cathedrall instruction sent by Pope Vigilius unto them If then to define a cause contrary to the Popes instruction be a sure note of a Reprobate Councell as they teach it to be farewell for ever this fift and all that follow it or approve it they are all by the rule of these two worthy Cardinals Reprobated Councels nay not so much as Councels but meere Conspiracies or Conventicles 18. Besides this see I pray you the zeale and devotion of these men to the Catholike faith If this Councell be for this cause a Rejected Councell because it followed not the instructions of Pope Vigilius sent unto it then it should have beene an holy and approved Councell if it had followed those instructions of Vigilius that is if it had condemned the Councells of Nice Ephesus and Chalcedon if it had decreed Nestorianisme to be the Catholike faith and Iesus Christ not to be God for Vigilius by decreeing that the Three Chapters ought to be defended instructed them thus to define and judge Had they thus done then because they had followed the instructions of Vigilius the two Cardinalls would have embraced this Councell with both armes have applauded advanced it to the skies seeing it did not so but contradicted the Popes Apostolicall instructions at this time fie on it it is an unlawfull a Reprobated Councell nay it is no Councell at all nor of any authority Can any with reason judge these men to be ought else then Nestorians then condemned heretikes and obstinate oppugners of all ancient holy Councells and of the Catholike faith See the strange diversity of judgement which is in us and them They in their hereticall dotage on the Popes Cathedrall infallibility teach this fift holy Councell to bee a reprobated synod eo nomine because it followed not the instructions of Pope Vigilius we on the contrary doe constantly affirme it to bee an holy and most approved synod eo nomine because it followed not but rejected and condemned those Cathedrall instructions of Vigilius with us consent the sixt seventh and all succeeding generall Councells till that at Laterane all former holy Councells also to all which this Councell is consonant From them dissent all these both former and subsequent Councells that is the whole Catholike Church for fifteene hundreth yeares and more Vtri creditis whose doctrine thinke you now is ancient orthodoxall and catholike And whether had you rather with these two Cardinalls account this fift synod an unlawfull assembly and a reprobate Councell because it contradicted the hereticall constitution of Pope Vigilius or with such an army of witnesses honor it for a sacred Oecumenicall approved Councell though it not onely wanted the approbation but had in plaine words the Cathedrall Reprobation z Si quid contra haec quae statuinius à quolibet factum dictum atque conscriptum est vel fuerit hoc modis omnibus ex authoritate sedis Apostolicae refutamus Const Vig. in sine of Pope Vigilius 19. Having now fully refuted not onely the Assertion of Baronius That this Councell was of no authority nor an approved Councell till Pope Vigilius confirmed and approved it but also both those reasons whereby he would perswade the same there remaineth yet one doubt which necessarily is to be satisfied for the finall clearing of this point For it will and justly may bee demanded what it was which made this fift an approved Councell Or if it bee not the Popes confirmation and approbation what it is in any Councell or any decree thereof which makes it to be and rightly to be esteemed an approved Councell or Decree I constantly answer that whatsoever it be it is no approbation no confirmation nor any act of the Pope at least no more of him than of any other Patriarke or Patriarchall Primate in the Church An evident proofe whereof is in the second Generall Councell for that ever since their Synodall sentence was made against the MACEDONIANS and ratified by the Emperour was esteemed by the Catholike Church an Oecumenicall and approved Councell and that before the Pope had consented unto it or approved the same For that Councell being assembled in May a Socr. l. 5. ca. 8. when Eucherius and Seagrius were Consuls an 381. continued till b Vsque ad finem mensis Iulij producta est Bar. an 381. nu 80. about the end of Iuly in the same yeare On the 30. of Iuly Theodosius the Emperour published his severe law against the Macedonians being then condemned heretikes Hee commanded that forth with al Churches should be givē to those c Lib. 3. de fide Cathol Cod. Theod. who held the one and equall Majesty of the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost and were of the same faith with Nestorius Timotheus and other Bishops in that Synod but whosoever dissented in faith from them ut manifestos haereticos ab Ecclesia expelli they should all be expelled as manifest haeretikes and never be admitted againe In which law seeing the Macedonians are called manifest heretikes that is such as are convicted and
condemned by a generall Councell it is doubtlesse that at the promulgating of this law both the Emperour and the catholike Church held that decree of the second Councel against the Macedonians to be the judgment of an holy lawful approved Oecumenical Synod such as was the most ample convictioÌ„ of an heretike manifestation of a heresie Now this Edict was published before Pope Damasus either approved that Councell or so much as knew what was done therein For the first newes what was done in the Councell came to Damasus after the Councell of Aquileia as after Sigonius d L. 8. de Occid Jmp. an 381. Baronius declareth who after the Synod at Aquileia described saith e An. 381. nu 97. Post haec autem After these things done at Aquileia when Damasus had received a message concerning the Councell at Constantinople c. that Councell at Aquileia was held f Bar. an eod nu 81. on the fift of September when the other at Constantinople was ended a month before and how long after that time it was before Damasus approved that Councell at Constantinople whether one two or three yeares will bee hard for any of the Cardinals friends truly to explane Howsoever seeing it is certaine that the generall Councell was ended and the Decrees thereof not onely approved but put in execution by the Church before the Pope I say not confirmed that Councell but before hee knew what was done and decred therein it is a Demonstration that a generall Councell or a Decree thereof may bee and de facto hath beene judged by the Church both of them to bee of full and Synodall authoritie and approved by the Church when the Pope had confirmed or approved neither of both 20. Nay what if neither Damasus nor any of their Popes till Gregories time approved that Councell Gregory himselfe is a witnesse hereof The g Lib. 6. Epist 3â— Canons of the Constantinopolitane Councell condemne the Eudoxians but who that Eudoxius was they doe not declare And the Romane Church eosdem Canones vel gesta Synodi illius hactenus non habet nec accipit neither hath nor approveth those Canons or Acts but herein it accepteth that Synod in that which was defined against the Macedonians by it and it rejecteth those heresies which being mentioned therein were already condemned by other Fathers So Gregory By whose words it is plaine that the Romane Church untill Gregories time neither approved the Canons nor Acts of that second generall Councell Even the condemning of Macedonius and his heresie was not approved by the Romane Church eo nomine because it was decreed in that Councell for then they should have approved the Canon against the Eudoxians and all the rest of their Canons seeing there was the selfe-same authority of the holy Councell in decreeing them all but the reason why they approved that against the Macedonians was because Pope h Anathema infligimus Macedonianis Epist Damas et Synod Rom. apud Theod. lib. 5. ca. 10. Damasus had in a Romane Synod divers yeares before i Concilium illud Romanum habitum est tempore Petri Episcopi Alexandrini qui ei interfuit Zozom lib. 6. ca. 23. Timotheus vero qui Petro successit sedit in Concilio Constantinopolitano ut ex subscriptione liquet the second Councell condemned that heresie and what heresies were by former Fathers condemned those and nothing else did the Romane Church approve in that Councell as Gregory saith The inducement moving them was not the authority of the second Councell but the judgement of other Fathers for which they accepted of the second Councell therein and this was untill the dayes or time of Gregory for that is it which Gregory intendeth in the former words hactenus non habet nâ—â— accipit not meaning that till the yeare wherein he writ that Epistle which was the fifteenth Indiction the Romane Church received not those Canons or Acts for in the ninth Indiction that is sixe yeares before himselfe professed k Lib. 2. Epist 24 to embrace that second Councell as one of the foure Euangelists which also to have beene the judgement of their Church he l Lib. 2. Epist 10 Indict 11. witnesseth in the eleventh Indiction but untill Gregories time hactenus untill this age wherein I live was the second Councell the Canons or Acts thereof not had nor approved by the Romane Church And yet all that time even from the end of that Councell was both that Councell held for a generall lawfull and approved Synod and their Decree against Macedonius by the whole Church approved as a Decree of a generall and lawfull Councell such as ought to binde the whole Church 21. What wee have shewed concerning the Decree against the Macedonians and in generall for the second Councell that will bee much more evident in the third Canon of that Synod which concernes the Patriarchall dignity of the See of Constantinople his precedence to the Patriarchs of Alexandria Antioch and his authority over the Churches in Asia minor Thrace and Pontus all which was conferred on that See by that third Canon That the Church of Rome till Gregories time approved not that Canon is evident by Pope Leo who in many m Epist 54.51.61 of his Epistles specially in that to Anatolius n Epist 53. shewes his dislike of it yea rejects it as contrary to the Nicene Decrees which Leo there defineth but without doubt erroniously to bee immutable The Legates of Leo having instructions from him said openly in the Councell of Chalcedon o Act. 16. pa. 136. â— touching the Canons of this Councell in Synodicis Canonibus non habentur they are not accounted or held for Synodall Canons and following the minde and precept p Sedes Apostolica quae nobis praecepit Ib. d. pa. 137. b. of the Pope they most earnestly oppugned this third Canon Long before Leo did Damasus reject q Vel ementer refutarunt hunc tertium CanoneÌ„ Leo et Damasus Turrian l b de 6 7 et 8 Synodis pa. 65. Romana Ecclesia hactenus respuit hunc Canonem Bin not in Conc. 2 § Approbatum this Canon facto decreto in Synodo Romana making a Decree against it in a Romane Synod which is extant in their Vaticane as Turrian who belike saw the Decree doth witnesse Now seeing that Decree of Damasus was made statim post secundum Concilium presently after the second Councell and was so strongly corroborated by Pope Leo this may perswade that none of their Popes before the dayes of Gregory would repeale the Decrees of those two Popes Their owne Nicholas Sanders goes further and saith r â—am primum in Concilio Later Constantinopolitana sedes Romanae Ecclesiae assensum publice obtinuit c. Sand. lib. 7. de visib Monar ad an 1215. That this Canon was not allowed by the Romane Church till the Councell at Laterane under Innocentius the third which is more than sixe
Presidency The Emperours sent Candidianus m Tom. 1. act Conc. Ephes ca. 32. to keepe away tumult and disorderly n Non licet illos qui necessarij non sunt dogmatum examen aliquo tumultu impedire ibid. persons from the Councell to see that no o Vt diligenter prospiciat ne qua gravior dissentio synodi consultationem obturbet Ibid. dissention and private quarrels might hinder their grave consultations the free and exact discussion of the causes proposed and to provide that every one might freely p Vt omnibus singulis recte perceptis singuli quod vlsum fuerit in medio proponant vel ab aliis proposita si opus id fuerit refutare ibid. and with leisure propose what was needfull and have scope to refute all doubts proposed by others The Emperours when they heard of the dissentions and disorders among the Bishops writ unto them to take a better and more peaceable and orderly examination of the cause saying q Sacr. Imper. ad Synodum to 3. act Conc. Eph. ca. 17. Majestas nostra ea quae acta sunt pro ratis legitimis habere non potest our Majesty cannot hold or esteeme those acts done so disorderly for firme and synodall nay we decree that all things which hitherto have beene done pro irritis nullis habenda esse shall be accounted of no force but utterly void and frustrate than which no greater tokens of Imperiall Presidency can be devised The whole and holy Synod willingly submitted themselves to this presidency In their proceedings the Emperours letters were their direction r Primo omniū Actorum monumentis reverendas pietatis vestrae literas quasi Facem quandam praemisimus Ep. synod ad Imp. to 2. act Conc. Eph. ca. 22. and as themselves professe the very Torch to guide all their actions In the manifold injuries and contumelies which they endured at the hands of Iohn with his Conventicle they fled to the Emperour beseeching ſ Etiam atque etiem rogamus vestram Majestatem ut sanct synod studium erga Deum agnoscat ut Candidianum quinque praeterea è sacra synodo Episcopos ad se accersat qui omnia singula qua Ephesi gesta sunt pietati vestrae ordine coram exponant Epist synodi ad Imp. to 4. act Conc. Eph. ca. 10. idem ca. 11. him to be Iudge of their equall proceedings and take an exact view and examination of their doings which upon t Annuit tandē illorum votis Jmperator Bin. in arg cap. 19 to 4. act Conc. Ephes their request the Emperour did and called u Vestra pielas nostra supplicatione instexa mandavit ut S. Synodus quos voluerit amād et qui universarum rerum statum coram exponant Relat. synodi ad Imper. to 4. act Conc. Ephes c. 22 Nostrae praeces sunt ut judicium à tua pietate accipiamus Iohan. convent cum expetit ad Jmper Append. ad to 2. Act. Conc. Ephes ca. 2. pa. 787. b. sive Bishops of either part to Constantinople to declare the whole cause unto him after which being performed he gave judgement x Decretum regium to 5 act Conc. Ephes ca. 11. for the holy Councell and adnulled all the acts of the Conventicle as the holy Synod had earnestly and humbly entreated him So fully and cleerly doth that sacred and Oecumenicall Councell wherein was the judgement and consent of the whole Catholike Church both acknowledge this Imperiall right of Presidency in the Emperours and submit themselves unto it 14. For the Councell of Chalcedon the matter is so evident that Bellarmine though strugling against the truth could not deny it There were present saith he y Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 19. §. Quartam in this Councell secular Iudges deputed by the Emperour who were not Iudges of controversies of faith to give a decisive suffrage therein for that belongs to no secular man whatsoever sed tantum an omnia fierent legitime sive vi fraude tumultibus but they were Iudges onely of Synodall order whether all things were done lawfully without force fraud and tumult And in this doth the very Imperiall Presidency consist And truly how religiously and worthily those glorious Iudges performed that honourable office in the synod all the actions thereof doe make manifest for scarce any matter was done in the synod but the same was ordered moderated and guided by their prudence and authority The Popes Legats very insolently took upon them at the beginning willing that Dioscorus might bee put out of the synod and sayd z Act. 1. Conc. Chal. pa. 4. b. Aut ille egrediatur aut nos eximus Either let Dioscorus goe out or we will depart The Iudges gravely reproved this stomacke in the Legates telling them If you will be a Si Iudicis obtines personam non ut accusator debes prosequi Ibid. pa. 5. b. Iudges you must not prosequute as accusers nor did they suffer Dioscorus to goe away but commanded him as was fit to sit in the place of the Rei The cause of Iuvenalis and Thalassius was proposed to the synod It could not be examined by them till they had leave from the Emperour We said b Act. 4. Conc. Chal. pa. 89. b. the Iudges have acquainted the Emperour therewith and we expect his Mandate herein and after they had received the Emperours minde they then told the synod Imperator c Ibid. sententiae vestrae permisit de Iuvenale deliberare the Emperour hath upon your intreaty permitted you to discusse and judge the cause of Iuvenalis Thalassius and the rest In the cause d Act. 4. Conc. Chal. pa. 90. Omnes clamaveriit Isti haeretici sunt of the ten Aegyptian Bish the Synod had almost pronounced a temerarious sentence against them as hereticall when indeed they were orthodoxall the Bishops cryed out Isti haeretici sunt these ten are heretikes The glorious Iudges knowing which was manifest that they forbore to subscribe by reason of a custome which they had that they might doe nothing without their Patriarke who was not then chosen and not as thinking heretically in the faith moderated the Synod in that matter saying e Act. eadem 5. pa. 90 b. Rationabile nobis clemens videtur it seemes to us to be reason and an act of clemencie not to have condemned them but staid till their Patriarch bee chosen the whole Synod consented to this grave sentence of the Iudges made a Canon f Can. 30. Act. 15 for that purpose In making the very definition of faith there grew a great dissention in the Synod some g Non recte habet Desinitio c. Act. 5. Cōc Chal. pa. 93. b. would have it one some another way set downe in so much that the Popes Legates were ready to make a schisme and depart h Iubete nobis rescriptum dari ut revertamur et
explaned in their Gravamina z Gravam opposita Conc. Trid. Causa 1. pa. 21. where the first reason of their rejecting the Trent assembly is this quod ea illegitime contra manifestum jus indicta sit because it was appointed and gathered unlawfully against manifest right seeing the Pope who called it hath no authoritie to summon or call a Councel Of the same judgement were other Princes When Hieronimus Martinengus a Epit. rerum in orb gest sub Fer. an 1561. apud Scard loc cit was sent as Legate from the Pope to call some out of England to that Trent assembly in the time of the late Queene of renowned and blessed memory è Belgio in insulam traijcere prohibuit she would not suffer him to set foote in her dominion about such businesse Nec b Ibid. diversum ad Reges Daciae Suetiae missus responsum retulit and the Kings of Denmarke and Swetia gave the like answere that the Pope had no right to call a Councell So justly did they dislike and contemne the going to that Synod even for this cause and that most justly esteeming it for no other than a Conventicle or unlawfull assembly 25. Said I unlawfull that is too soft and mild a word that and all the other nine with it by reason of that Papall calling were unlawfull in the highest degree even Antichristian For the authoritie whereby those Synods were called belonging in right to Emperours and Kings and being tyrannically usurped by the Pope as he by intruding himselfe into the Imperiall royalties and lifting up himselfe above all the Vicegerents of God here in earth that is above c 2 Thess 2.4 all that is called God did thereby proclame himselfe to bee that man of sinne and display his Antichristian Banner So on the other side those Bishops and others who came at his Papall call and yeelded obedience to him in such sort usurping did eo ipso in that very act of theirs receive the marke of the beast and not onely consent but submit themselves to his Antichristian authority and sight under the vety Ensignes and Banner of Antichrist But of this point I have before d Sup. ca. 13. intreated where I shewed that all even the best actions how much more then such tumultuous and turbulent attempts when they are performed in obedience to the Pope as Pope that is as a supreme Commander are turned into impious and Antichristian rebellions against God 26. This rather is needfull to bee here observed that not onely generall but even Provinciall or Nationall Synods are in all Christian Kingdomes to bee called onely by Imperiall not at all by Papall or Episcopall authority yea and they are so called in every well ordered Church For although there goe not forth a particular and expresse Edict or mandatum from Kings to assemble them yet so long as Kings or Emperours doe not expresse their will to the contrary even that summons which is sent from Primates or other Bishops subject unto them hath virtually and implicitè the Imperiall authority by which every such Synod is assembled The reason whereof is this The holy Nicene Councell decreed e Placuit annis singulis per unamquamque Provinciam his in anno Concilia celebrari Conc. Nic. Can. 5. that for the more peaceable government of each Church there should be two Provinciall Synods yearely held by every Primate Those holy Fathers meant not as the continuall practice throughout the whole Church doth explane so strictly to define that number of two as that neither moe nor fewer might be kept in one yeare But they judging that for those times a competent and convenient number they set it downe but yet as an accidentall ceremoniall and therefore mutable order if the necessitie and occasions of any Church should otherwise require That which is substantiall and immutable in their Canon is that Provinciall Synods shall be held by each Primate so often and at such times as the necessity and occasions of their Church shall require and the chiefe Iudge of that necessity and sitting occasions is no other than hee to whose sword and authority every Bishop is subject and without whose consent first obtained they may in no place of his Kingdome assemble together without the note of tumult and sedition This Nicene Canon as all the rest when Constantine f Quae ab Episcopis erant editae regulae Constantinus sua consignabat et confirmabat authoritate Euseb lib. 4. de vita Const ca. 27. and other suceeding Emperours and Kings approved as who hath not approved that holy Councel they then gave unto it the force of an Imperiall law according to the rule omnia g Lib. 1. Cod. de Veter jure enuc et lib. 2. Decretal tit 23. ca. sicut noxius in Glossa nostra facimus quibus nostram impartimur authoritatem wee make that our owne Act and our law which wee ratifie by our authoritie And Iustinian more plainly expressed this when he said h Novel 131. ca. 1. Sancimus vicem legum obtinere sanctas regulas we enact that the holy Canons of the Church set downe in the former Councels the Nicene the Constantino-politane Ephesine and Chalcedon shall have the force and stand in the strength of Imperiall lawes By this Imperiall assent it is that when the wisedome of Christian Emperours and Kings doth not otherwise dispose of calling Synods in their dominions Primates may call the same two or moe or fewer in any yeare as necessitie shall perswade but whensoever they call any the same are called assembled and celebrated by the force of that Imperial authoritie which Kings and Emperours have either given to that Nicene Canon or which they in more explicite manner shall impart unto the Primates or Bishops in their Kingdomes 27. Now if Provinciall Councels may not nor ever are lawfully held in Christian Kingdomes without this authority how much lesse may generall and Oecumenicall the occasions of which being rare and extraordinary the calling also of them is extraordinary and both for the time place meerly arbitrary at the will of those who have Imperial or regal authority To say nothing how inconvenient it is even in civill government and how dangerous unto Christian States that all the Bish of a Kingdome should leave their own Churches naked of their guides and Pastours and goe into farre and forraigne Countries without the command of their Soveraigne Lords especially goe at the command of an usurping Commander and that also if he require though their owne Soveraignes shall forbid or withstand the same of the mischiefe and danger whereof the example of Becket among many like may be a warning to all Kingdomes But leaving that to the grave consideration of others thus much now out of that which hath beene said is evident that seeing all those ten forenamed Synods were called and assembled by no other authority than Pontificall and seeing
yeare after it was published was confirmed by Pope Iohn who thus writeth f Epist 1. Ioh. 2. ad Justin to 2. Conc. pa. 404. et Bar. an 534. nu 15. et seq to the Emperour You for the love of the faith and to remove heresie have published an Edict which because it agreeth with the Apostolike doctrine wee confirme by our authority and againe You have writ and published those things which both the Apostolike doctrine and the venerable authority of the holy Fathers hath decreed nos in omnibus confirmamus and we confirme it in all points This your faith is the true and certaine religion this all the Fathers Bishops of Rome and the Apostolike See hath hitherto inviolably kept this confession whosoever doth contradict hee is an alien from the holy Communion and from the Catholike Church Thus Pope Iohn What can any man in the world now thinke else of Baronius but condemne him for an accursed heretike Hee denyes the Councell of Chalcedon to embrace that profession unum de Trinitate which as the Emperour and Pope witnesse it earnestly embraceth he not onely suspecteth in this place but in plaine termes else-where g Planè comperitur eosdem ipsos Scythiae Monachos Eutycheanos fuisse haereticos Bar. an 519. nu 99. he calleth the Scythian Monks Eutycheans heretikes and oppugners of the Councell of Chalcedon and that for this cause for that both themselves professed and required others to professe Christ to bee unum de sancta Trinitate nor content herewith hee addeth these words the heresie whereof with no niter can bee washt away hee faineth saith Baronius h An. eod nu 102. that these words unus de Trinitate est crucifixus are to bee added for the strengthning and explaning of the Councell of Chalcedon which sentence unus de Trinitate est crucifixus the Legates of the Apostolike Sea prorsus reijciendam esse putarunt thought to bee such as ought utterly to be rejected as being never used by the Fathers in their Synodall sentences latere enim sciebant sub melle venenum for they knew that poison did lye under this hony Now seeing by Iustinians Edict and the Popes confirmation thereof all who either refuse or who will not professe Christ to be unum de sancta Trinitate are accursed and excluded from the Catholike Church and communion Baronius cannot possibly escape that just censure who condemneth that profession as hereticall and as repugnant to the faith of Chalcedon Thus while the Cardinall labours to prove by this the Acts of the fift Councell to bee corrupt hee demonstrates himselfe to bee both untrue hereticall rejected out of the Church and a slanderer of the holy Councell of Chalcedon as favouring the heresie of Nestorius 4. Thirdly whereas hee saith that the Scythian Monkes would inferre verba ista in Synodum Chalcedonensem bring or thrust in those words into the Councell of Chalcedon it is a slander without all colour or ground of truth they saw divers Nestorians obstinate in denying this truth that Christ was unus de sancta Trinitate who pretended for them that these words were not expressed in the Councell of Chalcedon the Monkes and Catholikes most justly replyed that though the expresse words were not there yet the sense of them was decreed in that Councell that this confession was but an expression or explication of that which was truly implicitely and more obscurely decreed at Chalcedon To falsifie the Acts of that Councell or adde one syllable unto it otherwise than by way of explanation or declaration that the Monks and Catholikes whom Baronius calleth Eutycheans never sought to doe as at large appeares by that most learned and orthodoxall booke written by Iohannes Maxentius about this very cause against which booke and the Author thereof the more earnestly Baronius doth oppose himselfe and call them hereticall hee doth not therby one whit disgrace them his tongue and pen is no slander at least not to weighed but the more he still intangles himselfe in the heresie of the Nestorians out of which in that cause none can extricate him as in another Treatise I purpose God willing to demonstrate 5. Fourthly whereas Baronius saith that the Scythian Monkes prevailed not in the dayes of Hormisda quod absque additamento Synodus rectè consisteret because the Synod of Chalcedon was well enough without that addition hee shewes a notable sleight of his hereticall fraud That the Synod is well enough without adding those words as an expresse part of the Synodall decree or as written totidem verbis by the Councell of Chalcedon is most true but nothing to the purpose for neither the Scythian Monks nor any Catholikes did affirme them so to bee or wish them so to bee added for that had beene to say in expresse words wee will have the decree falsified or written in other words than it was by the Councell But that the Synod was well enough without this additament as an explication of it and declaration of the sense of that Councell is most untrue for both Iustinian by his Edict commanded and Pope Iohn by his Apostolike authoritie confirmed that to bee the true meaning both of that Councell and of all the holy Fathers And when a controversie is once moved and on foote whether Christ ought to bee called unus de sancta Trinitate for a man then to deny this or deny it to bee decreed in the Councell of Chalcedon or to deny that it ought to be added as a true explanation of that Councell is to deny the whole Catholike faith and the decrees of the foure first Councels and though one shall say and professe in words as did Hormisda and his Legates that they hold the whole Councell of Chalcedon yet in that they expresly deny this truth which was certainly decreed at Chalcedon their generall profession shall not excuse them but their expresse deniall of this one particular shall demonstrate them both to bee heretikes and expresly to beleeve and hold an heresie repugnant to that Councell which in a generality they professe to hold but indeed and truth doe not Even as the expresse denying of the manhood or Godhead of Christ or resurrection of the dead shall convince one to bee an heretike though hee professe himselfe in a generality to beleeve and hold all that the holy Scriptures doe teach or the Nicene fathers decree If Baronius his words that the Councell is right without that additament bee taken in the former sense they are idle vaine and spoken to no purpose which of the Cardinals deepe wisedome is not to bee imagined If they bee taken as I suppose they are in the later sense they undeniably demonstrate him to bee a Cardinall Nestorian 6. But leaving all the rest of the Cardinals frauds in this passage let us come to that last clause which concernes the corrupting of the Councell of Chalcedon This saith he which in Hormisdaes dayes they could not now in this
called Cyrill an heretike after that union The impious Epistle sayth the Councell x Loco citato is shewed by the contents thereof to have beene written after the union therefore it appeareth that Ibas denyed it to be his Epistle by this in that he sayd that he spake nothing against Cyrill after the union again Ibas in this denyed the Epistle eò quod dicebat because he sayd y Coll. 6. p. 564. a after the union I am not found to have sayd ought against Saint Cyrill Yea this and no other to have beene that denyall which the Councell meant Baronius knew right well for himselfe sayth z an 553. n. 211 that it is sayd in the Councell that Ibas denyed the Epistle ex eo for this cause for that after the union and peace made he denyed that he had sayd ought against Cyrill yet notwithstanding all this evidence of truth the Cardinall to disgrace the Acts of this Councell even against his owne knowledge and conscience affirmeth it to bee an untruth or as Binius calls it in a most spitefull manner a lye that Ibas denyed this Epistle to be his CAP. XXVII The third alteration of the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius for that the Councell of Chalcedon is said therein to condemne the Epistle of Ibas refuted 1. THE third corruption is by a mis-report and untrue relation which Baronius observeth in these Acts for that in them the Councel of Chalcedon is said to have condemned that Epistle of Ibas which he not onely saith a Quod ibidem subditur eandem Epistolam in Synodo Chalced. fuisse damnatam ipsa acta secus docent neutrum enim horum verum esse superius demonstravimus Bar. an 553. nu 211. is untrue Binius cals b Duo aut plura mendacia Bin. not in Conc. 5. pa. 60â— b. it also in plaine termes a lye but addeth both that the Acts of the Councell of Chalcedon doe teach the contrary and that out of those Acts hee hath before demonstrated the same Call you this a corruption of the Acts why it is the maine purpose of the Councell it is their very judgement and resolution touching the Three Chapters often and with acclamations repeated The Epistle c Anathematizavit Epist contrariam per omnia expositae definitioni à Concilio Chalc. Sancta Synodus dixit Scimus et nos haec ita subsequutâ— esse Coll. 6 pa. 564. a. is contrary to the definition Epistolam d Coll. eadem pa. 576. b. definitio sancti Chalcedonensis Concilij condemnat definitio ejecit in the proofe whereof they much insist Neither onely in the sixt collation doe they at large set downe this but in their eighth even in their Synodall definition e Quo facto demonstratum est contrariam per omnia Epistolam esse his quae definitione Chalc. continentur Coll. 8. pa. 584. a. they expresly mention that they have not onely said but even demonstrated before that this Epistle is in all things contrary to the definition of the Councell at Chalcedon yea they there adde which is more that the Councel of Chalcedon would in no sort otherwise f Jnvenimus quod non alâ—ter pâ—ssi sunt Ibam suscipere c. Ib. receive Ibas unlesse he himselfe did condemne the impietie contained in that Epistle Would any in the world save Baronius a man meerly infatuated in this cause and such as follow his idle fancies account that to bee a corruption or depravation of the Acts which is the maine scope purpose judgement and definition of the Synod which they so often in their severall Sessions repeate of which they expresly testifie in their very definitive sentence that they before had said proved demonstrated the same without which also if it were taken away as the Cardinall pretends it should not onely the Acts should be utterly perverted but the quite contrary to the judgement and determination of the Councell should bee affirmed Baronius might with as great truth and probability have said that the handling of the Three Chapters or judging of the Three Chapters had beene a depravation and corrupting of the Acts for this assertion that Ibas his Epistle was condemned by the Councell of Chalcedon is as necessarie and essentiall to the Acts as the cause it selfe of the Three Chapters or any sentence that is any where set downe therein 2. But yet if it be no depravation in the Acts yet saith the Cardinall g Loc. citat and Binius it is untrue It is a lye that the Councell of Chalcedon condemned that Epistle Let falshood and impudency it selfe stand here amazed and agast at these men This definitive sentence of this Councell wherein it is proclamed and decreed that the Epistle of Ibas was condemned by the Councell of Chalcedon is approved by all succeeding generall Councells by Pelagius Gregory and all other their successors till Leo the tenth that is by the consenting judgment of the whole Catholike Church and of all Catholikes ever since that decree was made and now Baronius and Binius stand up to give them all the lie they all say untruths onely Baronius and Binius are men that drop Oracles out of whose mouths no lie nor untruth can at any time proceed 3. But saith the Cardinall h Loco cit The Acts of the Councell of Chalcedon doe declare this and out of them I have before demonstrated this Loe the Cardinall will not onely say it but prove it yea he hath even demonstrated out of the Councell of Chalcedon all the former Popes and Councels that is all the whole Catholike Church to lye I feare mee such demonstrations will not turne to the Cardinals credit Doe the Acts of the Councell teach or demonstrate that could none of the Popes none of the succeeding generall Councels spie it in those Acts till Baronius took theÌ„ all tardy in an untruth What wil you say to the Cardinal and to his demonstration if the Acts doe not teach this nay if they teach directly and demonstrate the quite contrary who then I pray you must have the whetstone the Catholike Church or the illustrious Cardinall And certainly the Acts of Chalcedon doe demonstrate what this fift Councell and after it the sixt seventh and eighth and the rest testifie that this Epistle of Ibas was condemned by the Councell of Chalcedon First it is cleare and certaine by those Acts that the Councell of Chalcedon condemned Nestorius and all the impious doctrines and blasphemies of Nestorius approving the Ephesine i S. et magna Synodus 5. Cyrilli Synodales Epistolas amplexa est ad arguenduÌ„ Nestorianam dementiam c. Conc Chalc. Act. 5. pa. 96. et Can. 1. pa. 15. Councell and the Synodall Epistle of Cyrill wherein they k Omnes Episcopi clamaverunt Quicunque Nestoriano anathematizat anathema sit Omnes Nestorij Epistolam et dogmata anathematizamus Con. Ephes to 2. ca. 4. pa. 743. are condemned and anathematized
Vigilius as out of the Acts of the fift Synod It was proved that those Acts were corrupted and that the heretikes had inserted three quaternions that is foure and twenty leaves into the same Acts. Againe e Duae in ea 7. Actionâ— Concil 5. Epistolae inventae sunt quas commentias esse suppositias manifeste probarunt ibid. in the 7. Action or Collation it was found further that they added two Epistles of Vigilius one to Iustinian and the other to Theodora by which you see saith the Cardinal f Vides igitur quam fuerit 5. Synodus tum ab Origenistis tum à Monothelitis diversis temporibus lanciata ibid. that the Acts of the fift Synod have beene foully corrupted by the Monothelites We see it indeed And wee see withall another thing no lesse remarkable and cleare that the Cardinall is an insignious slanderer and playes the trifling Sophister in the highest degree Who ever doubted or denyed but that some copies of the Acts of this Synod have beene corrupted of this none that read the sixt g Act. 3. Act. 14. Councell can make the least question in the world For three corrupted copies were produced h Act. 14. and examined and some other were mentioned and the authors both who falsified them and who writ the inserted additions are all there recorded Nay the three corrupted copies were not onely discovered but accursed i Anathema libro qui dicitur Mennae ad Vigilium qui cuÌ„ sinxerunt sive scripserunt Anathema libâ—llis qui dicuntur facti fuisse à Vigilio ad Iustinianum et Theodorum Anathema simul eis qui falsaverunt acta sancti universalis quinti Concilij ibid. pa. 74 b. defaced k Chartaceum volumen quod falsatum est decernimus cassari in locis in quibus adjectiones sunt facta veruÌ„ libros etiam eos obelis obduci in locis in quibus depravaeti sunt cassari c. ibid. pa. 73. and raced before the whole Synod so farre as any corruption could bee found Doth the Cardinall know any man to defend as sincere or justifie one of those corrupted Monothelite copies If he doe the sixt Councell is an unresistable record against such and we will joyne with him in confuting such audaciousnesse Or will the Cardinall say that the Acts of the fift Synod which are now extant either have those additions or were written and taken out of those corrupted and falsified copies It is as cleare as the Sun they are not for not one of those Monothelite additions are in these Acts now extant These Acts and no other are they which we defend and which the Cardinall undertooke to disgrace and prove to bee corrupted and to have forgeries patched unto them Against these Acts the Cardinalls proofe out of the sixt Synod is so idle and so ridiculously sophisticall as not disputing ad idem that hee had need to pray that the Sophisters in our Schooles heare not of and applaud his rare skill in Logicke If because some copies were corrupted by the Monothelites those which most certainly escaped their hands must bee condemned then no deed nor testament though never so truly authenticall may be trusted for a forgerer may exscribe it and adde what he pleaseth in his extracted copy or because the Romane copies of the Nicene Canons were corrupted by l Zozimus Bonifacius or some of their friends therefore the authenticke records thereof the true copies of which the Africane Bishops with much labour purchased from Constantinople and Alexandria must be distrusted which yet the Africane Synod Saint Austen among the rest so much honoured that they gave a just check to the Pope and manifested that blot in him which all the water in Tiber will never wash away 3. The Cardinall m An. 554. nu 8 Exemplaria genuina misisse noscitur Gregorius and after him Binius n Germana exemplaria S. Synodi vidit cognovit S. Gregorius lib. 12. Epist 7. Bin. pa. 607. a. tels us a great matter and rare newes that in Pope Gregories time the Acts of this Synod were intire and that he sent the genuine copy thereof to Queen Theodalinda An evidence by the way that the Cardinall o S. Greg. lib 7 Epist 54. in depravata Synodi quintae exemplaria incidisse liquet dum ait Ibam negasse dictam epistolam esse suam Bar. an 448. nu 76. wittingly and wilfully slandereth the acts which Gregory followed to have beene corrupted wherein Ibas is truly said as the true genuine acts doe also witnesse to have denyed the Epistle to be his But let that passe why doe they mention the Copies of the Acts to have been sincere in Gregories time as if after that time no true copies thereof could be found In the sixt Councell more than 70. p Obijt Greg. an 604. Con. 6. habitum an 681. yeares after the death of Gregory divers true ancient and incorrupt copies q Praefatos duos libros falsatos esse eo quod neque in unum è prolatis antiquis immutilatis libâ—is ejusdem sancti Concilijs neque in chartaceo libro qui in recenti inventus est apud bibliothecam venerabilis Patâ—iorobij Act. 14. pa. 73. b were produced of the same one of them were found in the very Registry at Constantinople which the Monothelites of that See had not corrupted and falsified by it and the other true and entire copies were discovered and convinced the corruption of those three bookes which they cancelled and defaced how will or can either the Cardinall or Binius or any other prove that these Acts now extant are not consonant to those or taken out or published according to them Truly I doe verily perswade my selfe considering both that the sixt Councell was so carefull and vigilant to preserve the true Acts and also that these which now we have are so exact as before I have declared that these are no other than the copies of those selfe same ancient and incorrupted acts save some few and light faults which by the writers thereof have happened which Pope Gregory had and in that sixt Councell were read and commended to all posterity And I doubt not but the fraud of heretikes being then so fully and openly discovered the Church ever since hath most diligently and curiously not onely carefully preserved the same Which may well be thought to bee the true cause why of all the eight Councels the Acts of these three last that at Chalcedon this fift and the other of the sixt are come most safe and intire unto our hands Howsoever certaine it is that the Cardinall and Binius doe most childishly sophisticate in accusing the copies of the Acts now extant which onely we defend to be corrupted because those three or moe copies of the Acts which were produced in the sixt Synod which we detest and condemne much more than the Cardinall were falsified by the Monothelites none of those false
mans eye much more from his censure his thought is for himselfe that errour is personall it hurts none but the Pope himselfe If either by word or writing hee teach heresie that is Pontificall it is the fault of his office of his Chayre which should have beene infallible this hurts his sheepe and his brethren Nor skilleth it at all in what manner whether by word or writing by what occasion or motive hee teacheth heresie but whether at all or upon any occasion hee wittingly and willingly teach it that is the onely point which is questioned Vigilius condemned the Catholike faith saith Cardinall Bellarmine f Bell. loco cit but hee did it for ambition and desire of presidency Bee it so If the Pope for ambition may condemne the Catholike faith why may hee not doe so for feare of exile of disgrace of losing the Emperours or the King of Spaine or the French Kings favour If for feare why not for favour to purchase the good will of those or any of them If for favour why not for hatred hatred of Henrie the fourth the Emperour of Henry the eighth for pulling away the best feather out of the Popes Plume of Luther for being so busie in medling with his Indulgences and the triple Crowne If for hatred or favour why not for desire of lucre and to keepe the gaine of their crafts-men and Image workers who continually sing that note in the Popes eare Great is Diana of the Ephesians great is the Church and S. Peters Chayre Why not for any like passion of the minde may the Pope condemne the Catholike faith On what a ticklish and slippery ground doth their whole faith stand when either the Popes ambition or feare or favour or love or hatred or anger or desire or a fit of any other perturbation which disturbeth his minde may procure as at this time it did in Vigilius an anathema to the Catholike faith Best it were for them to renew the Stoicall sect and doctrine and receive it in the Church that out of those sober and unmoved mindes as out of an happy Nursery of Popes the Cardinals might in the Conclave still elect a Pope voyde of all passions and perturbations and transplant him out of the Stoicall to their Apostolicall Chaire But sure so long as they goe no further than the Conclave they shall never finde any but of the same metall with Vigilius one that may bee tossed every way with ambition with envy with love with hatred with feare and every passion of his minde as a powder-plot to blow up the whole Catholike faith and when he hath done that by his words by his writing by his preaching and teaching by any of his outward acts whatsoever Cardinall Bellarmine can excuse it and wipe away all the disgrace of it as here hee doth in Vigilius hee did it not with an hereticall minde for hee did it for ambition hee did it for feare hee did it for hatred hee did it for some other passion hee did it onely by an exteriour act and not ex animo But in the meane time whether hee did it ex animo or otherwise by his exteriour act the Catholike faith is blowne up from the foundation thereof as much by the Popes act as by the act of Arius of Nestorius of Eutyches or any other heretike and the Church hath a goodly amends indeed that the Pope forsooth did not which is impossible for him or all heretikes in the world to doe blow it up with an imagination or inward thought but with an exteriour act of his teaching by word or writing 41. Oh but sayth Bellarmine f Bell. loc cit non damnavit fidem palam sed occultè Vigilius did not openly but closely condemne the Catholike faith Closely so he did indeed it was his purpose and intent so to doe He came not now as Nero or Dioclesian with open force to batter but as Simon Magus Arius Nestorius Eutyches and other heretikes with Synomian arts to undermine the Church all his worke was under the vault The Anathema denounced in this Epistle against all who hold two natures in Christ was the powder that should have blowne up the holy Synod and Senate the House of God and whole City of God the powder the person and all was ready onely which the Cardinall observes g Vt sint omnia occulta usque ad tempus Bell. loc cit the time for the open publishing of that Anathema and setting fire to the traine was not yet come The gracious Providence of God which watcheth over Israell the admirable zeale piety prudence and vigilancy which God put into the heart of Iustinian the constancy of faith in the Greeke Church which at that time most happily fell out to bee greater than at any time before or since by these was the fatall blow intended by Vigilius most happily prevented This close and secret working proves Pope Vigilius to have beene both subtill and malicious in condemning the faith it doth excuse him neither à toto nor tanto from his condemning the faith or from being an hereticall Pope labouring by his hereticall doctrine to subvert the faith 42. The fourth and last Evasion or excuse for Vigilius fact in writing this Epistle is Bellarmines also Vigilius saith hee h Bell. 4. de Pōt ca. 10. § Sciendū did not at that time define any thing against the faith tanquam Pontifex as hee was Pope What shuffling and shifting is this in the Cardinall hee did not define any thing against the faith as Pope Hee did then define that which was against the faith but hee defined it not as Pope for otherwise it had beene foolish to say he defined it not as Pope when hee defined it neither as Pope nor as no Pope when hee defined it not at all Againe what a worthy saying is this of a Cardinall Vigilius did not at that time define it as hee was Pope at that time to wit while Silverius lived and was the onely Pope at which time as himselfe in expresse words saith Vigilius Papa non erat Vigilius was not then the Pope What needed the Cardinall say hee defined it not at that time as hee was Pope when at that time he was not Pope This reduplication quatenus Papa implies hee was Pope and that being Pope hee defined it but hee defined it not as hee was Pope but as hee was a private man or some other way Would not the Cardinall laugh if Gretzer or any such good friend of his should say Bellarmine at that time while hee was at Ingolstad writ not his Controversies as he was Pope or hee writ them not as he was a Turke a Iew or Mahumetane But leaving these shifts which demonstrate plainly that Bellarmine had a desire to say somewhat in excuse of Vigilius but knew not what and therefore snatched at this or that or any thing though it were never so crosse unto himselfe and such also as he could
not materiall be they few be they moe if the Pope as Pope or as an hereticall pope may confirme three or but one that one is abundant to prove his Chaire and judiciall sentence not to be infallible 49. But he taught this alone not in a Councell not with advice of his Cardinalls and Consistory why he did it not as a member of a Councell but as x Pontifex non ut praeses Concilij sed ut Princeps Ecclesiae summus potest iudicium Concilij retractare c. Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 18. § Dico secundo Princeps Ecclesiae He did this as did Agapetus y Agapeti Papae contra Anthimū iudicium absque Synodo fuit secundum supremam Apostolicae sedis authoritatem qua supra omnes Canones Pontifex eminet Bar. an 536. nu 23. in deposing Anthimus above and besides the Canons The whole power of his Apostolike authority much shined in this decision more than in any other where either his Cardinals or a Councell hath ought to doe much more was this done by him as Pope than any of them And yet had he listed to follow the judgement of others or of a Synod herein what better direction advice or counsell could his Cardinalls or any Synod in the world give unto him than the decree of the whole Councell of Chalcedon That Vigilius had before his eyes at this time that was in stead of a thousand Cardinals unto him seeing he as Ecclesiae Princeps defined Eutycheanisme notwithstanding that most holy and generall Synod yea against that Synod what could the advice of another or of a few Cardinals have avayled at this time 50. Thus all the evasions which they use being refuted it may now be clearly concluded not onely that Vigilius writ this impious and hereticall Epistle and writ it when he was the true and lawfull Pope but that he writ it also ex animo even out of an hereticall heart and writ it as he was Pope that is in such sort as that by his Pontificall and supreme authority hee confirmed that heresie which hee taught therein And this is the former of his Acts which as I told you is very remarkable his purpose and intent therein being the overthrow of the Councell at Chalcedon and of the whole Catholike faith 51. The other act of Vigilius concernes the cause of the three Chapters wherein by the heresie of Nestorius he publikely decreed and performed that as much as in him lay and as by his Apostolicall decree could be effected which hee had purposed and intended to doe by the heresie of Eutycheanisme In which whole cause how Vigilius from the first to the last behaved himselfe how at the first hee oppugned the Emperours most religious Edict and the Catholike faith how afterward he played the dissembling Proteus with the Emperour and the whole Church for the space of five or six yeares together how at the last he returned to his naturall and habituall love of heresie and how in decreeing it by the fulnesse of his Apostolicall authority hee sought utterly and for ever to abolish the Councell of Chalcedon and with it the whole Catholike faith the former Treatise doth abundantly declare which withall demonstrates the vanity of that saying of Bellarmine For the time sayth he a Bell. lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 10. § Contigit Ab hoc tempore nullus inventus est in Vigilio aut error aut erroris simulatio c. that hee was true Pope neither any errour nor simulation of errour was found in him sed summa constantia in fide but the greatest constancy of faith that could be For as by our former treatise is evident he was not only most wavering but hereticall in faith And this was in a manner the whole course of Vigilius life or the most eminent acts thereof while he was Pope pretending orthodoxy but embracing heresie and as opportunity offered it selfe labouring by words by private Epistles by resisting the imperiall just and godly Edict by publike constitutions to overthrow the faith and the whole Church of God 52. You see now his ingresse into the Papacy and his progresse in the same touching his egresse both out of it and this life heare what S. Liberatus b Liber Brev ca. 22. saith How Vigilius being by heresie afflicted died it is knowne unto all Heare what Cardinall Bellarmine c Bell. loc cit saith out of Liberatus Ab illa ipsa haeresi afflictus Vigilius was miserably afflicted by that selfesame heresie which at the first he nourished and againe Misere vexatus usque ad mortem he was miserably vexed even untill hee dyed Heare Baronius who first promised d Bar. an 538. nu 20. to declare how invigilavit in Vigilio vindicta Dei how the vengeance of God watched Vigilius and at last revenged the innocent blood which he shed and then performing that promise sayth e Bar. an 556. nu 2. He died in an Iland in Sicily by the just judgement of God confectus ipse aerumnis ex morbo himselfe being wasted with misery by reason of his disease who had caused Silverius in an Iland in Palmaria to bee pined away and put to death As he got the papacy by wicked meanes so was he immensis agitatus fluctibus tossed with exceeding great tempests therein hated by the Emperour not gratefull to the Easterne and execrable to the Westerne Bishops and when hee seemed to have come out of the streame into the haven and almost one foot into the City being pined away immensis doloribus with unmeasurable paines he dyed Thus Baronius Now if we should deale with him as Baronius f Opinari si cui licet facilius est invenire qui Evagrij de ejus condemnatione ad supplicia apud inferos luenda velit sequi sententiam quam aliorum Bar. an 565. nu 2. c. doth with Iustinian and by his precedent acts judge of his reward according to the Text Opera eorum sequuntur eos I feare the censure would seeme very harsh to those who are so ready to examine Iustinian by that rule For what workes I pray you followed Pope Vigilius Ambition usurpation sacriledge murder symony hypocrisie schisme heresie and Antichristianisme concerning which the Apostle sayth They which doe them shall not inherit the kingdome of God I will not I list not be rigorous in this point neither towards him or any other I content my selfe with that lesson of the Apostle g Rom. 14.4 Domino suo stat aut cadit Yet thus much by occasion of this Treatise and the approved judgement of the Church declared therein concerning Theodorus of Mopsvestia long before dead must needs bee said of him of Baronius and of all other who have already or shall at any time hereafter write as they have done in defence of heresie and oppugnation of Gods truth As repentance for such sinnes and impious writings opens unto them so impenitency and
Braggadochio p. 205. sect 10. To Assent to the Popes or to their Cathedrall definitions in a cause of faith makes one an heretike pa. 172. sect 6. Author of the Edict was Iustinian himselfe p. 366. sect 6 7. B. BAronius nice in approving the Epistle of Ibas and why p. 128. sect 22. Baronius wittingly obstinate in maintaining the heresie of Nestorius by approving the later part of that epistle p. 129 sect 24 25. and p. 31. sect 28. Baronius sports himselfe with contradictions p. 131. sect 27. Baronius revileth the cause of the Three Chapt. p. 361. sect 1. Baronius Annals not altogether intire pag. 435. sect 19. Baronius by his own reasons proves his Annals to be untrue p. 436. sect 19. in fine sect 20. c. Baronius holds it dangerous for Vigilius to leave Rome to come to Constantinople p. 462 sect 1 2. Bellisarius most renowned save in the matter of Silverius p 470. sect 11. Bellarmine and Baronius at variance about the Epistle of Vigilius to Anthimus Severus and others p. 477. sect 19 20. Baronius first reason to disprove it is taken from the inscription p 477. in fine p. 478. sect 21 22 23. c. his second reason from the subscription pa. 482. sect 26. his last reason is because hee was not upbraided for it by the Emperour and others p. 483. sect 27. Bellarmines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to know when a Councell decreeth any doctrine tanquam de fide pa. 40. sect 9. c. Baronius vilifieth the fift generall Councell p. 266. sect 2. The Banishment of Vigilius after the fift Councell a fiction p. 250. sect 16. and p. 253. sect 19. When and for what Vigilius was banished p. 252. sect 18. Baronius his three reasons for Vigilius his consenting to the Synod after his exile p. 245. sect 8. First from the testimony of Evagrius sect ibid. the second from the fact of Iustinian in restoring Vigilius p. 247. sect 11. the third of Vigilius consenting to the Synod taken from the words of Liberatus He was afflicted not crowned p. 160. sect 30. C. COnstitution of Vigilius sent unto the Synod pag. 8. sect 4. in fine the summe of the Constitution was the defence of the Three Chapters p. 10. sect 8. c. The Councell refuteth the Popes decree and ground of it p. 14. sect 1 2. c. The Councell condemneth and accurseth the Popes decree p. 17. sect 6. and p. 22. sect 15 16 The Councels decree consonant to Scripture p. 26. sect 24. The fift Councell approved by succeeding Councels and Popes p. 27. sect 26. and how long p. 29. sect 29. c. Councells above the Pope p. 29. sect 30 31. The Cause of the Three Chapters a cause of faith p. 37. sect 3 4. c. professed by Baronius p. 42. sect 14. a tryall of mens faith p. 362. sect 4. The Councell proposeth their decree about them tanquam de fide p. 41. sect 13. The Churches in the East divided from the West about the three Chapters p. 39. sect 7. The fift Councell explaineth a former definition of faith made no decree to condemne any new heresie p. 46. sect 20 21. Fift Councell of authority without the Popes approbation p. 268. sect 5 6 c. it was neither hereticall nor schismaticall p. 269. sect 7. it was assembled with the Popes consent p. 272. sect 12 13. Corruptions crept into some synodall acts are not just causes of rejecting others of that Councell p. 378. sect 3. The Councell of Chalcedon held Christ to be unum de sancta Trinitate p. 382. sect 8. 3. the Councell of Chalcedon not corrupted pa. 384. sect 6 7. The Constitution of Vigilius no part of the synodall acts p. 399. sect 1 2 3. not published in the Synod p 401. sect 4. Chrysostomes bones not translated from Commana to Constantinople p. 426. sect 3. Councell against Councell at Ephesus p. 113. sect 2. The Church may binde or loose a man after death p. 53. sect 15 16. The Church cannot loose those who dye impenitent p. 55. sect 20 21. Coronati non coronati as two sorts so two rewards of professors p. 263. sect 43. A Councell is approved though the Pope approve it not p. 275. sect 17 18. Generall Councels have sought the Popes approbation p. 287. sect 34. Cyrill cleares himselfe of Nestorianisme p. 123. sect 16. D. VVHether a dead man may novitèr bee condemned is a question of faith p. 48. sect 3. That a dead man may be condemned is the judgement of Fathers p. 49. sect 6. the judgement of provinciall Synods p. 50. sect 7. the judgement of generall Councels p. ibid. sect 7. the judgement of Baronius p. 51. sect 10. Defenders of the Popes infallibility accursed by the Councell p. 24 sect 20 21 22. Dioscorus being hereticall judged Ibas his profession hereticall therefore the profession of Ibas must be orthodoxall Vigilius his reason p. 151. sect 29. Defenders of the three Chapters heretikes p. 171. sect 4. Divination or Mathematicall predictions nor allowable p. 343. sect 28. Domnus his action not inserted at Chalcedon p. 44. sect 9. To dissent from the Pope in a cause of faith makes not one an heretike p. 171. sect 5. Many Doctrines of their Romish Church may be held except that of the Popes infallibility and yet the party that holds them no papist p. 182. sect 21. in fine E. EPistle of Ibas wholly hereticall p. 19. sect 8 9. and p. 24. sect 19. Eunomius approved not any part of this Epistle p. 20. sect 11. Eunomius approved the confession of Ibas p. 21. sect 14. The Epistle of Ibas not approved at Chalcedon p. 107. sect 2 3 4 c. The Epistle was truly the writing of Ibas p. 109. sect 5 6. At Ephesus a great rent and division between Iohn and Cyrill ibid. At Ephesus Cyrill was deposed by the Conventicle ibid. sect 3. The Emperour ignorant for a time of the division betweene Iohn and Cyrill p. 15. sect 4. The Emperour had knowledge of the division by a letter brought into the Court by a beggar ibid. Eustathius full of forgeries p. 340. sect 24 25 c. Eutychius not banished for not consenting to the heresie of the Phantastickes p. 341. sect 25. Eutychius given to divination hereticall and what it was p. 343. sect 28 29. for these supposed to be banished ibid. Evagrius full of fables p. 345. sect 30. c. The Emperours Edict reviled by Baronius p. 363. sect 1. it was not repugnant to the orthodoxall faith it was no seminary of sedition ibid. sect 3 4. The Epistle of Ibas condemned by the Councell at Chalcedon p. 381. sect 1. the Epistle in Cedrenus not Iustinians p. 398. sect 1. Epistles writ to Dioscorus and Leo were forged and not Theodorets p. 417. sect 7 8. and p. 444. sect 8. Epistles by their erroneous inscription are not proved to be forged p. 429. sect 9 10. c. Epiphanius his writing against images read
in the second Nicene Synod and by them rejected p. 109. sect 7. the booke was the booke of Epiphanius p. 112. sect 12. The explanation meant by Ibas was a condemning of the twelve chapters of Cyrill pa. 159. sect 42 43. a condemning of the faith p. 160. sect 44. the like explanation meant by Vigilius p. 166. sect 52. F. FAcundus set on by the Pope writ against the Emperours Edict p. 214. sect 4. Facundus and Baronius revile the Emperor p. 215. sect 4. Facundus an enemy to the Catholike faith p. 371. sect 13. The Foundation being hereticall poysons all which is built thereon p. 190. sect 29 30. Faith unto certainty of faith two things required p. 182. sect 20. G. GOntharis not trecherously slaine by Bellisarius p. 448. sect 15. Gregory his words and meaning pretended by Basil about the three Chapt. explained p. 43. sect 16 17. c. H. HEretikes dying dye not in the peace of the Church pag. 59. and pag. 61. § 6. Heresie with pertinacy differs much from an error p. 61. in fine First in regard of matter p. 62. sec 8. secondly for the manner ibid. sec 9. thirdly in regard of the persons who erre p. 64. sec 11. fourthly in regard of the Churches judgement ibid. sec 12. Heresie in its owne habit doth lesse harme p. 103. sec 27. Heretikes in words orthodoxall in sense and meaning hereticall p. 147. sec 20. proved in Vitalis ibid. An hereticall profession may be in termes orthodoxall ibid. sec 21. Heretikes pretend to hold with ancient Councels p. 201. sec 4 5. Worst Heretikes are the moderne Romanists p. 204. sec 10. Heretikes lyars in their profession pa. 207. sec 15. Heretikes profession contradictory to it selfe p. 208. sec 16. An hereticall profession gives denomination to a man rather than an orthodoxall pa. 208. sec 17 18. Heresie is a tryall of mens love to God pa. 361. sec 2. I. IBas his epistle unto Marie an heretike of Persia p. 125. sec 19. full of Nestorianisme Ibas denyeth God to be incarnate and Mary the mother of God p. 122. sec 13. Ibas professeth two natures and one person in Christ p. 139. sec 1. and p. 143. sec 9. Ibas his consenting to the Ephesme Counsell proves not his epistle Catholike p. 154. sec Ibas consented not to Cyrill upon his explanation p. 155. sec 35. c. Vigilius his first reason explained in five severall things first the Popes Rhetorick sec 35. second his Chronology of time sec 36. third his Logicke sec 40. the fourth and fifth his Ethicall and Theologicall knowledge sec 41. vide p. 168. sec 55. Ibas embraced the union in Nestorianisme p. 125. sec 19. Ibas professed not the epistle to bee his as the Acts declare p. 386. sec 2. The Image of Christ sent to Abgarus a fable p. 346. sec 32. Infallibility of the Popes judgement the foundation of a papists faith p. 34. sec 34. and a doctrine of the Romish Church p. 172. sec 7. 8 c. and p. 177. sec 13 14. Infallibility of the Popes judgement in causes of faith defended by any makes the defender hereticall p. 61. sec 6. and p. 63. sec 10. and to dye out of the peace of the Church ibid. Infallibility of the Popes judgement taught by commending the Churches judgement to be infallible and generall Councels pa. 173. sec 8. and by the Church they understand the Pope sec 8 9. and p. 178. sec 15. Infallibility only peculiar to the Pope p. 174 sec 11. Infallibility of the Popes judgement is hereticall p. 180. sec 18. Iustinian his Edict for defence of the three Chapters p. 3. sec 7. Iustinian the Emperour spared Vigilius from banishment and why p. 257. sec 26 27. Iustinian reviled by Baronius p. 324. slandered to be illiterate p. 325. sec 3. 4. for making lawes in causes of faith sec 5 6. for persecuting Vigilius sec 7. Iustinian in his last age no Aphthardokite p. 330. sec 8. and p. 333. sec 12. c. no disturber of the peace of the Church p. 331. in fine Iustinian a defender of the faith witnesse Pope Agatho p. 356. sec 16 witnesse the Rom. Synod sec 17. witnesse the sixt Councell sec 18. witnesse Pope Gregory sec 19. Iustinian no subverter of the faith pa. 349. sec 37 38. Iustinian founded many stately Churches and Monasteries p. 350. sec 39. Iustinian no subverter of the Empire ibid. sec 40. Iustinian severely censured by Baronius p. 354. sec 45. Ierusalem not advanced by the fift Synod to a Patriarchship p. 430. sec 1 2 c. Iustinian Dioclesian-like caused not Vigilius to be beaten p. 453. sec 19. Iustinian favoured not the heresie of Anthimus p. 454. sec 21. K. THe King of England refused to send to their Trent Councell p. 308. sec 24. Kings and Emperours have onely right to call Councels p. 239. sec 5. L. THe Laterane Councell under Leo the 10. reprobated the Councell at Constance and Basil touching the authority of Gen Councels p. 33. sec 33. The Laterane decree condemned by the Vniversity of Paris p. 34. sec 35. The more learned the man is the more dangerous are his heresies p. 123. sec 27. Luther his zeale that hee would not communicate in both kindes if the Pope as Pope should command him p. 195. sec 33. Liberatus an unfit witnesse in the cause of the three Chapt. p. 373. sec 15 16. Leo judged the Nicene Canons for the limits of Sees unalterable p. 405. sec 4. Leo his judgement erroneous for preheminency of Bishops p. 400. sec 4 5. Leontius no sufficient witnesse for the Epistle of Theodoret p. 415. sec 3. Lawes besides those in the Theodosian Code p. 412. sec 5 6. Lawfull Synods and what makes them so p. 282. sec 24 25 26. c. To Lawful Synods besides an Episcopall confirmation p. 281. sec 25. c. there is required a Regall or Imperiall p. 285. sec 31 32. Lawfull Councels require first that the summons be generall p. 292. sec 3. secondly that it be lawfull thirdly that it be orderly ibid. sec 4. M. MEnnas died in the 21. yeare of Iustinian and the Pope excommunicated him in the 25 p. 237. sec 18. The Matrones of Rome entreated Constantius to restore Liberius 248. sec 12. Monkes of Sythia slandred by Baronius for falsifying the Acts of the Councell at Chalcedon p. 383. sec 4 5. Monothelite additions not extant in the fift Synod p. 409. sec 2 3. Mennas his confession to Vigilius a forgery p. 441. sec 2. Mennas not excommunicated by Vigilius p. 442. sec 4 5. N. NEpos died in an errour onely not in any formall heresie p. 65. sec 13. The 2. Nicene assembly a conspiracy p. 111. sec 11. in fine Nestorius his bookes being restrained the bookes of Theodorus and Diodorus were in more esteeme p. 121. sec 12. The Nestorians forged a false union between Iohn