the Pope or any Bishop hinder the assembling of a generall Councell and so the publike peace and tranquillity of the whole Church Open but this gappe and there never should have been nor ever shall be any generall Councell The wilfulnesse of Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia at Nice of Iohn Patriarch of Antioch at Ephesus of Dioscorus Patriarch of Alexandria at Chalcedon will frustrate all those holy Councells and make them to be neither generall nor lawfull The saying of Cardinall Cusanus is worthy observing to this purpose I beleeve saith he m Lib. 3. de Concor ca. 15. that to be spoken not absurdly that the Emperor himselfe in regard of that care and custody of preserving the faith which is committed unto him may praeceptivè indicere Synodum by his Imperiall authority and command assemble a Synod when the great danger of the Church requireth the same negligence aut contradicente Romano Pontifice the Pope either neglecting so to doe or resisting and contradicting the doing thereof So Cusanus This was the very state and condition of the Church at this time when the fift Councell was assembled The n Vid sup ca. 1. nu 6. whole Church had beene a long time scandalized and troubled about those Three Chapters it was rent and divided from East to West High time it was and necessary for Iustinian to see that flame quenched although Pope Vigilius or any other Patriarch had never so eagerly resisted the remedie thereof 15. Had the Cardinall pleaded against this Synod that Vigilius had not beene called unto it hee had spoken indeed to the purpose For this is essentiall and such as without which a Synod cannot bee generall and lawfull that all Bishops be summoned to the Synod and comming thither have free accesse unto it and freedome of speech and judgment therein But the Cardinall durst not take this exception against this Synod or for Vigilius for none of these to have beene wanting in this Councell is so cleare that pertinacie it selfe cannot deny it It was not the Pope as they vainly boast but the Emperor who by his owne and Imperiall authority called this Councell as the whole Synod even in their Synodall sentence witnesse Wee are assembled here in this City jussione pijssimi Imperatoris vocati being called by the commandement of our most religious Emperor His calling to have beene generall Nicephorus doth expresly declare The Emperor saith he o Lib. 17. ca. 27. assembled the fift generall Councell Episcopis ecclesiarum omnium evocatis the Bishops of all Churches being called unto it yea the Emperor was so equall in this cause that Binius p Not. in Conc. 5. §. Concilium testifieth of him Paris numeri Episcopos ex Oriente Occidente convocavit that he called in particular and besides his generall summons by which all without exception had free accesse as many out of the West where the defenders of those Chapters did abound as he did out of the East where the same Chapters were generally condemned And yet further Vigilius himselfe was by name not onely invited intreated and by many reasons perswaded but even commanded by the Emperor and in his name to come unto the Synod as before q Sup. ca. 2. nu 1. 3. we shewed Now what freedome hee might have had in the Councell both that offer of the Presidencie doth shew for him in particular and the words of the Councell spoken concerning all in generall doth declare for when Sabinianus and others who being then at Constantinople were invited to the Synod and refused to come the synod sayd r Collat. 2. pa. 524. b. It was meet that they being called should have come to the Councell and have been partakers of all things which are here done and debated especially seeing both the most holy Emperour and we licentiam dedimus unicuique have granted free liberty to every one to manifest his minde in the Synod concerning the causes proposed Seeing then he not onely might but in his duty both to God to the Emperour and to the whole Church hee ought to have come and freely spoken his minde in this cause his resisting the will of the Emperor and refusing to come doth evidently demonstrate his want of love to the truth and dutifulnesse to the Emperor and the Church but it can no way impaire or impeach the dignity and authority of the Councell neither for the generality nor for the lawfulnesse thereof 16. Besides all which there is yet one thing above all the rest to be remembred for though Pope Vigilius was not present in the Synod either personally or by his Legates but in that sort resisted to come unto it yet he was present there by his letters of instruction by his Apostolicall and Cathedrall Constitution which hee published as a direction what was to be judged and held in that cause of the Three Chapters That Decree and Constitution he promised to send ad Imperatorem Synodum both to the Emperor and to the Synod quod ingenuè praestitit which also he ingenuously performed as the Cardinall tells Å¿ An. 553. nu 47. us That elaborate t Jdque elaboravââ ibid. decree to which an whole Synod together with the Pope subscribed containing the Popes sentence and instruction given in this cause Vniverso u An. eod nu 48. orbi Catholico cunctisque fidelibus not onely to the Synod teaching them what they should define but to all Christians teaching them what they shold beleeve was in consessu Episcoporum recitatum read and recited before all the Bishops in that Councell as Binius doth x Not. in Conc. 5. §. Constitutââ assure us This one kinde of presence in the Synod is suppletive of all the rest of more worth then 20. nay then 200. Legates à latere sent from his holinesse They all may deale besides or contrary to the Popes minde as Zacharias and Rhodoaldus did in a Councell held about the cause of Photius but this Cathedrall instruction is an inflexible messenger no bribes no perswasions no feare no favour can extort from it one syllable more then his holinesse by the infallible direction of his Chaire hath delivered yea though the Pope should have beene personally present in the Synod and face to face spoken his mind in his cause yet could not his sudden or lesse premeditated speech have beene for weight or authority comparable to this decree being elaborated after seven yeares ponderation of the cause and all things in it being disposed cum omni undique cautela atque diligentia with all diligence and circumspection that could possibly bee used which the Pope though absent in body yet sent as an Oracle from heaven to be a direction to the Synod and to supply his own absence So many wayes is this former objection of Baronius vaine and unsound when he pretends this Councell to have beene unlawfull because the Pope resisted it and the members assembled without
definition of a Father for saith he he is a father of the Church who feeds and nourisheth the Church with wholesome doctrine who being set over the Lords houshold gives them their measure of Corne in due season now if in stead of wholesome food and good Corne hee give them Cockle and Tares he becomes no father but a stepfather no Doctor but a seducer To instance in some particular Eusebius Caesariensis when hee seemes to favour Popery hee is highly extolled by Lindane u Lindan Panoplia lib. 1. ca. 17. Senensis x Senensis Bib. â titulo Eusebius and Possevine y Possevinus in apparatu sacro hee is then a most famous writer of the Church most learned worthy to bee a Bishop not of one City onely but of the whole world but when the same Eusebius lookes awry upon Rome then hee is branded by Canus z Canus locorum Theol. lib. 7. ca. 3 Costerus a Coster in Apolog contra Greuinc ca. 8. and Baronius b Baron ad annum 340. Lindan panoplia lib. 1. cap. 23. for a stickler for Arrius an Arrian heretike a ringleader of the Arrian faction whose memory is accursed in the second Synod of Nice Tertullian likewise is guilded by Lindanus c and Rehing d Rehing in muris Civitatis sanctae fund 2. et 12. with the glorious titles of a very noble author the chiefe of all the Latine Fathers the great light of Africa a most ancient Writer and Doctour most learned most skilfull most acute where hee hath some passages which may bee detorted to give countenance to some Romish superstitions But elsewhere when in expresse words he oppugneth some doctrines defined now for Articles of faith in the Church of Rome he is as much besmeared with foule imputations by Azorius e Azorius moral lib. 8. cap. 16. Maldonate f Maldon in Math. cap. 16. vers 19. p. 340. and Bellarmine g Bell. de sanctorum beat lib. 1. cap. 5. p. 1938. Bell. de Sacram. Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 6. p. 698. An hereticall author an Arch-heretike an enemy to the Catholike and like to the Calvinists a maÌ whose authority is not much to be set by because he was no man of the Church and as Euseb Tertull. so also Origen hath had contrary testimonials from the Church of Rome when he pleaseth them hee is h Lind. Panopl el. l. 3 c. 24. et 26 a famous light of the Church of Alexandria whom S. Hier. cals another Mr of the Churches after the Apostles a i Dumus contra Whitââ fol. 109. witnesse beyond all exception But when hee fits not their humour then he is a Schismatike k Canus loc The. lib. 7. c. 3. Maldon in Ioan. cap. 1. vers 3. pag. 399. a father of the Arrians and Eunomians a bold l Ribera in Malach Prophet proemium and rash man an obstinate lover of his owne errours In Councels the case is yet clearer for the Cardinall sticks not in most plaine termes to hang all them upon the Popes sleeve The m Bell. de Rom. Pont. lib. 4. ca. 3 Tota firmitas legitimorum Conciliorum est à Pontifice Romano et cap. 1. whole strength authority saith he of lawfull Councels is from the Pope their n Conciliorum iudicium tum demuÌ sirmum est cum accesserit Rom. Pontificis confirmatio judgment then begins to be of force after the Pope shall ratifie them And what Councels will he ratifie you may bee sure not the Councell in Trulio for that taxeth the Romane Church by name for inforcing single life upon the Clergy not the Councell at o An. Do. 681. Constantinople under Constantine Pogonate for that he accurseth Honorius the Pope for an heretike not the Councell held at Frankfort p An. Do. 794. in the time of Pope Adrian for that condemneth their Image-worship not the Synod of Pisa q An. Do. 1409. for in that Gregory and Benedict Popes were deposed not the Synod r An. Do. 1430. of Basil wherein Engenius was unpoped nor the Councell of Constance Å¿ An. Do. 1414. for in it a generall Councel is set aboue the Pope and three Popes were cashiered by their Authority I except the later Sessions of the same condemned Councell which are Gospell with them because they Anathematize the Wicliffists and Hussites But the t An. 787. second Synod of Nice shall be held for a generall Councell because it defendeth and commandeth the worship of Images though it be full of blasphemous absurdities and was called by an insolent woman domineering Irene over her husband and devoted wholly to superstition The Councell u An. Do. 1517. of Laterane though consisting of none in a manner but the Popes creatures shall in despight of the Oecumenicall Councels of Pisa Constance and Basil bee held a holy and generall Councell because it defines that the Pope is above generall Councels and for greater reason will the Pope advance the small Conventicle of Trent to the honour of a sacred Oecumenicall Councell because it is throughly for them in all points though as a learned Bishop present at that Councell truely affirmes that matters in it came to that passe through the wickednesse of those hungry x Dudithius quinque Eccles Epist ad Maximilianum secundum Caesar Bishops that hung upon the Popes sleeve and were created on the sudden by the Pope for the purpose that that Councell seemed to bee an assembly not of Bishops but of Hobgoblins not of men but of Images moved like the statues of Daedalus by the sinewes of others Lastly for their pretended title of Catholike Church it may be said of it as it was of Pompeius y Lucan de bello âiu l. 1. Sirname in his declining age and fame Stat magni nominis umbra 't is but the shadow of a great name for by it they meane nothing but their particular Church of Rome or the Pope himselfe Thus Bellarmine glosseth upon the words of our Saviour Matth. 16. the Pope Peters successor is bid to z Bell de Concil author l. 2. c. 19. Dicere Ecclesiae id est sibi ipsi ut praesidi et Ecclesiae cui ipse praeest tell the Church that is to tell himselfe as Governour and the Church which hee governs Gretzer a Gretz desen Bell. lib. 3. de verbo Dei Ais tertiò interpretantur Ecclesiam Patam non abnuo quid tum comes off more roundly Thou wilt say they interpret the Church the Pope I grant it what then And b 2 a. 2ae disput. 1. q. 1. Greg de Valent. By the name of the Church wee understand the Head of the Church the Pope and Bozius c Boz lib. 2. de signis Eccl. ca. 21. See farther in this Treatise cap. 13. p. 174. declares this mysterie more explicitely The Pope sustaineth the person of all Bishops of all Councels
confirmed by succeeding generall Councils by Popes and other Bishops in the following ages of the Church By the sixt Councill which professeth t Act. 15. pa. 80. a. of it selfe that in omnibus consonuit it in all points agreeth with the fifth By the second Nicene which they account for the seaventh which reckneth v Act. 6. pa. 357. a this fift for one of the golden Councils which are glorious by the words of the holy Spirit and which all being inlightned by the same spirit decreed those things which are profitable professing that themselves did condemne all whom those Councils and among them whom this fift did condemne By other following Councils in every one of which the 2 Nicene and by consequent this fift Councill is approved as by the acts is cleare and Baronius confesseth x An. 553. nu 229. that this fift in alijs Oecumenicis Synodis postea celebratis cognita est atque probata was acknowledged and approved by the other generall Councils which were held after it 27. It was likewise approved by succeeding Popes and Bishops By Pelagius the second who writ an whole Epistle y Epist 7. Pelag. 2. to perswade the Bishops of Istria to condemne the Three Chapters telling z Pa. 687. them that though Pope Vigilius resisted the condemnation of them yet others his predecessours which followed Vigilius did consent thereunto By Gregory who professing a Lib. 1. Epist 24. to embrace reverence the 4 first Councils as the 4 Euangelists addeth of this fift QuintuÌ quoque coÌcilium pariter veneror I do in like manner reverence the fift Councill wherin the impious Epistle of Ibas is rejected the writings of Theodoret with Theodorus his writings And then of them all he saith Cunctas personas whatsoever persons the foresaid five venerable Councils doe condemne those also doe I condemne whom they reverence I embrace because seeing they are decreed by an universall consent whosoever presumeth to loose whom they bind or bind whom they loose se et non illa destruit he destroyeth himselfe but not those Councils and whosoever thinketh otherwise let him be accursed Thus Pope Gregory the great ratifying all the former anathemaes of the Councill and accursing all that labour to unty those bands By Agatho b In Cont. 6. Act. 4. pa. 16. a. by Leo c Epist ad Constan Imp. the second who both call this an holy Synod and not to stay in particulars All d Bar. an 869. nu 58 59. their Popes after the the time of Gregorie were accustomed at their election to make profession of this fift as of the former Councils and that in such solemne and exact manner after the time of Hadrian the second that they professed as their forme it selfe set downe by Anton. Augustinus e In manuscripto codice ex quo eum citat Bar. loco citate doth witnesse to embrace the eight generall Councils whereof this was one to hold them pari honore et veneratione in equal honor and esteeme to keepe them intirely usque ad unum apicem to the least iôta to follow and teach whatsoever they decreed and whatsoever they condemned to condemne both with their mouth and heart A like forme of profession is set downe in the Councill at Constance f Ses 39. pa. 1644. where the Councill having first decreed g Ses 4. pa. 1560. the power and authoritie of the Pope to be inferiour and subject to the Councill and that he ought to be obedient to them both in matters of faith and orders of reformation by this their superior authoritie ordaineth That every Pope at the time of his election shall professe that corde et ore both in words and in his heart hee doth embrace and firmely beleeve the doctrines delivered by the holy Fathers and by the eleven generall Councils this fift being reckned for one and that he will keepe defend and teach the same faith with them usque ad unum apicem even to the least syllable To goe no further Baronius confesseth h An. 553. nu 229. that not onely Gregory and his predecessors unto Vigilius sed successores omnes but all the successors of Gregory are knowne to have received and confirmed this fift Councill 28. Neither onely did the Popes approve it but all orthodoxal Bishops in the world it being a custome as Baronius sheweth i An. 869. nu 58. that they did professe to embrace the seven generall Councills which forme of faith Orthodoxi omnes ex more profiteri deberent all orthodoxall Bishops by custome were bound to professe And this as it seemeth they did in those Literae Formatae or Communicatoriae or Pacificae so they were called k Cum quo totus orbis commercio formatarum concordat Opt. lib. 2. p. 40. Quaerebam utrum epistolas communicatorias quas Formatas dicimus possent quo vellent dare Aug. Epist 163. Sub probatione Epistolij sine Pacificis quae dicuntur Ecclesiastica Conc. Chalc. can 11. which from ancient time they used to give and receive For by that forme of letters they testified their communion in faith and peaceable agreemeÌt with the whole Catholike Church Such an Vniforme consent there was in approving this fift Council in all succeeding Councills Popes and Bishops almost to these dayes 29. From whence it evidently and unavoidably ensueth that as this fift Synod so all succeeding Councils Popes and Bishops to the time of the Councill of Constance l Celebratum est an 1414. that is for more then fourteene hundred yeares together after Christ doe all with this fift Councill condemne and accurse as hereticall the judiciall and definitive sentence of Pope Vigilius delivered by his Apostolical authority for instruction of the whole Church in this cause of faith therfore they al with an uniforme consent did in heart beleeve and in words professe and teach that the Popes Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith may be and de facto hath been hereticall that is they all did beleeve and teach that doctrine which the reformed Churches maintaine to be truly ancient orthodoxall and catholike such as the whole Church of Christ for more then 14 hundred yeares beleeved and taught but the doctrine even the Fundamentall position whereon all their doctrines doe relie and which is vertually included in them all which the present Church of Rome maintaineth to be new hereticall and accursed such as the whole Church for so many hundred yeares together with one consent beleeved and taught to be accursed and hereticall It hence further ensueth that as this fift Councill did so all the fore-mentioned generall Councils Popes and Bishops doe with it condemne and accurse for heretikes not onely Vigilius but all who either have or doe hereafter defend him and his Constitution even all who either by word or writing have or shall maintaine that the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith is infallible that is
all who are members of the present Romane Church and so continue till their death nay they not onely accurse all such but further also even all who doe not accurse such And because the decree of this fift Councill is approved by them to the least iôta it in the last place followeth that the condemning and accursing for hereticall that doctrine of the Popes infallibilitie in causes of faith and accursing for heretikes all who either by word or writing have or doe at any time hereafter defend the same and so presist till they dye nay not onely the accursing of all such but of all who doe not accurse them is warranted by Scriptures by Fathers by all generall Councils by all Popes and Bishops that have beene for more then 14. hundred yeares after Christ 30. This Vniforme consent continued in the Church untill the time of Leo the 10 and his Laterane Councill Till then neither was the Popes authoritie held for supreme nor his judiciall sentence in causes of faith held for infallible nay to hold these was judged and defined to be hereticall and the maintainers of them to be heretikes For besides that they all till that time approved this fift Councill wherein these truths were decreed the same was expresly decreed by two generall Councils the one at Constance the other at Basil not long before m Conc. Basil sinitum est an 1442. id est an 74. ante concil Later that Laterane Synod In both which it was defined that not the Popes sentence but the Iudgement of a generall Councill n Concil Basil in Decreto quinq conclus pa. 96. a. is supremum in terris the highest judgement in earth for rooting out of errors and preserving the true faith unto which judgement every one even the Pope o Cui quilibet etiamsi papalis status existat obedire tenetur Conc. Constant sess 4. et Bas sess 2. himselfe is subject and ought to obey it or if he will not is punishable p Debitè puniatur Conc. Const ses 5. Basil ses 3. by the same Consider beside many other that one testimony of the Councill of Basil and you shall see they beleeved and professed this as a Catholike truth which in all ages of the Church had beene and still ought to be embraced They having recited that Decree of the Councill at Constance for the supreme authority of a Councill to which the Pope is subject say q Sess 33. thus Licet has esse veritates fidei catholicae satis constet although it is sufficiently evident by many declarations made both at Constance here at Basil that these are truths of the Catholike faith yet for the better confirming of all Catholikes herein This holy Synod doth define as followeth The verity of the power of a generall Councill above the Pope declared in the generall Councill at Constance and in this at Basil est veritas fidei Catholicae is a veritie of the Catholike faith and after a second conclusion like to this they adjoyne a third which concernes them both He who pertinaciously gainsayeth these two verities est censendus haereticus is to be accounted an heretike Thus the Councill at Basil cleerly witnessing that till this time of the Councill the defending of the Popes authority to be supreme or his judgement to be infallible was esteemed an Heresie by the Catholike Church and the maintainers of that doctrine to be heretikes which their decrees were not as some falsly pretend rejected by the Popes of those times but ratified and confirmed and that r Per Concilia generalia quae summi Pontifices Consistorialiter declaraverunt esse legitima etiam pro eo tempore quo ejusmodi declarationes ediderunt Conc. Basil pa. 144. a. Consistorialiter judicially and cathedrally by the indubitate Popes that then were for so the Councill of Basil witnesseth who hearing that Eugenius would dissolve the Councill say s Epist Conc. Basil pa. 100. b. thus It is not likely that Eugenius will any way thinke to dissolve this sacred Council especially seeing that it is against the decrees of the Councill at Constance per praedecessorem suum et seipsum approbata which both his predecessor Pope Martine the fift and himselfe also hath approved Besides this that Eugenius confirmed the Councill at Basil there are other evident proofes His owne Bull or embossed letters wherein he saith t Literae bullatae Eugenij lectae sunt in Conc. Bas Ses 16. of this Councill purè simpliciter ac cum effectu et omni devotione prosequimur we embrace sincerely absolutely and with all affection and devotion the generall Councill at Basil The Councill often mention his adhesion v Jn sua adhaesione sess 16. his maximaÌ adhaesionem x Decreto quinque Concl. pa. 96. b. to the Council by which Adhesion as they teach y Sess 29. pa. 96. b. Decreta corroborata sunt the Decrees of the Council at Basil made for the superiority of a Council above the Pope were coÌfirmed Further yet the Orators which Pope Eug. sent to the council did not only promise but z Jurabant ejus decreta defendere c. Sess 16. corporally sweare before the whole Councill that they would defend the decrees therof particularly that which was made at Constance was now renewed at Basil Such an Harmonie there was in beleeving and professing this doctrine that the Popes judgement in causes of faith is neither supreme nor infallible that generall Councils at this time decreed it the indubitate Popes confirmed it the Popes Orators solemnly sware unto it the Vniversall a Haec veritas toties et tam solenniter per universam ecclesiam declarata est Epist Conc. Bas pa. 144. a. and Catholike Church untill then embraced it and that with such constancy and uniforme consent that as the Council of b Jn decreto quinque conclus pa. 96. Basil saith and their saying is worthy to be remembred nunquam aliquis peritorum dubitavit never any learned and skilfull man doubted therof It may be some illiterate Gnatho hath soothed the Pope in his Hildebrandicall pride vaunting c Hildebrandum sic gloriari solitum testatur Avent lib. 5. Annal. pa. 455. Se quasi deus sit errare non posse I sit in the temple of God as God I cannot erre but for any that was truly judicious or learned never any such man in all the ages of the Church untill then as the Councill witnesseth so much as doubted thereof but constantly beleeved the Popes authoritie not to be supreme and his judgement not to be infallible 31. After the Councill of Basil the same truth was still embraced in the Church though with far greater opposition then before it had witnesse hereof Nich. Cusanus a Bishop d Poss Biblic in Nic. Cusano a Cardinall a man scientijs pene omnibus excultus who lived 20 e Obijt ann 1464. Poss Conc. autem finitum
10. and his Laterane Synod are ample witnesses that this Sanction was never repealed before that Synod for they f Conc. Later ses 11 complaine that by reason of the malignitie of those times or else because they could not helpe it his predecessors tolerasse visi sunt seemed to have tolerated that pragmaticall Sanction and that for all which either they did or could doe the same Sanction retroactis temporibus viguisse et adhuc vigere had in former times and did even to that very day of their eleventh Session stand in force and full vigor Now seeing that Sanction condemneth as hereticall as did the Council also of Basil that assertion of the Popes Supremacie of authoritie and infallibilitie of judgment in defining causes of faith which the present Romane Church defendeth it is now cleerly demonstrated that the same Assertion was taught professed and beleeved to be an heresie and the obstinate defenders thereof to be heretikes by the consenting judgement of Councils Popes Bishops and the Catholike Church even from the Apostles time unto that very day of their Laterane Session which was the 19. of December in the yeare 1516. after Christ 33 On that day a day never to be forgotten by the present Romane Church it being the birth-day thereof Leo the tenth with his Laterane Councill or as the learned Divines of Paris g Leo 10. in quedam caetu nescimus qualiter tamen non in Spiritu Domini congregato App. Vniv Paris account it Conspiracie they being not assembled in Gods name abolished as much as in them lay the old and Catholike doctrine which in all ages of the Church had beene beleeved and professed untill that day and instead thereof erect a new faith yea a new foundation of the faith and with it a new Church also Hee and his Synod then reprobated h Quae de authoritate Concilij supra Pontificem constituerunt sententia CoÌc Lateranensis plane reprobata sunt Bin. Not. in Conc. Const § Ex parte the Decree of Constance for the superioritie of a Councill above the Pope they reprobated i Reprobarunt decre tum Concilij Basiliensis Bel. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 17. § Denique also the Councill of Basil and the same Decree renewed by them That Councill they condemne as Conciliabulum or k Conc. Lat. sess 11. Conventiculam quae nullum robur habere potuerit As a Conspiracie and Conventicle which could have no force at all They reprobated the l Ibid. Pragmaticall Sanction wherein the Decree of Constance and Basil was for ever confirmed Now that Decree being consonant to that catholike Faith which for 1500 yeares together had beene imbraced and beleeved by the whole catholike Church untill that day in reprobating it they rejected and reprobated the old and catholike Faith of the whole Church In stead hereof they decreed the Popes authoritie to be m Hujus sanctae sedis suprema authoritate Ibid. pa. 640. supreme that it is de n Ibid. necessitate salutis a thing necessary to salvation for all Christians to be subject to the Pope and that not onely as they are severally considered but even as they assembled together in a generall Councill for they define Solum o Jbid. pa. 639. Romanum Pontificem authoritatem super omnia Concilia habere The Pope alone to have authoritie above all Generall Councills This the Councill at Laterane diserte ex professo docuit taught cleerly and purposely as Bellarmine tells p Lib. 2. de Concil ca. 17. § Denique us nay they did not onely teach it but expressissimè definiunt q Lib. cod ca. 13. § Deinde they did most expresly define it And that their Definition is no other then a Decree of Faith as the same Cardinall assures us Decrees of faith saith he r Lib. ââd ca. 17. § Ad hunc are immutable neyther may ever be repealed after they are once set downe Tale autem est hoc de quo agimus and such is this Decree for the Popes supreme authoritie over all even Generall Councils made in their Laterane Synod And what meane they thinke you by that supreme authoritie Truly the same which Bellarmine explaineth That because his authoritie is supreme therefore his judgement s Proinde ultimum judicium summi poÌtificis esse lib. 4. de Rom. pontif ca. 1. § Sed nec in causes of Faith is the last and highest and because it is the last and highest therefore it is t Restat igitur ut Papa sit Index ultimus et proinde noÌ possit errare Lib. 4. de Pont. Rom. ca. 3. § Contra. Et DicuÌt Concilij sententiam esse ultimuÌ judicium Hinc autem apertissimè sequitur non errare Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 3. § Accedat infallible So by their Decree together with supremacie of authority they have given infallibilitie of judgement to the Pope and defined that to be a catholike truth and doctrine of Faith which the whole Church in all ages untill then taught professed and defined to be an heresie and all who maintaine it to be Heretikes and for such condemned both it and them 34 Now because this is not onely a doctrine of their faith but the very foundation on which all their other doctrines of faith doe relie by decreeing this they have quite altered not onely the faith but the whole frame and fabricke of the church erecting a new Romane church consisting of them and them onely who maintaine the Popes Infallibilitie and supremacie decreed on that memorable day in their Laterane Synod a church truly new and but of yesterday not so old as Luther a church in faith and communion severed from all former generall Councils Popes and Bishops that is from the whole catholike Church of Christ which was from the Apostles times untill that day And if their Popes continue as it is to be presumed they doe to make that profession which by the Councils of Constance and Basil they are bound to doe to hold among other this fift Councill ad unum iôta this certainly is but a verball no cordiall profession there neither is nor can be any truth therein it being impossible to beleeve both the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to be hereticall as the fift Councill defined and the Popes Cathedrall sentence in such causes to be infallible as their Laterane Councill decreed So by that profession is demonstrated that their doctrine of faith is both contradictory to it selfe such as none can possibly beleeve and withall new such as is repugnant to that faith which the whole Catholike Church of Christ embraced untill that very day of their Laterane Session 35 Yea and even then was not this holy truth abolished Foure moneths did not passe after that Laterane Decree was made but it was condemned by the whole Vniversitie of v In Appel à Leon. 10. quae facta est 21 die Mart. an 1517. Decret
§ In his autem Pelagius who both himselfe fully assenteth herein to Saint Austen and testifieth the assent of Pope Leo in this manner Quis nesciat who knoweth not that the doctrine of Leo is consonant to Saint Austen Heare o Cyr. lib. cont Theod. cit à Conc. 5. Collat. 8. pa. 585. a. S. Cyrill who speaking of heretikes saith Evitandi sunt sive in vivis sive in mortuis they are to bee avoyded whether they bee dead or living 7. The Church speakes yet somewhat louder in the united judgement of Provinciall Synods In an p Citatur in Conc. 5. Coll 5 pa. 548 a. Africane Councell it was proved how certaine Bishops at their death had bequeathed their goods to heretikes whereupon statuerunt the Bishops in that Synod decreed ut post mortem anathemati subjiciantur that such should bee accursed even after their death and this Sextilianus an Africane Bishop testifieth upon his owne certaine knowledge The judgement of the Romane Church is to this purpose most pregnant About some twenty yeares before this fift Councell Dioscorus was chosen Bishop of Rome but shortly after dying eum post mortem anathematizavit Romana Ecclesia the Romane Church accursed him even after he was dead although hee had not offended in the faith but in some pecuniary or Symoniacall crime Et hoc sciunt omnes qui degunt Romae and they all who live at Rome know this to have beene done against him after his death they especially who are in eminent place who also continued in the communion with Dioscorus untill hee dyed as after q Inst Edict § Invenimus Iustinian Benignus r Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 549. a. Bishop of Heraclea and after them both the fift Councell Å¿ Coll. 8. pa. 585. b. testifieth In this very cause of Theodorus there was a Synod held in Armenia by Rambulas t Bar. an 435. nu 4 Bishop of Edessa Acatius and others wherein both themselves condemned Theodorus though dead and in their letters to Proclus exhort u Petimus quatenus fiat unitas vestra contra Theodorum sacrilega Dogmata ejus Jn Libell Presbyt ArmeÌ ad Procl in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 542. b. him to doe the like 8. But this voyce of the Church sounds like a mighty thunder in the consenting judgement of generall Councels In the sixt x Act. 12.13 18. Pope Honorius who in his life time had not been was now about threescore yeares after his death convicted to bee an heretike and then noviter condemned and anathematized by the whole Councell The same sentence of Anathema was confirmed and againe denounced against him in the second y Act. 7. in Epistola 2. Synod Can. 1. Nicene and in the other under z Honorius post mortem ab Orientis Episcopiâ anathemate est affectus Conc. 8 Act. 7. pa. 891. b. Hadrian which they account to be the seventh and eighth generall Councels In the Councell of Chalcedon Domnus a Edict Justin § Quod autem Conc. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 575. b. Bishop of Antioch was after his death condemned In the holy Ephesine Councell was this very Theodorus of Mopsvestia after his death condemned as Pope Pelagius b Pelag. 2. Epist § In his expresly testifieth The like to have beene done against Macedonius by the fift Councell at Constantinople Iustinian c Sancta Dei Ecclesia post mortem Macedonium anathem atizavit Iust Edict § Quod declareth Before that was the same done by the Councell at Sardica for when some of those who had subscribed to the Nicene faith returned to Arianisme alij quidem d Jbidem vivi alij autem post mortem anathematizati sunt à Damaso Papa ab universali Sardicensi Synodo they were anathematized some while they lived others after their death by Pope Damasus and by the generall Councell at Sardica as witnesseth Athanasius With such an uniforme consent doe all these Councels teach this and teach it not as any novell doctrine but as a truth successively from age to age even from the Apostles time delivered unto them by warrant of which Apostolical tradition Valentinus Martian Basilides à nulla Synodo e Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 549. a. anathematizati being by no Synod in their life time condemned were after their death accursed by the Church of God 9. And yet if none of all these particulars could bee produced seeing the doctrine of the faith decreed in this fift Councell one part whereof is this of condemning the dead is consonant to all the former and confirmed by all succeeding Councels as we did before demonstrate nor Councels only but approved by all Popes and Bishops from Gregory the first to Leo the tenth yea by all Catholikes whatsoever who all by approving this fift Councell consent in this truth Seeing all these that is the whole Catholike Church for 1500 yeares with one consenting voyce sound out like a multitude of mighty waters this Catholike truth which Vigilius oppugneth that one may after his death be noviter condemned and found it as a doctrine of the Catholike faith and even thereby found out Pope Vigilius to have held yea to have defined heresie and all who defend Vigilius to bee hereticall I do nothing doubt but if ever you did or can you doe now most distinctly heare the voyce of the Church even of that Church of which their Romane Rabsecha vaunteth that we are marvellously affrighted at the very name thereof 10. May I now intreate that as you have heard the Church so you would be pleased to heare what the Cardinall doth say of this matter After this part of Vigilius decree he sets a memorable glosse upon the Popes text Hic adverte Note here saith the Cardinall that f Bar. an 553. nu 185. this assertion of Vigilius that dead men ought not to be condemned is not so generally received as it is set downe by him A worthy note indeed out of a Cardinals mouth Papa hic non tenetur But I pray you by whom is it not received The Cardinall answers not by the holy Church the holy Church g Ejusmodi homine jure damnare post mortem sancta consucvit Ecclesia Bar. ibid. doth practise the contrary unto it What the holy Church not receive the dogmaticall and Apostolicall assertion of the holy Pope not that assertion which his Holinesse decreeth to be taught by Scripture to be a Constitution a rule a definition of the holy Apostolike See No truly The holy Church for all that receives not this assertion saith the Cardinall And the Cardinall was to blame to use such a palpable ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã The Church receiveth it not hee might and he should have said The holy Church rejecteth condemneth and accurseth this Cathedrall assertion of the Pope and all that defend it nor the Church onely of that one age wherein Vigilius lived but the Catholike Church
in doctrinall as personall matters That Theodorus was dead is personall but that none after death may bee condemned for an heretike is doctrinall yea an heresie in the doctrine of faith That Theodorus dyed in the peace of the Church is an errour personall but that Theodorus therefore dyed in the peace of the Church because he was not in his life time condemned by the expresse senteÌce of the Church or that any dying in heresie as Theodorus did doe die in the peace of the Church are errours doctrinall That Theodorus was not by the former Fathers and Councels condeÌned is a personall error but that Theodorus by the judgement of the Fathers Councels ought not after his death to be condemned is doctrinall even a condemning of the Councels of Ephesus and Chalcedon as guilty of beleeving and teaching an heresie So many wayes is the Popes sentence in this first Chapter erronious in faith of which Baronius most vainely pretendeth that it is no cause of faith no such cause as doth concerne the faith 41. There now remaineth nothing of Vigilius decree concerning this first Chapter but his conclusion of the same And although that must needs of it selfe fall downe when all the reasons on which it relyeth and by which onely it is supported are ruinated or overthrowne yet if you please let us take a short view of it also rather to explane than refute the same His conclusion hath two branches the former is that in regard of the foresaid reasons nostrâ b Vig. Const nu 179 eum non audemus damnare sententia wee dare not condemne Theodorus by our sentence wee dare not doe it saith Vigilius 42. Oh how faint-hearted pusillanimous and dastardly was the Pope in this cause Cyrill the c Sanctissimorum Episcoporum hic coactorum caput Cyrillum c. Epist Synod Ephes to 4. Act. Conc. Ephes ca. 8. head of the generall Councell Proclus a most d Cyrill epist ad Acat in Con. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 543. a. Dominus meus sanctissimus Episcopus Proclus holy Bishop whose Epistle as Liberatus e Lib. ca. 10. saith the Councell of Chalcedon approved Rambulas the piller of the Church the religious Emperours Theodosius and Valentinian the Church of Mopsvestia the Councels of Ephesus of Armenia of Chalcedon the whole Catholike Church ever since the Ephesine Synod both durst and did condemne Theodorus and besides these Baronius and Binius two of the most artificiall Gnathonizing Parasites of the Pope even they durst and did even in setting downe the very Constitution of Vigilius cal f Rursumque haereticus blasphemus c. Bar. an 553. nu 120. et seq et Bin. pa. 595. et seq Theodorus more than forty times an heretike a craftie impious madde prophane blasphemous execrable heretike onely Pope Vigilius hath not the heart nor courage hee onely with his sectators dare not call him nor coÌdemne him for an heretike we dare not condemne him by our sentence 43. And yet when Vigilius saw good hee who durst not doe this durst doe a greater matter he durst doe that which not any of all the former nay which they all put together never durst doe Vigilius durst defend both an heresie and a condemned and anathematized heretike he durst commend forged and hereticall writings under the name of holy Fathers hee durst approve that Epistle wherein an heretike is called and honoured for a Saint he durst contrary to the Imperiall and godly Edict of Theodosius contrary to the judgements of the holy generall Councells defend Theodorus honor his memorie yea honor him as a teacher of truth while he lived as a Saint being dead These things none of all the former ever durst doe in these Vigilius is more bold and audacious then they are all 44. Whence thinke you proceeded this contrariety of passions in Vigilius that made him sometimes more bold then a Lyon and other times more timerous then an Hare Truely even from hence As Vigilius had no eyes to see ought but what favored Nestorianisme so hee had not the heart to doe ought which did not uphold Nestorianisme If a Catholike truth met him or the sweet influence thereof hapned to breath upon him Vigilius could not endure it the Popes heart fainted at the smell thereof but when the Nestorian heresie blew upon him when being full with Nestorius he might say agitante calescimus illo not Ajax not Poliphemus so bold nor full of courage as Pope Vigilius As the Scarobee or beetle g Pier. Hierog lib. 55. is said to feed on dung but to dye at the sent of a Rose So the filth of Nestorianisme was meat and drinke to the Pope it was vita vitalis unto him but the fragrant and most odoriferous sent of the catholike truth was poison it was even death to this Beetle So truly was it fulfilled in him which the Prophet saith h Jer. 9.3 they bend their tongues for lyes but they have no courage for the truth we dare not condemne Theodorus by our sentence 45. The other branch of the Popes conclusion is Sed i Vig. Const nu 179 nec ab alio quopiam condemnari concedimus neither doe wee permit that any other shall condemne Theodorus Nay we decree k Vig. Const nu 208 that none else shall speake write or teach otherwise then we doe herein As much in effect as if the Pope had definitively decreed wee permit or suffer no man whatsoever to teach or beleeve what Cyrill what Proclus what the whole generall Councells of Ephesus and Chalcedon that is what all Catholikes and the whole Catholike Church hath done taught and beleeved we permit nay we command and by this our Apostolicall Constitution decree that they shall be heretikes and defend both an heresie that no dead man may be condemned and condemned heretikes in defending Theodorus yea defending him for a Saint and teacher of truth This we permit command and decree that they shall doe but to doe otherwise to condemne Theodorus or a dead man that by no meanes doe we permit or suffer it to bee lawfull unto them 46. And as if all this were not sufficient the Pope addes one other clause more execrable then all the former for having recited those threescore hereticall assertions which as we have declared were all collected out of the true and indubitate writings of Theodorus he adjoynes l Vig Const nu 173. Anathematizamus omnem wee accurse and anathematize every man pertaining to orders who shall ascribe or impute any contumely to the Fathers and Doctors of the Church by those forenamed impieties and if no Father then not Theodorus for those may be condemned See now unto what height of impiety the Pope is ascended for it is as much as if hee had said We anathematize and accurse Saint Cyrill Saint Proclus Saint Rambulas Saint Acatius the Synode of Armenia the generall Councells of Ephesus of Chalcedon of Constantinople in the time of
it 22 You have now the judgement and cathedrall resolution of Vigilius touching this second Chapter that the hereticall writings of Theodoret against Cyril and the Catholike faith may not bee condemned Take a view also of those two reasons by which hee labours to strengthen and perswade the same The former is drawne from the Councell at Chalcedon It is saith Vigilius t Vig. Const nu 180. valde contrarium Chalcedonensis Synodi judicie indubitabiliter inimicum very contrarie and without all doubt repugnant to the judgement of the Synod at Chalcedon that any Nestorian doctrines should now be condemned sub ejus sacerdotis nomine under the name of Bishop Theodoret. So Vigilius 23 Could he not content himselfe to be hereticall alone unlesse he disgraced the holy Councell of Chalcedon as guilty of the same heresie as if they also had judged that none of Theodorets writings not those written against the faith ought to bee condemned They to judge this or is it contrary and that indubitabiliter to condemne those writings of Theodoret or any writings under his name Far was it from the thought much more from the grave judgement of so holy a Councell Even themselves as before we declared condemned and anathematized all those writings of Theodorrt and warranted by their judgement all others to anathematize the same Gregorie u Lib. 7. Indic â Epist 54. witnesseth of the fift Councell that it is sequax in omnibus in all things a follower of the Councell at Chalcedon Seeing then the fift Councell doth so often and so constantly condemne and anathematize those writings of Theodoret its undoubted that the same writings were formerly condemned by the Councell of Chalcedon the fift Synod but treading in their steps and following them in that judgement wherein they had gone before them If to condemne those writings be repugnant to the judgment at Chalcedon then is the fift Councell not a follower but a confuter and contradicter of the judgement at Chalcedon Nor onely the fift Councell but the whole catholike Church ever since the time of Vigilius they all doe reject and condemne the judgement of the Councell at Chalcedon seeing they all by approving the fift Synod and decree thereof do anathematize those writings of Theodoret which to doe is as Vigilius teacheth indubitanter contrarium most certainely contrary to the judgement at Chalcedon If the whole catholike Church bee not hereticall which to thinke is impietie by contradicting and condemning the judgement of the Councell at Chalcedon then undoubtedly is Vigilius hereticall in teaching and decreeing that to condemne any writings of Theodoret or any under his name is repugnant to the judgement of the Councell at Chalcedon 24. The other reason of Vigilius is because it were a disgrace injury and slander against Theodoret to condemne his writings This the Pope x Vigil Const nu 182. expresseth in the very words of his sentence in this manner The truth of these things those are the three personall points before handled being weighed we ordaine and decree nihil in injuriam atque obtrectationem probatissimi viri hoc est Theodoreti sub taxatione nominis ejus à quoquam fieri vel proferri that nothing shall be done or spoken by any to the injury and slaÌder of the most approved Bishop Theodoret by taxing of his name and it must needs be taxed if his writings or bookes be condemned 25. See here the compassionate and tender heart of Vigilius Not onely Iustinian and the fift generall Councell but Pelagius Gregory and other succeeding Popes and Councels even the whole Catholike Church ever since the time of Vigilius they all by approving the decree of the fift Synod doe not onely taxe the name of Theodoret but accurse anathematize the writings of Theodoret and that even under his name Now such a loving and tender affection doth the Pope carry towards the hereticall writings of Theodoret that rather than they may be condemned or his name taxed by the condemning of them Iustinian Pelagius Gregory and other his successors the fift the sixt and other generall Councels even the whole Catholike Church they all must be and are de facto here declared and by the Popes cathedrall sentence decreed and defined not onely to bee hereticall as the former reason imported but injurious persons backbiters slanderers they all must be condemned and for ever disgraced rather then Theodorets name must bee taxed or his hereticall writings condemned or disgraced 26. But say indeed Is it an injurie a slander a disgrace to one that his errors should either by himselfe or by the Church be condemned How injurious was that holy Bishop Saint Augustine to himselfe in writing so many retractations and corrections of what he saw amisse And what himselfe did hee would not onely willingly but gladly have permitted the holy Church to have done Nor may we think this mind to have been onely in Austen Modestie and humilitie are the individuall concomitants of true knowledge and learning and the more learned any man is the more judicious is he in espying the more ingenuous in acknowledging the more lowly and humble in condemning his owne errors As it is but winde and no solid substance which puffes up a bladder so is it never any sound or solid learning but meere ventositie emptinesse of knowledge which makes the minde to swell to beare it selfe aloft and either not see that truth into which his high and windie conceit will not suffer him to looke downe and dive or seeing it not embrace the same though it were with a condemning yea with a detestation of his owne error It must never be a shame or disgrace to any man to recall and condemne his errors till he be ashamed of being a man that is subject to errors Saint Augustine y Illi quos vulgo moriones vocant quanto magis absurdi insulsi sunt tanto magis nullum verbum emittunt quod revecare velint quia dicti mali paenitere utique cordatorum est Aug. Epist 7. more sharply saith That its a token not onely of a foolish and proud selfe-love but of a most malignant z Nimis perversâ se ipsum a maâ qui aliââ nuli errare ut error suus lateat ibid. minde rather to wish others to bee poysoned with his heresies then either himselfe to recall or permit others specially the Church of God to condemne his heresies It was no injurie no slander nor disgrace to Theodoret that his hereticall writings were by the Church condemned but it had beene a fault unexcusable and an eternall disgrace to the Church if shee had suffered such hereticall writings to passe uncondemned 27. Oh but Theodoret was probatissimus vir a man most approved by the Councell of Chalcedon saith Vigilius is it not an injury to condemne the writings of a man most approved No verely the more approved the more eminent learned and orthodoxall any man is the more carefull and
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 Hâres 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 PaÌmac 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 vehemeÌter neglectum Cyrus nomine a Iudaeis extructum ut qualemcunque gratiam benefactori Cyro refarreÌt 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 âatim 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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
maintained he shall finde them full stuft with many grosse and palpable untruths of matters de facto on which they build their doctrinall positions as in this concerning the Epistle of Ibas it is now most manifest 12. For this time I will not enter into so spacious a field but yet this one thing by the way I cannot but observe seeing those Nicene Fathers professe that writing against Image-worship going under the name of Epiphanius to be in such sort the book of Epiphanius as this Epistle going under the name of Ibas is the Epistle of Ibas and seeing we have now demonstrated this Epistle to be truly and indeed the Epistle of Ibas it followeth even by their owne reason and comparison that the book also against Image-worship cited by the Councell at Constantinople in the name of Epiphanius is in truth and in very deed the true writing of Bishop Epiphanius And yet further because those Nicene Fathers acknowled Epiphanius for a Catholike k Beatum patrem Epiphanium catholicae ecclesiae Doctorem agnoscimus Conc. Nic. 2. Act. 6. pa. 371. b. Doctor of the Church one who held the ancient tradition l Illi qui antiquam ecclesiae traditionem recipiunt beato Epiphanie non adversantur ibid. b. of the Church and consented to the Catholikes in and before his time it hence againe followeth that the doctrine of condemning Image-worship which in that booke of Epiphanius is delivered was by the generall Councell at Constantinople some thirty m Conc. Const contra Imagines habitum est an 754. Bin. to 3. pa. 229. Conc. Nicenum habitum an 787. Bin. notis in id Conc. yeares before this Nicene Assembly decreed n Qui imaginem ausus fuerit parare aut adorare aut in ecclesia aut in privata domo constituere aut clam habere si Episcopus fuerit deponatur c. Decretum Conc. Constant sub Constantino Copronimo quod extat in Nicenâ Conc. 2. Act. 6. pa. 377. a. that it I say is ancient Catholike consonant to the ancient tradition and the doctrine of the ancient and catholike Fathers of the Church even from the Apostles time And this is all which Baronius hath gained by his alleaging those publike acts of the Nicene Fathers to prove this not to be the Epistle of Ibas And let this suffice to be spoken of the personall untruths of Vigilius and Baronius touching this Epistle of Ibas which are but a praeludium to their doctrinall errors and heresies wherof in the next place we are to entreat CHAP. XI That Vigilius and Baronius in their former reason for defence of the Epistle of Ibas drawne from the union with Cyrill mentioned in the latter part of that Epistle doe defend all the heresies of the Nestorians 1. WEE come now from personall matters to that which is the Capital point and maine heresie contained in the defence of this this Chapter wherein Vigilius and Baronius have so behaved themselves that those former errours though they be too shamefull are but a very sport and play to that hereticall frenzie which here they doe expresse For now you shall behold the Pope and his Cardinall in their lively colours fighting under the banner of Nestorius and using the most cunning stratagems that were ever devised to cloake their hereticall doctrine and gaine credit to that condemned heresie Those sleights are principally two The former is gathered out of the latter part of the Epistle of Ibas where mention is made of the union betwixt Cyrill and Iohn which although I touched before a Sup. ca. 4. yet because it is a matter of greater obscuritie and containeth a most notable fraud of Vigilius and Baronius I purposely reserved the full handling of it unto this place where without interruption of other matters I might have scope enough to explaine the depth of this mysterie 2. In the time of the Ephesine Councell there was as all know an exceeding breach betwixt Cyrill with other Catholike Bishops who condemned Nestorius and Iohn Bishop of Antioch with divers other Eastern Bishops who tooke part with Nestorius against the holy Councell And the division was so great that at the selfe-same time in one the selfe-same citie of Ephesus they held two severall Councels and set up altare contra altare Councell against Councell Patriarcke against Patriarcke Bishops against Bishops and Synodall sentence against Synodall sentence But betwixt those two Councels there was as much difference as is betwixt light and darkenesse betwixt truth and heresie betwixt the Church of God and the Synagogue of Satan The one consisted of holy orthodoxall and Catholike Bishops whose President was Cyrill the other of hereticall b Coactis in unum solo nomine Episcopis qui unà cum Nestorio desciveraÌt ex quibus alij erant extorres âagi proprijs sedibus destituti alij à suis Metropolicanis depositi alij Pelagij Caelestij veneno imbuti Epi. Synodal sanct Conc. Eph. ad Caelestinum to 4. Act. Eph. c. 17. factious and divers deposed Bishops whose President was Iohn The former condeÌned Nestorius his blasphemous doctrine whereby hee denied Christ to be God the latter defended Nestorius and all his impious doctrines The former was held in a Church even in the Church of the Blessed c Considentibus in sanctiss Eccles quae appellatur Maria to 2. act Ephes coÌc ca. 1. saepe alibi Virgin whose Sonne they professed to bee truly God the latter in an Inne d Iohanne in diversorio maneÌte sacraque illius Synodo praesente Act. Ephe. coÌc to 3. ca. 1. Cum vix curru dissilijsset Iohannes cubiculuÌque ingressus esset Apol. Cyril ad Imper. to 5 ca. 2. pa. 827. b. or Taverne a fit place for them who denied Christ to be God The former proceeded in all respects orderly and Synodally as was fit and requisite that they should the latter did all things tumultuously e Iohannes cum suis nullam omnino vel per leges ecclesiasticas vel per. Augustorum decretum potestatem obtinuit Libel Cyril et Mem. oblatus s synodo to 4. Act. ca. 2. Johannes omni ecclesiastica authoritate proculcata omnique ecclesiarum ordine ritu consuetudine contempta c. ibid. Quae temere vaneque fuerant nugati quaeque praeter omnem Canonum ordinem ediderant c. Epist Synod ad Imp. to 4. ca. 8. quod contra leges et canones omnemque ordinem perpetrarunt ibid. presumptuously and against the Canons of the Church supporting themselves onely by lies calumnies and slanderous reports In a word the former was truly an holy a generall an Oecumenicall f Omnes Orientales atque Occidentales vel per se vel per legatos sacerdâtali huic concessui intersunt Act. Ephes to 2. ca. 16. Quod à nobis exijt judicium aliud nihil esse quam coÌmunem concordemque terrarum orbis sensum atque consensum Ep. Synod Eph. Conc. ad Imp. to 2.
ca. 17. Councell wherein was the consent of the whole Catholike Church the latter was nothing else but an hereticall schismaticall and rebellious faction or conspiracie of some thirtie g Ille Iohannes 30. tantum numero eosque vel haereticos vel alios illius factionis socios Epist Synod 5. Conc. ad Imp. to 4. ca. 2. Johannes rebellionis hujus antesignanus ibid. ca. 3. alibi saepe or fortie persons unworthy the name of Bishops insolently opposing themselves to the holy Councel yea to the whole Catholike Church in which number and faction besides others who lesse concerne our purpose were these h Vt patet ex eorum subscripsione Act. Conc. Ephes to 3. ca. 2. tom 4. ca. 7. Iohn Bishop of Antioch the ring-leader of the rest Paulus Bishop of Emisae Theodoret of whom wee before entreated and Ibas not then but some three or foure yeares after Bishop of Edessa whom to have beene present at that time as a Bishop though his name bee not expressed in their subscription both Glicas i Glic Annal. part 4. pa. 363. in his Annales and the Councell at Chalcedon k Post duos dies venimus in Ephesum ait Ibas in Epist sua Conc. Chal. act 10. seâuutus sum primatem meum ibid. pa. 112. b. and Ibas his owne words therein doe make manifest 3. Now though there was so great odds betwixt the holy Councell and this factious conventicle yet were they as is the custome of all heretickes and schismatickes most insolent in all their actions As the holy Councell deposed Nestorius for an hereticke so the Conventicle to cry quittance with them deposed l Tu Cyrille tu Memnon scitote vos exauctoratos omnique episcopali honore exutos to 3. Act. Eph. ca. 2. Cyrill for an Arch-hereticke also condemning m Capita haeretica à Cyrillo exposita ut quae Euangelica Apostolicae doctrinae apertè repugnant Ibid his twelve Chapters as hereticall which the holy Councell had approved as orthodoxall As the holy Councell excommunicated n Act. Conc. Ephes to 4. ca. 7. and anathematized Iohn Paulus Theodoret Ibas and all the rest of their factious adherents and defenders of Nestorius and his heresie So did the Conventicle also excommunicate and anathematize Cyrill and all o At vos reliqui omnes qui Cyrilli actis consensistis anathemati subjacete tom 3. Ephes Act. ca. 2. that tooke part with him and defended his twelve Chapters and so among these even Pope Celestine and the whole Catholike Church As the holy Councell truly and justly called themselves the sacred and oecumenicall Councell and tearmed Iohn with his adherents a faction and hereticall p Schismaticorum conciliabutum to 4. Act. Conc. Ephe. ca. 15. Conventicle of Nestorians so did the Conventicle arrogate unto themselves the glorious name of the holy q Sacra Synodus c. tom 3. act ca. 2.6.7 alibi saepe Ephesine Councell and slandered them which held with Cyrill to bee a Conventicle r Confuso illorum Conciliabulo se conjunxerunt tom 3. act Ephes ca. 1. Quoddam inter se conciliabulum instituerunt ibid. c. 4. an unlawfull s Seditiose iniquè contra ecclesiasticas sanctiones regiaque decreta consensistis ibid. ca. 2. and disorderly assembly tearming them Arians t Qui furijs quibusdam agitati Arij Apollinarijque dogmata inflaurare voluerunt to 3. ca. 18. Apollinarians and from Cyrill Cyrillians v Scitote Cyrillianos tyrannide fraudibus c. Append. ad to 3. act Ephes ca. 10. As the holy Councell constantly refused to communicate with Iohn x To. 4. act ca. 15. et ca. 18. or any of his faction untill they did coÌsent to the deposing of Nestorius and anathematizing his heresie so the conventicle most peevishly and pertinaciously not onely refused the communion with Cyrill and other Catholikes but bound themselves by many solemne oathes y Iuravimusque saepissime pientissimo Regi quod impossibile sit nobis coÌmunicare his Cyrillianis si non exploserint capitula Appen to 3. act ca. 9. 10. and that even in the presence of the Emperor that they would never communicate with the Cyrillians unlesse they would condemne the twelve chapters of Cyrill adding that they would rather dye z Parati sumus prius mori quam suscipere unum ex Cyrilli capitulis ib. ca. 7. then admit or consent unto any one of those twelve chapters Such an unhappie and lamentable breach Iohn and the Eastern Bishops made in the Church at the time of that Ephesine Councell 4. The religious Emperours Theodosius and Valentinian whose imperiall authority was the onely meanes to end all these strifes had they beene personally present in the Synod to see all these disorders they would no doubt either have prevented this breach or after it had hapned have healed and made up the same But they residing then at Constantinople were extreamely abused by the vile dealings of the Nestorians for so much had these Nestorians prevailed both at the Court and in the Citie of Constantinople where Nestorius had beene Bishop that though the holy Councell sent letters after letters to certifie the truth of all matters to the Emperor yet either a Arbitramur pijss Imperatorem nihil horum dilucidè intellexisse Ita terra marique obsidemur ut nihil eorum quae nobis hic eveneruÌt vestrae Sanctitudini significare potuerimus Epist saâ conc ad Euâatium alios tom 4. act ca. 21. Qui. Nestorij studiosi erant omnia maria publicas vias âbfidenâââ neminem prorsus à sacra Synodo Constantinopol venire permittunt to 2. act Ephes ca. 19. were their messengers stopt or their letters by the malicious vigilancie of the Nestorians intercepted so that none no not any small notice of them came to the Emperors whereas on the other part the frequent b Ea interim quae inimici Christi erant ultro citroque deferebantur ibid. letters of the conventicle fraught with lies slanders had every day accesse yea applause in the Citie in the Court and before the Emperors And which was the worst of all Count Candidianus whom the Emperours made their owne deputie and president of the Councell to see all good and Synodall orders observed therein hee failed of that trust committed unto him and being most partiall c Candidianus Comes amicitiam Nestorij pietati aâte ponens ea pietati vestrae instillare fluduit quae cum sibi tum Nestorio commoda grataque futura intelligebat Relatio Synod ad Imp. to 4. ca. 10. towards Nestorius and his heresie by his letters also he seconded and soothed all the lies which the conventicle had writ unto the Emperors By which meanes it came to passe that the Emperors knowing nothing of that division amongst the Bishops how beside the holy Councell there was a factious and schismaticall conventicle held in the citie thought all that
where hee speakes of the union is repugnant to that holy union It is the union in Nestorianisme the union in oppugning and overthrowing the whole Catholike saith which Ibas when he writ this Epistle embraced and which in his Epistle he commendeth which that it may appeare to all wee are now to unfold the mystery of that union with Cyrill under colour whereof Ibas first then Vigilius and lastly Baronius with all who hold the Popes judgement to bee infallible doe very cunningly convey their hereticall doctrines and contradict the Catholike faith 15. The Nestorians being loth to forsake or have it thought that any of them did forsake their heresies and being withall most desperately given to lying and slandering set forth a forme of union forged by themselves wherein they made Cyrill and all who consented to him that is all Catholikes to condemne their former Catholike doctrine decreed at the Ephesine Synod and to assent to their heresies And as if this had beene the true union and the conditions of peace agreed upon betwixt Cyrill and Iohn they every where buzzed this into the eares of their sectaries and spred abroad the copies thereof triumphing in it that now they had wonne the field that Cyrill and all his partakers had now consented to Nestorianisme and that upon this consent a generall union and peace ensued in the Church This and no other is the union which Ibas in his Epistle embraceth and by consenting whereunto Pope Vigilius decreeth and Baronius defendeth Ibas to be a Catholike to which union whosoever consenteth or approveth others consenting to it they doe even by that one act besides all the rest infallibly demonstrate themselves not onely to be Nestorians and to approve all the heresies and blasphemies of Nestorius but to be in the most base abject and low degree of all Nestorians even such as by lyes and calumnies strive to uphold their heresies 16. For proofe whereof I shall produce records above exception and first of all Cyrills owne testimony Acatius the worthy Bishop of Meletene hearing by the report which the Nestorians b Ex altera parte quidam de palatio culpaverunt Cyrillum cur susceperit ab orientalibus Episcopis duarum confessionem naturarum quod Nestorius dixit docuit hoc ipsuÌ Valeriano Acatio videbatur Liber ca. 8. had spred abroad that Cyrill in making the union had consented to the Nestorian doctrine of two natures making two persons in Christ contrarie to his owne 12. Chapters certified Cyrill of this report Cyrill writ unto him at large declaring the contrarie and assuring him that it was but a meere calumnie devised against him They reprove and accuse us saith he c Cyril Epist ad Acat to 5. Act. Conc. Eph. ca. 8. pa. 8â4 835. as if formerly we had thought the quite contrarie to those things which now at the union we have written and I understand that they object also unto us quod novam fidei expositionem vel symboluÌ receperimus that we have now at the union embraced a new Creed or new exposition of the faith rejecting that old and venerable Creed Thus did the Nestorians accuse Cyrill as himselfe testifieth but what answered he for himselfe At stultus stulta loquitur cor ejus vana meditatur he calls them in plaine termes fooles and lyars the foole speaketh foolishly and his heart meditateth lyes And in the end he warneth Acatius not to give credit to the counterfeit Epistle or forme of union which the Nestorians had forged and spread abroad in his name If any Epistle saith he d Jbid. pa. 837. a. be caried about as written by me tanquam de ijs quae Ephesi acta sunt jam dolente poenitentiam agente contemnatur as if I did now since the union sorrow and repent for those things which were done and decreed at Ephesus let such an Epistle be condemned Nay the Greeke is more emphaticall ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã scorne and deride every such writing The like almost doth Cyrill write to Dynatus Bishop of Nicopolis who uppon the Nestorians slanderous reports suspected as it seemeth the very same of Cyrill as Acatius did Cyrill e Cyrill Epist ad Dynatum quae est 38. extat tom 5. Act. Eph. ca. 16. having declared the certaine truth of these matters unto him saith in the end It is needfull that you should know the cleare truth of these matters lest some men who doe vainly f ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and falsly report one thing for another should trouble any of the brethren Perindè ac si nos quae contra Nestorij blasphemias scripsimus retractaremus g ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as if wee had upon the union recalled revoked or denied those things which we have written before against the blasphemies of Nestorius 17. Besides these indubitate testimonies of Cyrill the Nestorians themselves doe manifest this their calumnie For although Iohn and those Easterne Bishops who in their Councell at Antioch subscribed to that holy profession of faith which was sent from Cyrill unto them who were by farre the greater part and who therefore are counted the Easterne Church though these I say were as they well deserved received into the Catholike CoÌmunion when the union was concluded yet is it most untrue which Vigilius affirmeth and takes it for a ground of his errour touching Ibas that omnes h Vig. Const nu 192 orientales Episcopi per Paulum Emisenum ad concordiam redierunt that all the Easterne Bishops by Paulus Emisenus returned to the unity and communion of the Church They did not all not Helladius not Eutherius not Hemerius not Dorotheus for whose restoring to their Sees for they were deposed Paulus did earnestly labour with Cyrill but not being able to prevaile for them manserunt in eodem schismate in quo etiam nunc perseverant they continued in their former schisme as rent from the Church and so they do now also remaine nor was there in the covenants of peace any mention of them as Cyrill i Cyr. Epist ad Dynatum expresly affirmeth But I will onely insist upon two of the principall sticklers in the Nestorian heresie and who most concerne our present cause Theodoret and Ibas 18. Theodoret beleeving the reports of his fellow Nestorians that the Catholikes at the time of the Vnion had revoked their former doctrines and consented to Nestorianisme insulted over them in a publike oration k Quae extat in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 559. at Antioch before Domnus in this manner Vbi sunt dicentes quod Deus est qui crucifixus est where are those that say that he was God who was crucified God was not crucified but the man Iesus Christ hee who is of the seed of David was crucified Christ is the Sonne of David but he is the temple of the sonne of God Non jam est contentio Oriens Aegyptus sub uno jugo est There
14. ca. 16. §. His. The Pope universorum personam sustinet sustaineth the person of all Bishops of all Councels of all the whole Church he is in stead of them all As the whole multitude of the faithfull is the Church formally and the generall Councell is the Church representatively so the Pope also is the Church Vertually as sustaining the person of all and having the power vertue and authoritie of all both the formall and representative Church and so the Churches or Councels judgement is the Popes judgement and the Churches or Councels infallibility is in plaine speech the Popes infallibilitie 10. This will further appeare by those comparisons which they make betwixt the Church or Councels and the Pope It is the assertioÌ of Card. Bellarmine b Li 2. de Conc. ca. 13. § Haec as also of their best c Omnium qui doceÌt papam esse supra Concilium ibid. quos recenset ca. 14. §. ultima writers that there is as much authoritie Intensivè in the Pope alone as in the Pope with a generall Councell or with the whole Church though Extensivè it is more in them then in him alone Even as the light is Intensivè for degrees of brightnes as great in the Sun alone as in it with all the Starres though it is Extensivè more in theÌ that is more diffused or spred abroad into moe being in them then in the Sun alone Neither onely is all the authoritie which either CouÌcell or Church hath in the Pope but is in a far more eminent manner in him then in them In him it is Primitively or originally as water in the fountaine or as light in the Sun Omnis authoritas est in uno saith Bellarmine d Lib. 4. de Ron. Rom. ca. 24. §. Secundo seeing the governmeÌt of the Church is Monarchicall all ecclesiasticall power is in one he meanes the Pope and from him it is derived unto others In the Councell and the rest of the Church it is but derivatively borrowed from the Pope as waters in little brookes or as light in the moone starres In him is Plenitudo potestatis as Innocentius teacheth c Inn. 3. ca. 1. Cum ex eo Ex. de Penit. cap. Proposuit et de Concess prebend the fulnesse of Ecclesiasticall power and authoritie dwelleth in him in the rest whether Councels or Church it is onely by Participation and measure they have no more then either their narrow channels can containe or his holinesse will permit to distill or drop downe upon their heads from the lowest skirts of his garment So whatsoever authoritie either Church or generall Councell hath the same hath the Pope and that more eminently and more abundantly then they either have or can have 11. But for Infallibilitie in judgement that 's so peculiar to him that as they teach neither the Pope can communicate it unto Church or Councell nor can they receive it but onely by their connexion or coherence to the Pope in whom alone it resideth Potestas infallibilitas papalis est potestas gratia personalis saith Stapleton f Relect. Conc. 6. q 3. art 5. opin 5. Papall power and infallibilitie is a personall gift and grace given to the person of Peter and his successors and personall gifts cannot bee transferred to others In like sort Pighius g Lib. 6. de Eccles Hier. ca. 1. § Et quanquam Vni Petro atque ejus Cathedrae non Sacerdotali quantocunque Concilio the priviledge of never erring in faith was obtained by the prayer of Christ for Peter alone and his Chaire not for any Councell though it be never so great To the same purpose saith Bellarmine h Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 11. § De secundo If a generall Councell could not erre in their sentence the judgement of such a Councell should be the last and highest judgement of the Church but that judgement is not the last for the Pope may either approve or reject their sentence So Bellarmine professing the Popes onely judgement to be infallible seeing it alone is the last and highest after and above both Church and generall Councell All the infallibility which they have is onely by reason of his judgement to which they accord consent It hence appeareth saith Bellarmine i Lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 3. §. Contra. tot am firmitatem that the whole strength and certainty of judgement which is even in lawfull Councels is from the Pope non partim à Concilio partim à Pontifice it is not partlie from the Councell and partly from the Pope it is wholly and onely from the Pope and in no part from the Councell When the Councell and Pope consent in judgement saith Gretzer k Defen ca. 2. lib. 4 de Pont. § Recensent omnis infallibilitas Concilij derivatur à Papa all the infallibility of the Councell is derived from the Pope and a little after when the Pope consenteth with the Councell ideo non errat quia est Papa hee is therfore free from erring because he is the Pope and not because he consenteth with the Councell In like sort Melchior l Loc. Theod. lib. 6. ca. 7. § Quid. Canus The strength and firmitude both of the whole Church and of Councels is derived from the Pope and againe m Lib. 5. ca. 5. §. Non. In generall Councels matters are not to bee judged by number of suffrages but by the waight of them Pondus autem dat summi Pontificis authoritas and it is the Popes gravity and authority which gives waight to that part whereunto he inclineth If he say it one hundred Fathers with him are sufficient but if his assent bee wanting a thousand a million ten thousand millions Nulli satis sunt no number is sufficient Nay if all the whole world be of a contrary judgement to the Pope yet as the Canonist n Cupers Com. in cap. Oportebat pa. 11. tels us the Popes sentence totius orbis placito praefertur is of more weight and worth than the judgement of the whole world So cleare it is that all their boasting of the authority and infallible judgement of the Church and of generall Councels wherein they please themselves more than ever the Iews did in crying o Ier. so oft TempluÌ Domini the Temple of the Lord that all this is nothing else but a Viser to hide or actually to draw into mens mindes the Popes infallibility they having no meaning at all to give or allow either to Church or generall Councell any infallibility but onely with a reference to the Pope to whom alone they annex it as a personall gift and peculiar prerogative and who like those leane and ill favoured Kine of Pharaoh hath devoured and quite swallowed up all the authority and infallibility both of Church and Councels yet thus much now is evident that seeing all who are of their present Romane Church beleeve and professe the
Church and generall Councels to be infallible seeing their infallibility is none but onely by adhering and consenting to the Pope it necessarily ensueth that they all à fortiori doe beleeve and must professe the Pope to be infallible seeing on his the infallibility of both the other doth wholly and solely depend 12. Let me adde but one other proofe hereof taken from Supremacy of authoritie and judgement It is a ruled case in their learning Si o Bell. lib. 3. de verb. Dei ca. 5. § QuintuÌ et lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 1. § Denique et lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 11. § De tertio errare non potest debet esse summus judex He who is infallible must be the highest and last Iudge and Vice versa He p Affirmant ejus judicium esse ultimuÌ Hinc autem aperte sequitur non errare Bell. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 3 § Accedat who is the last and highest judge must be infallible Supremacy and infallibility of judgement are inseparably linked To whomsoever Supremacy is given even for that cause infallibility of judgement is granted unto him also for seeing from the last or supreme Iudge there can be no appeale it were most unjust to binde Christians to beleeve his sentence who might be deceived most unjust to binde them from appealing from a judge that were fallible or from an erronious judgement Consider now to whom Supremacy of judgement in causes of faith belongeth To whom else but to the Pope whereas some dare affirme saith the Canonist q Cupers com ad cap. oporteb pa. 4. nu 33. that a Councell is above the Pope Falsissimum est This is most false The Successor of Peter saith Stapleton r Rel Cont. 6. q. 3. art 5. opin 10. supra omnes est is above all Bishops Church generall Councels above all The Pope saith Bellarmine Å¿ Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 17. is simply and absolutely above the whole Church and above a generall Councell t Lib. eod ca. 14. § Vltimae Hee further tels us that this assertion That the Pope is above a generall Councell is not only the judgment of all the ancient Schoole Divines the coÌmon sentence of their Writers of whom he reckoneth thirteene and if it were fit three times thirtie might bee scored up with them but that it is the publike doctrine of their Church decreed in their Laterane Synod under Leo the tenth There the Councell saith he u Lib. eod ca. 17. § Denique disertè ex professo docuit did plainly and of set purpose teach the Pope to bee above all Councels yea expressissimè x Lib. eod ca. 13. § Deinde rem definivit that Laterane Councell did most expresly define this and their definition hereof is Decretum de fide a Decree of faith for which cause in his Apology bearing the name of Schulkenius hee professeth y Ca. 6. § Probo pa. 227. that this is Articulus fidei an Article of faith such as every Christian is bound to beleeve that the Pope is Summus in terris totius Ecclesiae Iudex the Supreme last and highest Iudge of the whole Church here upon earth which he proves besides many other authorities by this very Laterane z Cap. eodem § Lateran pa. 249. decree and by their Trent Councell The words themselves of those Councels make the matter plaine in that at the Laterane Councell they thus decree Solum a Sess 11. pa. 639. b. Romanum Pontificem supra omnia Concilia authoritatem habere that the Pope alone hath authority above all Councels and this they say is taught not b Nedum ex Scripturae sacrae testimonio dictis sanctorum patrum c. Ibid. onely by Fathers and Councels but by the holy Scriptures thereby shewing that in this decree they explicate declare the Catholike faith which is one of the Cardinals notes to know when a decree is published by a Councell tanquam de fide as a decree of faith and they threaten the c Ibid. pa. 340. indignation of God and the blessed Apostles to the gainsayers of their decree A censure as heavy as any Anathema the denouncing whereof is another of the Cardinals notes that they proposed this decree as a decree of faith In the other at Trent the Councell teacheth d Sess 14. ca. 7. that unto the Pope is given Suprema potestas in universa Ecclesia the Supreme power in the whole Church And this Supremacy is such that from all Councels all other Iudges you may appeale to him and hee may reverse e Pontifex ut Princeps Ecclesiae summus potest retractare illud judicium Concilij Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 18. § Dico Potest approbare vel reprobare IdeÌ lib. 2. ca. 11. § De tertio adnull or repeale their judgement but from him as being the last and highest Iudge as having supreme power qua f Bell. lib. eodem 2. ca. 18. § Praeterea nulla est major cui nulla est aequalis then which none is greater and to which none is equall you may appeale to none no not as some g Aug. Triump de potest Eccl. q. 6. ar 8. of them teach unto God himselfe The reason whereof is plaine for seeing the Popes sentence in such causes is the h Sententia Concilij cui praest Petrus est sententia Spiritus sancti Bell. lib. 3 de verb. Dei ca. 5. § Sextum Idem asserere possunt caetera legitima Concilia Bell. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 2. § Tertius sentence of God uttered indeed by man but assistente i Bell. lib. 3. de verb. Dei ca. 10. § Decimum gubernante Spiritu Gods Spirit assisting guiding him therein if you appeale from him or his sentence you appeale even from God himselfe and Gods sentence Such soveraignty they give unto the Pope in his Cathedrall judgement Now because Infallibility is essentially and inseperably annexed to supremacie of judgement it hence evidently ensueth that as their Laterane and Trent Councels and with them all who hold their doctrine that is all who are members of their present Romane Church doe give supremacy of authority and judgement unto the Pope so with it they give also infallibility of judgement unto him their best Writers professing their generall Councels desining and decreeing their whole Church maintaining him and his Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to bee infallible which was the former point that I undertooke to declare 13. Suffer mee to goe yet one step further This assertion of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith is not onely a position of their Church which hitherto wee have declared but it is the very maine ground and fundamentall position on which all the faith doctrines and religion of the present Romane Church and of every member thereof doth relie For the manifesting whereof that must
upon the authority of Vigilius did not receive the fift Synod atque à contraria illis sentientibus sese diviserunt and separated or divided themselves froÌ those who thought the contrary Such were the Italian Africane Illirian other neighbour Bishops So Baronius truly professing a schisme to have bin then in the Church and Pope Vigilius to have beene the leader of the one part 36. But whether of these two parts were Schismatickes As the name of heresie though it bee common to any opinion whereof one makes choice whether it be true or false in which sense Constantine the great called o Epist ad Crestum apud Euseb lib. 10. ca. 5. the true faith Catholicam sanctissimam haeresim yet in the ordinarie use it is now applied only to the choice of such opinions as are repugnaÌt to the faith So the name of Schisme though it import any scissure or renting of one from another yet now by the vulgar use of Divines it is appropriated onely to such a rent or division as is made for an unjust cause and from those to whom hee or they who are separated ought to unite themselves hold communion with them This whosoever doe whether they bee moe or fewer then those from whom they separate themselves they are truly and properly to bee termed Schismatikes and factious For it is neither multitude nor paucitie nor the holding with or against any visible head or governour whatsoever nor the bare act of separating ones selfe from others but only the cause for which the separation is made which maketh a Schisme or faction and truly denounceth one to be factious or a Schismatike If Elijah separate himselfe from the foure hundreth Baalites and the whole kingdome of Israel because they are Idolaters and they sever themselves from him because he wil not worship Baal as they did If the three children for the like cause separate themselves from all the Idolatrous Babylonians in separation they are both like but in the cause being most unlike the Baalites onely and not Elijah and the Babylonians only and not the three children are Schismatikes Now because every one is bound to unite himselfe to the Catholike and orthodoxall Church and hold communion with them in faith hence it is that as out of Austine h Lib. de unit Eccl. ca. 4. Stapleton rightly observes i Lib. 6. doct princ ca. 7. §. Istud Tota ratio Schismatis the very essence of a Schisme consists in the separating from the Church I say from the true orthodoxall Church for as Saint Augustine in the same place reacheth whosoever dissents from the Scriptures and so from the true faith though they be spred throughout the whole world k Lib. 10. ca. 7. §. Nempe yet such are not in the sound Church much lesse are they the Church And therefore from them be they never so many never so eminent one may and must separate himselfe But if any sever himselfe from the orthodoxall Church or to speake in Stapletons words si renuit operari in ratione fidei ut pars ecclesiae catholicae if he will not cooperate or joyne together in maintaining the faith as a member of the Catholike or orthodoxall Church Schismaticus hoc ipso est hee is for this very cause a Schismatike 37. Apply now this to Vigilius and the fift generall Councell and the case will be cleare The onely cause of separation on the Councels part was for that Vigilius with all his adherents were Heretikes convicted condemned and accursed for such by that true sentence and judgement of the fift generall Councell which was consonant both to Scriptures Fathers and the foure former generall Councels and approved by all succeeding generall Councels Popes and Bishops that is by the judgement of the whole Catholike Church for more then fifteene hundreth yeares together A cause not onely most just but commanded by the holy Apostle l Tit. 3.10 Shun him that is an hereticke after once or twice admonition much more after publike conviction and condemnation by the upright judgement of the whole Catholike Church On the other side Vigilius and his Faction separated themselves from the Councell and all that tooke part with it for this onely reason because they were Catholikes because they embraced and constantly defended the Catholike faith because he wold not cooperate as Stapleton speaketh with them to maintaine the true Catholike faith and so on their part there was that which essentially made them Schismatickes Baronius in saying that those who then dissented from Vigilius were Schismatickes speakes sutably to all his former assertions For in saying this he in effect saith that Catholikes to avoid a Schisme should have turned Heretickes should have embraced Nestorianisme and so have renounced and condemned the whole Catholike faith as Vigilius then did Had they so done they should have been no Schismatikes with Baronius But now for not condemning the Catholike faith with Vigilius they must all be condemned by the Cardinall for Schismatickes 38. For the very same reason the whole present Romane Church are Schismatickes at this day and not the Reformed Churches from whom they separate themselves For the cause of separation on their part is the same for which Vigilius and his schismaticall faction separated themselves from the fift Councell and the Catholikes of those times who all tooke part with it even because wee refuse to embrace the Popes Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith as the fift Councell refused that of Vigilius The cause on our part is the same which the fift Councell then had for that they defend the Popes hereticall constitution nay not onely that of Vigilius which yet were cause enough but many other like unto that and especially that one of Leo the tenth with his Laterane Councell wherby Supremacie and with it Infallibilitie of judgement is given unto the Pope in all his decrees of faith In which one Cathedrall decree condemned for hereticall by the fift Councell and constant judgement both of precedent and subsequent Councells as before we have declared not onely innumerable heresies such as none yet doth dreame of are included but by the venom and poyson of that one fundameÌtall heresie not only all the other doctrines are corrupted but the very foundation of faith is utterly overthrowne Let them boast of multitudes and universalitie never so much which at this day is but a vaine brag say they were far more even foure hundreth to one Luther or the whole kingdome of Babilon to the two witnesses of God yet seeing it is the cause which makes a schismaticke the cause of separation on their part is most unjust but on ours most warrantable holy for that they will not cooperate with us in upholding the ancient and Catholike faith that especially of the fift Councell condemning and accursing the Cathedrall sentence of Pope Vigilius as hereticall all that defend it as Heretickes it evidently followeth that they
and then you will pitty Baronius for this so weake and silly excuse for Vigilius 5. In the Ephesine Latrocinie there came n Act. Concil Eph. recitat in Conc. Chal. Act. 1. pa. 45. certaine Eutychean heretikes to the number of 35. who being justly excommunicated by that holy Bishop Flavianus desired to bee restored to the coÌmunion of the Church Dioscorus his Synod willed them to make a profession of their faith they did so their confessioÌ was this Sic sapimus sicut 318. Patres in Nicea sanxerunt sicut hic congregata sancta Synodus confirmarunt wee beleeve as the Nicene Fathers decreed and the former holy Synod at Ephesus confirmed nor did we ever beleeve or thinke otherwise than those holy Councels decreed wee beleeve as S. Athanasius S. Cyrill S. Gregory omnes Catholici Episcopi and as all Catholike Bishops have beleeved and we accurse all that beleeve otherwise Thus professed those Eutychean heretikes and upon this profession they were by Dioscorus and his Synod restored to the communion of the Church yea which is more that same Latrocinie or hereticall Synod at Ephesus professing o Ibid. pa. 46. the former Councels to be tutelam nostrae Catholica fidei the stay and prop of their Catholike faith so they call their heresie commanded the Nicene Creed which was confirmed in the holy Ephesine Councell to bee read before them and the testimonies of many holy Fathers p Jbid. pa. 47. consenting thereunto Peter Athanasius Poelix Iulius Cyprian and others together with the decree of the Ephesine Councell Nulli q Ibid. pa. 50. licere proferre vel conscribere vel componere aliam fidem praeter eam that it should not be lawfull for any to utter write or compose any other faith or Creed but that which was decreed at Nice After all these read before them Dioscorus said Existimo r Ibid. pa. 57. omnibus placere I thinke that this faith decreed at Nice and confirmed at Ephesus is approved by us all for we may not either retract or make doubt of what they have done and let every man say his judgement hereof Then said Thalassius I thinke the same qui contraria eis sapiunt abominor and I abhorre all who thinke the contrary Iohn of Sebastia I detest all heresies colo hanc solam fidem and embrace this faith onely which was decreed at Nice Stephanus If any beleeve otherwise than the Nicene Fathers decreed let him be accursed because this is the true and Catholike faith and the whole Councell said Omnes sumus ejusdem fidei we are all of the same faith which the Nicene Fathers decreed Thus professed that whole Ephesine Latrocinie consisting of 128 Bishops they all said they held the Nicene faith and none but that accursing all that received not that while yet at that very time when they thus professed they were most damnable heretikes and conspired together to abolish for ever the holy Nicene saith They being Eutycheans learned to make such a dissembling profession of Eutyches himselfe who delivered up to that Synod Å¿ Conciliab Ephes in Act. Conc. Chal. Act. 1. pa. 11. a confession of his faith bemoaning that he was persecuted because he would not deny the Nicene faith nor beleeve otherwise then those holy fathers had decreed and the Ephesine Councell had confirmed and who having repeated verbatim the Nicene Creed addeth this Thus was I taught by my progenitors thus have I beleeved in this faith was I borne in this faith was I baptized and signed with the Crosse in this faith was I consecrated in this faith have I lived to this day and in this faith doe I desire to dye And this confession doe I make attestante mihi tam Deo quam vestra sanctitate both God and this holy Councell being my witnesse hereof Thus Eutyches of whom notwithstanding this so holy a profession and all his partakers their second Nicene Councel truly saith t Act. 6. pa. 561. Eutiches Dioscorus and the heretikes of that branne approved the Nicene faith confirmed in the holy Councell at Ephesus sed tamen haeretici permanserunt yet for all that they remained heretikes 6. What can the Cardinall or any of his friends oppose to this Example If Vigilius be no heretike because hee professeth to hold the faith of the Councell at Chalcedon then neither Dioscorus nor the Eutycheans nor Eutyches himselfe is an heretike because they all with as great earnestnesse professed to keepe inviolable the Councels at Nice and Ephesus the Catholike faith explaned in them accursing all who beleeve the contrary thereunto If notwithstanding this so resolute and earnest profession Dioscorus the Eutycheans with that Ephesine coÌspiracy were heretikes Eutyches himself an archheretike as they al undoubtedly were for even while they thus professed they all denied u Consiteor ex duabus naturis fuisse Dominum ante adunationem post vero adunationem unam naturam confiteor Dixit Eutyches sanctae Synodus dixit consentimus Act. Conc. Ephes in Act. Conc. Chal. Act. 1. pa. 28. b. two natures to remaine in Christ after the union as the very acts of that Latrocinie doe expresly declare then was it a very silly reason of Baronius to conclude that Vigilius was no heretike because in his decree for defence of the Three Chapters hee is so resolute to keepe inviolable the Councell of Chalcedon and the faith there decreed 7. The like may bee seene in the Monothelites of whom their second Nicen Synod saith x Act. 6. pa. 5â1 thus Sergius Bishop of Constantinople Cyrus Bishop of Alexandria Honorius Bishop of Rome and all who are called Monothelites embraced both the Councell of Chalcedon and the next which followed it which is this fift and the generall Councels which went before these to wit the Nicen Constantinopolitane and Ephesine veruntamen ut haeretici a Catholica ecclesia dammati sunt yet for all this they were condemned for heretickes by the whole Church Why may not the Catholike Church give the like doome of Vigilius for defending the three Chapters though hee professe and imbrace all the same Councels and particularly that of Chalcedon as they did 8. Perhaps other Heretickes would dissemble in their profession but the Nestorians of which ranke Vigilius was they were men of a better fashion they would never professe to hold the decrees and faith of an holy Councell unlesse they did so indeed Fie of all heretickes they were most vile in this kinde Read the acts of their Conventicle held in an Inne at Ephesus during the time of the holy Ephesine Councell and you shall see that as by lies slanders and all base revilings they sought to disgrace Cyrill and all other orthodoxall Bishops calumniating them as heretickes and oppugners of the Nicen faith so they boasted of themselves that they forsooth were the onely men who defended and upheld the Councell of Nice and the faith there explaned Witnesse
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 câjus 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 ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã 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 Å¿ 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
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 gestiâ 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
Pontificis Imperator excitatus sanctionem edidit Bin. not in eam Epist yea further the Emperour commanded the severall Bishops to shew their judgements in that doctrine of faith decreed at Chalcedon which he did to this end ut omnium calculo confessione Chalcedonense Concilium iterum firmaretur saith Binius m Locis citatiâ that the Councell of Chalcedon might be confirmed againe by the consent and confession of all those Bishops They did what the Emperour commanded them some alone as Anatolius Sebastianus Lucianus Agapetus and many moe some in Synodal Epistles as the Bishops of Alexandria of Europe all whose letters are adjoyned to the Councell of Chalcedon n Pa. 146. ad pa. 179. concerning all which that is to be noted which Agapetus saith o Pa. 166. Pene omnes occidentalium partium Episcopi confirmaverunt atque consignaverunt almost all the Bishops of the West and so also in the East did confirme by their letters and subscriptions that faith which was explaned at Chalcedon What authority thinke you could the confirmation of one single Bishop as of Agapetus and Sebastianus or of a Synod consisting but of nineteene Bishops as that at Millan p Vt liquet ex eorum epist Synod quae extat post Epist 52. Leonis or but of seven q Vt Epis Syriae post Conc. Chal. pa. 155. b. or sixe r Vt Episc Maesia ibid. a. or five Å¿ Vt Episc secundae Syria Ibid. pa. 157. b. or foure t Vt Episc Osrâeviae Ibid. pa. 168. a. as some of the other give to the great and Oecumenicall Councels of Ephesus and Chalcedon approved not onely by the Popes but by the consenting judgement of the whole Christian world as out of the Ephesine Synod we before declared And yet was never one of those confirmations fruitlesse as Pope Leo who was the author of them rightly judged Of the great Nicene Councell Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia and Theognis Bishop of Nice after they had endured exile for not consenting to the Nicene faith in token of their repentance writ u Epistola eorum extat apud Socratem lib. 1. ca. 10. thus unto the Synod Those things which are decreed by your judgement consentientibus animis confirmare decrevimus we are purposed to confirme with consenting mindes Even the consent of two and those exiled and hereticall Bishops is called a confirmation of the great Nicene Councell to which no authority was added therby I will but add one example more and that is of this our fift Councell concerning which in their second Nicene Synod it is thus said x Act. 1. pa. 306 Foure Patriarkes being present approved the same and the most religious Emperour sent the Synodall Acts thereof to Ierusalem where a Synod being assembled all the Bishops of Palestina manibus pedibus ore sententiam Synodi confirmarunt they all confirmed the sentence of this Councell with their hands with their confessions and full consent except onely one Alexander Bishop of Abyles who thought the contrary and therefore was put from his Bishopricke and comming to Constantinople was swallowed up by an earthquake So their Nicene Synod By all which it is now cleare that generall and appoved Oecumenicall Councels or the decrees thereof may bee and de facto have beene usually approved and confirmed not onely by the Pope but by other succeding generall Councels by Provinciall Synods yea by particular Bishops who have beene absent none of all which gave or could give more authority to the Councell or Synodall decree thereof than it had before and some of them are both in authority and dignity not once to bee compared to those Synods which they doe approve or confirme and yet not any one of al these confirmations were needlesse or fruitlesse 36. The reason of all which may be perceived by the divers ends of those two coÌfirmations These use end of the first confirmation by the Bishops present in the Councell was judicially to determine and define the controversie then proposed and to give unto it the full and perfect authority of a Synodall Oecumenicall decree that is in truth the whole strength and authority which all the Bishops and Churches in the whole world could give unto it The use and end of the second confirmation by those Bishops who were absent was not judicially to define that cause or give any judgment therein for this was done already and in as effectuall a manner as possible it could bee but to preserve the peace of the Church and unity in faith which could by no other meanes be better effected than if Bishops who had been absent and therefore did but implicitè or by others consent to those decrees at the making thereof did afterwards declare their owne explicite and expresse consent to the same Now because the more eminent that any Bishop was either for authority or learning the more likely he was either to make a rent and schisme in the Church if hee should dissent or to procure the tranquility and peace of the Church if hee should consent hence it was that if any Patriarke Patriarchall Primate or other eminent Bishop were absent at the time of the Councell the Church and Councell did the more earnestly labour to have his expresse consent and confirmation to the Synodall decrees This was the cause why both the religious Emperour Theodosius y Sacra Imper. ad Iohan. to 5. Act. Eph. Conc. ca. 3. Cyril Epist 38. ad Dynatum to cod ca. 16. and Cyrill with other orthodoxall Bishops were so earnest to have Iohn Patriarke of Antioch to consent to the holy Ephesine Synod which long before was ended that as he had beene the ringleader to the factious conventicle and those who defended Nestorius with his heresie so his yeelding to the truth and embracing the Ephesine Councell which condemned Nestorius might draw many others to doe the like and so indeed it did This was the principall reason why some of the ancient Councels as that by name of Chalcedon for all did it not sought the Popes confirmation to their Synodall decrees not thinking their sentence in any cause to bee invalid or their Councell no approved Councell if it wanted his approbation or confirmation a fancy not dreamed of in the Church in those daies but wheras the Pope was never personally present in any of those which they account the 8 general Councels the Synod thought it fit to procure if they could his expresse and explicite consent to their decrees that he being the chiefe Patriarch in the Church might by his example move all and by his authoritie draw his owne Patriarchall Diocesse as usually hee did to consent to the same decrees whereas if he should happen to dissent as Vigilius did at the time of the fift Councell hee was likely to cause as Vigilius then did a very grievous rent and schisme in the Church of God 37. There was yet another use and end of
those subsequent confirmations whether by succeeding Councels or absent Bishops and that was that every one should thereby either testifie his orthodoxy in the faith or else manifest himselfe to bee an heretike For as the approving of the six generall Councels and their decrees of faith did witnesse one to be a Catholike in those doctrines so the very refusing to approve or confirme any one of those Councels or their decrees of faith was ipso facto without any further examination of the cause an evident conviction that he was a condemned heretike such an one as in the pride and pertinacie of his heart rejected that holy synodall judgement which all the whole catholike Church and every member thereof even himselfe also had implicitè before confirmed and approved In which respect an heretike may truly bee called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã being convicted and condemned not onely by the evidence of truth and by synodall sentence but even by that judgment which his owne selfe had given implicitè in the decree of the Councell The summe is this The former confirmation by the Bishops present in the Synod is Iudiciall the later confirmation by the Bishops who are absent is Pacificall The former is authoritativè such as gives the whole authority to any decree the later whether by succeeding Councels or absent Bishops is Testificativè such as witnesseth them to be orthodoxall in that decree The former joyned to the Imperiall confirmation is Essentiall which essentially makes both the Councell an approved Councel all the decrees therof approved synodal and Oecumenicall decrees the later is accidentall which being granted by a Bishop doth much grace himselfe but little or nothing the Synod and being denyed by any doth no whit at all either disgrace the Synod or impare the dignity and authority thereof but doth extreamely disgrace the partie himselfe who denyeth it and puls downe upon him both the just censures of the Church and those civill punishments which are due to heretikes or contumacious persons 38. My conclusion now is this Seeing this fift Councell was both for the calling generall and for the proceeding therin lawfull and orderly and seeing although it wanted the Popes consent yet it had the concurrence of those two confirmations before mentioned Episcopall and Imperiall in which is included the Oecumenicall approbation of the whole catholike Church it hence therefore ensueth that as from the first assembling of the Bishops it was an holy a lawfull and Oecumenicall Councell so from the first pronouncing of their synodall sentence and the Imperiall assent added thereunto it was an approved generall Councell approved by the whole catholike Church and so approved that without any expresse consent of the Pope added unto it it was of as great worth dignity and authoritie as if all the Popes since S. Peters time had with their owne hands subscribed unto it And this may suffice to satisfie the fourth and last exception which Baronius devised to excuse Vigilius from heresie CAP. XIX The true notes to know which are generall and lawfull and which either are not generall or being generall are no lawfull Councels with divers examples of both kindes 1. THAT which hath beene said in the former Chapter is sufficient to refute that cavill of Baronius against the fift Councell whereby he pretends it to have neither been a general nor a lawfull Synod because the Pope resisted the assembling and contradicted the decree and sentence thereof but for as much as it is not victory but truth which I seeke and the full satisfaction of the reader in this cause and seeing this point about the lawfulnesse of generall Councels is frequent and very obvious and such as being rightly conceived will give great light to this whole controversie about Councels I will crave liberty to lanch somewhat further into this deepe and explane with what convenient brevity I can what it is which maketh any Synod to bee or rightly to be esteemed a generall and lawfull Councell 2. As the name of Synod doth in his primary and large acception agree to every assembly so doth the name of Councell to every assembly of consultation The former being derived from ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is all one with Coetus and imports the assembly of any multitude which meeteth and commeth together The later being derived of Cilia a Concilium dictuÌ Ã communi intentione âo quod in unum omnes dirigant mentis obtutuÌ Cilia enim oculorum sunt Isiod Mer. in suam Canon collect whence also supercilium imports the common or joynt intending or bending their eyes both of body and minde to the investigation of the truth in that matter which is proposed in their assembly But both of those words being now drawne from those their large and primitive significations are by Ecclesiasticall writers and use of speech penes quem jus est norma loquendi restrained and appropriated onely to those assemblies of Bishops and Ecclesiasticall persons wherein they come together to consult of such matters as concernes either the faith or discipline of the Church Of these because some are lawfull others unlawfull Synods if we can finde what it is which maketh a generall and lawfull Councell it will bee easie therby to discerne which are unlawfull Synods seeing it is vulgarly and truly said that Rectum is index sui obliqui 3. That a Synod be generall and lawfull there are three things necessarily and even essentially required the want of any one of which is a just barre and exception why that Synod is either not generall or not lawfull The first which concernes the generalitie is that the calling and summons to the Councell be generall and Oecumenicall so that all Bishops be called and when they are come have free accesse to the same Councell unlesse for some fault of their owne or some just reason they ought to bee debarred For if the calling to any Synod bee out of some parts onely of the Church and not out of the whole the judgement also of such a Councell is but partiall not generall and the Councell is but particular not Oecumenicall seeing some of those who have judicatory power are either omitted or unjustly excluded from the Synod The want of this was a just exception taken by the Pope Iulius against that Councell of Antioch b Extat tom 1. Conc. pa. 420. wherein Athanasius was deposed by the Arian faction and Gregory of Cappadocia intruded into his See why it neither was nor could be esteemed generall or such as should binde the whole Church by the decrees made by it for said Iulius c Apud Socr. l. 2 ca. 13. et Zozom lib. 3. ca. 9. they did against the Canons of the Church ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã because they did not so much as call him to that Synod whereas the Canons of the Church forbid that any decree which should have power to binde the whole Church should bee made without the sentence judgement and
x John 21.15 17. and all the Apostles equally with him as also all y Cum ei Petro dicitur ad omnes dicitur Amas me â pasce oves meas Aug. lib. de agone Christ ca. 30. who either in their Presbyteriall or Episcopall authority succeed unto them for in their Apostolicall none of them had or have any successour that all these are Pastours z Ier. 23.1 2. Ezech. 34. per totum et Act. 20 28. et 1 Pet. 5.2 also of Gods flock but they are all subordinate to the Imperiall Pastours of the people of God the sheep-hooke is subject to the Scepter the Crosier to the Imperiall Crowne Concerning Kings Saint Peter gives a generall precept Feare God a 1 Pet. 2.17 and honour the King which honour he expresly calleth subjection b Ibid v. 30. and obedience in the same Chapter first wee owe obedience to God and next God unto Kings and Emperours Concerning all others excepting Kings and such as have Kingly authority Saint Paul gives a like generall precept Let c Rom. 13.1 every soule be subject to the higher powers even to those who by Gods warrant and as his Vicegerents doe beare d Ibid. v. 4. the sword to them every soule ought to be subject who can except thee from this generality This is commanded saith Chrysostome e Chrys in ca. 15. ad Rom. Not onely to secular men but to all to Monkes to Priests and Bishops the Apostle teacheth them ex debito obedire even in duty to obey Kings and Princes sive Apostolus sis sive Propheta sive Euangelista sive quisquis tandem fueris not the Prophets not the Apostles not the Euangelists not any soule is exempt from this subjection and if not Peter himselfe then certainly not his Vicar as the Pope f Quem Primatem diocescos Synodus dixit praeter Apostolââ primi Vicarium Nich. 1. Epist 8. § Quem cals himselfe And this very subjection of the Pope and all Bishops to the Emperours to omit Silvester Iulius Leo and Gregorie Pope Agatho in most submissive manner acknowledgeth almost seven hundred g Conc. 6. habitum an 680 Bar. et Bin. years after Christ h Conc. 6. Act. 4. pa. 22. in Epist Agathonis et Rom. Synodi Omnes nos praesules vestri imperij famuli All we Bishops are the servants of your imperiall highnesse saith Agatho and a Synod of 125 Westerne Bishops with him to which purpose hee cals Italy his servile i Epist Agath Act. 4. pa. 12. b. Province and Rome his servile City adding that he did this at the Emperours sacred command pro obedientiae satisfactione pro obedientia quam debuimus for that obedience which hee did owe to the Emperour nay yet in more lowly manner he saith not that hee but studiosa obedientia nostri famulatus implevit the willing obedience of his owne servitude to the Emperour did performe this Nor was this the profession onely of Agatho and the Westerne Bishops but the whole sixt Councell approved the same Petrus k Sermo acclamatorius Conc. generalis 6. Act. 18. pa. 89. b. per Agathonem loquebatur Saint Peter spake by the mouth of Agatho Now because they all acknowledge the Pope to be the first and chiefe Bishop in the Church for they all in that Councell approve l Defiâit Concil 6. Act. 17. pa. 80. a. the Councels of Chalcedon and first Constantinopolitane in both m Conc. 2. Can. 5 et Conc. Chal. Act. 16. post Can. 27. which that is decreed seeing by the confession of Agatho by them approved the Pope is a servant and oweth subjection and obedience to the Emperour much more are all other Bishops in the whole world servants and subjects to the Imperial command and that by the consenting judgment of the whole catholike Church represented in that sixt generall Councell 8. The same Soveraignty and supreme Pastorall authority of Kings is after this againe testified in that which they call the eighth generall Councell more than n Conc. illud 8. habit an 869. Bar. et Bin. eight hundred and sixty yeares after CHRIST Basilius the Emperour said before the Councell in his letters o Conc. 8. Act. 1. pa. 880. b. unto them The government of the Ecclesiasticall ship is by the Divine Providence committed unto us in that ship doth saile all who are members of the Church Bishops or Laicks and the government of the whole ship is given to the Emperour Hee like the Pilot rules and directs all Raderus the Iesuite and Binius following him in stead of nobis have put vobis in the latine text as if Basilius had said that the government of the Church belonged to Bishops not to Emperours It is a Iesuiticall and fraudulent tricke for which no colour of excuse can bee made The Greeke set on the very opposite Page p Apud Rad. pa. 224. is ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã nobis in the Surian CollectioÌ q Extat apud Bin. to 3. Con. pa. 858. of those Acts it was rightly read nobis their owne Cardinall Cusanus r Cusan lib. 3. de Concor Cathi ca. 19. out of the ancient Acts of that Synod cites it commisisset nobis the very sense inforceth it to be nobis for the Emperour addeth Therefore doe wee with all sollicitude exhort and warne you that you come to the holy Oecumenicall Synod which had beene a most foolish collection had he not said nobis but vobis for then not to him but to them should have belonged the care to call the Bishops to the Synod yet against all these evidences of truth Raderus and Binius falsifie the text corrupt the words and pervert the sense by turning nobis into vobis that so they might deprive the Emperour of that supreme authority which Basilius there professed to belong unto himselfe and the Legates of the Patriarchs in the name of the whole Synod approved the Emperours saying Å¿ Conc. 8. Act. 1. pa. 880. b. Recte Imperatores nostri monuere the Emperours have said well To goe no further in this matter that which was cited out of the Scripture concerning Ioshua and David doth clear this point for seeing all who sit in Imperial thrones are like Ioshua and David to feed the Israel of God and the Israel of God containes the whole flocke and all the sheepe of Christ ex t Bell. lib. 1. de Pontif. Rom. ca. 15. § At nobis hac ipsa voce Pasce difficile non est demonstrare summam potestatem ei attribut It is easie even by this very word Feed to demonstrate that supreme power doth belong to Kings seeing unto them it is said Feed my sheepe feed my people Wherefore seeing Kings are commanded by God to rule by their Pastorall authoritie all others and all others are commanded to obey and bee subject unto them and their Imperiall commands as unto their supreme Pastour hereupon earth it hence
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 omniuÌ 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 Å¿ 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 tandeÌ 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 amaÌd 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. CoÌc 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
not onely by Nicephorus and the Emperours Epistle but by the evident testimony of the whole Synod in the synodall sentence it is undoubtedly certaine that the cause of Origen was not as he fancieth the first action or cause handled in the Synod and that he doth but play the Mome in carping at the Acts for want of the first Action 4. It may bee yet that the cause of Origen was the second action in the fift Synod as Nicephorus z Loco citato saith and after him Evagrius * Evag. lib. 4. ca. 37. and that is enough to prove the defects of these Acts. No it was not the second neither as it was not before so neither was it handled after the other of the Three Chapters witnesse the Synodall sentence it selfe wherein all the matters which every day they examined and discussed are set downe and repeated after repetition they testifie a Coll. 8. p. 586. a also Repetitis igitur omnibus quae apud nos acta sunt all things being repeated which were done or handled by way of discussion among us or in this Synod Seeing they repeated all that was debated among them and make no mention of this cause of Origen it is undoubtedly certaine that Origens cause was not debated either first or last in the Synod it was neither the first action as Cedrenus and Baronius nor the second as Evagrius and Nicephorus suppose besides the very determination of the Synod evidently declares the errours of Nicephorus and Evagrius The books say they b Niceph. et Evag. loc citat against the doctrine of Origen being offered to the Synod the Emperour demanded of the Councell Quid de his statueret What it would decree concerning those doctrines A matter utterly incoherent and improbable for in the synodall decree concerning the three Chapters which they suppose to be made before this cause of Origen was either heard or proposed the Councell had expresly delivered their judgement and condemned both Origen and his impious writings When they had already condemned both him and his errors what an incongruity is it to make the Emperour demand what they would decree of him and his errours Or may we thinke that the holy Synod would first condemne Origen and his impious writings as they did in the synodall sentence against the three Chapters and then afterwards examin the matter and make an enquiry whether Origen and his writings were to bee condemned or not which were to follow that disorder which the Switzers are reported to have used in judgement which was most justly called Iudicium vetitum to execute a man and then try and examine whether he ought to be executed or not Farre be it from any to imagine such injustice and rashnesse to have beene in this holy generall Councell Seeing then they condemned and accursed Origen and all his errours in that which Nicephorus and Evagrius account the former Session it is ridiculous to think that either the Emperour urged or that they themselves would in the second Session goe Switzer-like to examine the bookes and doctrines of Origen whether he they ought to be condemned Some doubt perhaps may arise out of those words in the Councell d Coll. 5. p. 552. a which the Cardinall slily e An. 553. nu 42 haec acta inquit desiderantur in Synodâ c. alledgeth Origen was condemned in the time of Theophilus Quod etiam nunc in ipsa fecit vestra Sanctitas which your Holinesse hath now done and Pope Vigilius also But if the words be marked they make nothing against that which I have said for neither hath that Nunc a relation to this present Councell for it is certaine that in it Vigilius did not condemne Origen seeing he was not at all present in the Synod but to this age he was condemned in former ages as namely by Theophilus and now also that is in this your age and even by your selves and by Vigilius and if ought else were imported thereby yet is it onely said that Origen was now condemned which was indeed done by the Synod but that his cause was then examined and debated there neither is it true neither doe the words any way imply 5. Nay I adde further not onely that this Councell did not debate this cause of Origen but it had beene both superfluous and an open wrong to themselves and to the whole Church to have entred into the examination thereof For beside many other former judgements not many e Anno nempe 12. Iustiniani Vigilii 2. ut notat Bar. an 538. nu 29. et 31. yeares before in the time of Mennas both the Emperour in an Imperiall Edict f Extat Edict to 2. Conc. pa. 482. et seq had condemned Origen and his errors and by the Emperours command Mennas with a Synod of Bishops then present at Constantinople had confirmed that condemnation the other Bishops who were absent did the like the Emperour requiring every Patriarke to cause all the Bishops subject to his jurisdiction to subscribe to the same The doctrines and writings of Origen were no doubt at that time fully debated all the Bishops present in this fift Councell had then subscribed and consented to the condemnation of him and his errors so had Vigilius and all Catholike Bishops in the West Seeing the judgement of the Church in condemning Origen was universall would the Councell after themselves and all other Catholike Bishops that is after the judgement of the whole Catholike Church now debate and examine whether Origen and his doctrines ought to be condemned They might as well call into question whether Arius or Macedonius or Nestorius or Eutyches and their doctrine should bee condemned the judgement of the Catholike Church was alike passed on them all for this Councell g Coll. 8. pa. 587 condemned and accursed Origen and his errors as it did Arius Macedonius Nestorius and Eutyches but it condemned them all upon the knowne judgement of the Catholike Church not upon a new tryall or examination then taken of any one of them And this verily seemes to have deceived and led into error Evagrius Nicephorus and Cedrenus for of Baronius I cannot for many reasons imagine it to have beene errour or ignorance in him but wilfull and malicious oppugning the truth they knew or heard by report for even Evagrius h Evag. loc cit who lived in that age saith of that which hee writeth touching the fift Synod Of these things sic actum accepimus we have heard they were thus done I say they might heare that which indeed was true that Origen and his errours were condemned in a Councell at Constantinople in the time of Iustinian and they not being curious nor carefull to sift the diversities of Councels nor exact in computating times confounded the former particular Synod under Mennas wherein many of the doctrines of Origen were recited and he with them condemned in eleven Anathematismes i
non re seu honore non potestate Bell. lib. 1. de Pontif. Rom. ca. 24. § âorro and Binius k Binius verba Bellar. repetit et ait id patere ex Conc. Nic. Can. 7. notis in Epist 3. Anaclet to 1. Conc. pa. 105. not in Conc. Nicen. ca. 7. pa. 31â a. professe though it was but a single Bishorick subject as both Ierome l Hoc ibi in Conc. Nic. decernitur ut Palestinae Metropolis Cesarea sit et totius Orientis Antiochia Hier. Epist ad Pammach contra Johan Epis Hieros and the Nicene m Habeat Aelia honoris consequentiam post Antiochiam Metropoli propria dignitate servata Conc. Nic. Can. 7. Councell declare to the Bishop of Antioch as his Patriarke and to the Bishop of Cesarea Palestina for there is another in Cappadocia as his Metropolitane yet for honor of our Saviors resurrectioÌ in that place it had the name of n Hieros limitaââââscopus scââbat loco sed nullâ Archi-Episcopo vel Episcopo praeerat Bell. loc cit Patriark and preeminency in Councels o Nam sedit 4. loco in Concilio Niceno et subscribit ante Episcopum Caesariensem in Conc. Nicene et Constant ut ex subscriptione liquet et in Conc. Chalc. Act 5. to the Bishop of Caesarea Not to the authoritie and power of a Patriarke for that it had and had it justly long before this fift Councell even by the decree and judgement of the Councell of Chalcedon Iuvenalis p Epist 62. Leonis had sued for it in the Ephesine Councell but the Bish of Antioch as it seemeth then being unwilling to manumit him as it were free him from his subjection Cyrill resisted it writ to Pope Leo praying him to do the like But after long contention both parties being throughly agreed the matter was brought to the Councell of Chalcedon where Maximus and Iuvenalis the Bishops of both Sees first of all and before the whole Councell professed that they were both willing that q Placuit mihi ait Maximus et Iuvenali propter multam contentionem ut sedes Antiochena habeat duas Phaenicias et Arabiam sedes autem Hierosolymorum habeat tres Palestinas et rogamus ex decreto vestrâ haec firmari Conc. Chalc. Act. 7. pa. 105. the Bishop of Antioch should hold the two Pheniciaes and Arabia and the Bishop of Ierusalem should hold the three Palestinaes and they both requested the whole Synod to decree confirme and ratifie the same The whole Councell thereupon by their decree coÌfirmed the same all the most revereÌd Bishops cryed r Ibid. We all say the same and we consent thereunto After them the most glorious Iudges in the name of the Emperor added Imperiall authority and the royall assent to the Synods decree saying Firmum etiam per nostrum decretuÌ sententiam Concilij in omni tempore permanebit hoc this shall abide firme for ever by our decree and by the judgement of the Councell that the Church of Antioch have under it the two Pheniciaes and Arabia the Church of Ierusalem have under it the three Palestines Thus the Iudges The same Decree of this Councell at Chalcedon is expresly testified both by Evagrius Å¿ Evag. l. 2. ca. 18 and Nicephorus t Nic. Callist lib. 15. ca. 30. So untrue it is which Guil. Tyrius and out of him Baronius avoucheth that the Church of Ierusalem was first made a Patriarchall See or had the Provinces and Metropolitanes of Casarea and Scithopolis annexed unto it by the fift Councell that it is undoubtedly certaine that it had with the title and dignity true Patriarchal authority and power over divers Provinces together with their inferiour Bishops conferred upon it with a plenary consent of the whole Church in the Councell of Chalcedon And that you may see the most shamefull dealing both of Bar. and Binius in another place where their choller against this fift Councell was not moved they acknowledge that truth for intreating of the Councell at Chalcedon In this seventh Session of it saith Baronius u An. 451. nu 124. and the like doth Binius x Not. in Conc. Chalc. pa. 184. b. was the controversie coÌposed betwixt the Bishops of Antioch IerusaleÌ and the cause being judged the two Pheniciae and Arabia were given to the Bishop of Antioch and the three Palestines were adjudged to the Bishop of Hierusalem ex quibus jam perspicuè ââparet jus Metropolis in Hierosolymitanam Ecclesiam esse translatum whence it doth evidently appeare that the right of the Metropolis which before belonged to the Bishop of Caesarea was translated to the Bishop of Ierusalem So they who yet in hatred against the Acts of the fift Councell with faces of Adamant deny that truth which here they confesse to be cleare and conspicuous 3. But saith the Cardinall y An. 553. nu 246. the decree of Chalcedon was made post absentiam Legatorum when the Popes Legates were now gone and so they being absent is to be held invalid O the forehead of the Cardinall Were the Popes Legats absent were they gone Truly they were not onely present at this decree and consenting unto it but after it was proposed by Maximus and Iuvenalis they were the very first men that gave sentence therein whose sentence the whole Councell followed For thus it is sayd z Conc. Chalc. Act. 7. pa. 105. a Pascasinus and Lucentius the most reverend Bishops and Boniface a Presbyter these holding the place of the Apostolike See said by Pascasinus These things betwixt Maximus and Iuvenalis are knowne to be done for their good and peace nostrae humilitatis interloquutione firmantur and they are confirmed by the interloquution of our humility ut nulla imposterum de hac causa sit contentio that never hereafter there should be any contention about this matter betweene these Churches Is it credible that the Cardinall could be so audacious and impudent as to utter such palpable untruths Vnlesse he had quite put off I say not modesty but reason sense and almost humane nature Let this stand for the second capitall untruth in this passage 4. Yet Pope Leo himselfe saith Baronius a Loco citato withstood that Decree of the Councell at Chalcedon because it was prejudiciall to the rights of other Churches and by reason he consented not it was not put in execution as it was after this Decree of the fift Synod Had the Cardinall and his friends beene well advised they would feare and bee much ashamed once to mention the resistance of Pope Leo to the Councell at Chalcedon either in those Patriarks or in the other of Constantinople for first the resistance of Leo which was meerely ineffectuall demonstrates that the Popes contradiction with all his might and power can neither disanull nor infringe the judgement of a generall Councell which is no small prejudice to his Princehood or Princely
XXXV That Baronius himselfe followeth many forged writings and fabulous narrations in handling this cause of the fift Councell as particularly the excommunication ascribed to Mennas Theodorus and others and the narration of Anastasius 1. YOV have seene all the exceptions which their great Momus could devise against these Acts to prove them corrupted either by alteration or mutilation or which is the worst of all by additions of forged writings But alas who can endure to heare Baronius declame against corrupted false forged or counterfeit writings Quis tulerit Gracchos better might Gracchus invey against sedition or Verres against bribery than Baronius against the using of false and fained writings Aethiopem albus derideat hee should first have washt away those foule blemishes out of his owne Annals more blacke herewith than any Aethiopian and then have censured such spots in others Were his Annals well purged of such writings their vast Tomes would become a pretty Manuall They who have occasion to examine other passages in Baronius will finde the truth hereof in them for this one concerning the fift Councell Pope Vigilius and the cause of the Three Chapters from which I am loath to digresse I doubt not but whosoever will compare the Cardinals Annals with this Treatise wil easily perceive that all which hee hath said in defence of the Pope relyeth on no other nor better grounds but either forged writings or if truely written by the authors yet on some fabulous narration and untruths which from them the Cardinall hath culd out as onely sit for his purpose Suffer me to give a tast hereof in some of them 2. The first in this kinde is a supplication to Vigilius or a briefe confession made unto him by Mennas Bishop of Constantinople Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea and divers other Easterne Bishops inserted in the beginning of the Constitution of Vigilius and much applauded by the Cardinall a Bar. an 572. nu 19. in this cause and this to bee a meere fiction is by many evident proofes before mentioned easily discerned The occasion of it as the Cardinall tels us b Ibid. et nu 20. was to humble themselves to Pope Vigilius and acknowledge the injuries they had done in writing and declaming against c Vigilio non acquu vit sed eââ plane despexiâ eique insultavit c. Ba. an 551 nu 3. him and his Synodall Constitution for Taciturnity concerning the Three Chapters Now seeing that whole matter is fictitious for neither was there any such Synod ever held nor any such decree ever made the confession which is grounded on them must be like them fabulous and forged 3. The contents bewray the dulnesse of the forgerer the Easterne Bishops professe there to imbrace the foure former Councels and all the Acts thereof in all causes judgements and Constitutions made with consent d Vniversa ab eisâem Synodiâ Communi coâsensu cum Vicarijs sedis Apostolicae judicia conservamus c. in Exemplo confess quod extat in initio Constituti Vigilij of the Popes Legates Why the Easterne Bishops knew right well that some Canons were concluded both in the Councells of Constantinople and Chalcedon not only without but quite contrary to the minde of the Pope and his Legates as namely that about the dignity of Constantinople which they notwithstanding the resistance of the Legates both approved and knew it to have beene ever held in force by the judgement of the Catholike Church but specially by the Bishops of Constantinople whose Patriarchall dignity which they ever after the second Councell enjoyed was both decreed and confirmed by those Canons Never did the Easterne Bishops in those dayes nor long after esteeme the Popes owne much lesse his Legates consent so necessary to any Synodall Decree but that without them the same might bee made and stand in force as the judgement of the generall Councell and whole Church And to goe no further what an unlikely and uncredible thing is it that Theodorus and the rest in one yeare should make this confession to accept no more of those Synodall decrees then the Pope or his Legates were pleased to allow and the very next yeare after contrary to that their confession themselves hold a Synod and make a Synodall decree in this cause of the Three Chapters not onely without the Popes consent or presence either of himself or his Legate but even contrary to his definitive sentence made known unto them the deviser of that confession shewes himselfe plainely to have beene some of the Vaticane favourites who living perhaps in the time of Gregory by this intended to infringe the dignity of the See of Constantinople and those Canons which were concluded both in the 2. and 4. Councell whereas the Easterne Bishops notwithstanding the contradiction and resistance of the Pope held them ever in as great authority and reverence as any Canons in all the foure former Councels 4. Againe what a silly devise was it to make Mennas Theodorus and a great number of Bishops to aske pardon of the Pope for that wherein they professe themselves no way to bee guilty I have e De injurijs beâtitudini vestrae factis ego quideÌ nullam feci c. Ibid. done no injuries to your Holinesse yet for the peace of the Church veluti si eas fecissem veniam postulo I pray you forgive mee that which I never did as if I had done it Can any man thinke this the submission of wise men of such stout and constant mindes as Mennas and Theodorus besides the rest had or what could bee devised more repugnant to that which Vigilius is made to say in his excommunication f Extat inter Epist Vigilij post Epistolam 16. of Theodorus Thou scandalizing the whole Church and being warned entreated threatned by me hast refused to amend nunquam à pravâ intentione cessasti and never hast thou ceased from thy wicked designe nor to write and preach novelties so he cals the condemning of the Three Chapters yea after the Constitution for silence to which thou hadst sworne thou hast openly red in the Pallace a booke against the Three Chapters thou hast beene the fire-brand and the beginner of the whole scandall thou hast despised the authority of the Apostolike See Thus saith the Excommunication Was Vigilius well advised thinke you to accept as a satisfaction and submission for so many and so hainous crimes of insolency contempt perjury sacriledge and the like this confession at the hands of Theodorus wherein he doth in effect give the Pope the lie saying and avouching I have written no bookes at all contrarie to that Decree of Silence made by your Holinesse and for the injuries which have beene done to your holinesse and to your See eas quidem non feci truely I have done none at all Is not this a worthy submission the Pope saith he hath done innumerable and very hainous injuries to him such as deserved the censure of
requiring him to confirme the deposition of Anthimus Vigilius f Bar an eod nu 18. had done this upon the Emperours letter the Popes letters are recorded both in Baronius and Binius dated when Iustinus was Consull which was sixe whole yeares before the Popes comming to Constantinople all that time the Emperour still liked the deposing of Anthimus and many wayes had approved Mennas for the Bishop Now after all this when the whole Church and every man was troubled with a more waighty cause of the Three Chapters Anastasius brings in this that the Emperour and the Pope quarrelled for two yeares about an old forgotten matter of Anthimus wherein there was a perfect concord betwixt them both nay that is nothing to quarrell but that the Emperour like Dioclesian should cause him to be beaten to bee reviled to be puld from the Altar and Sanctuary and haled about the towne by a rope about his necke imprison and banish him and all for his refusing to doe that which the Emperour had decreed to be done and commanded him to do the same that for this cause their kisses should be turned into curses and they both now weep a contrary weeping to their former the Emperour wept because Vigilius would not doe that which the Emperour himselfe commanded him not to doe the Pope wept for that he was trailed in a rope about the towne and all for not doing that which the Emperour would not have him to doe Truely this surpasseth the degree of a fable or untruth Voraginensis himselfe could not devise a more simple and sottish Legend 20. If this doe not sufficiently perswade you of the untruth of this passage see how Baronius and Binius doe contradict the same for in this short narration are contained those complura mendacia as Baronius cals f Bar. an 552. nu 16. them which writers and first of all Anastasius delivereth The Church of Euphemia whither the Pope fled was as Anastasius saith one of the Churches in Constantinople Baronius g In Basilica S. Euphaemiae quae est Chalcedone habitare disposuit Vigilius Bar. an 552. nu 8. and Binius h Confugit Chalcedonem in Basilicam S. Euphaemiae Bin. Not. in vitam Vigilij § Tunc dedit tels you it was the Church in Chalcedon Anastasius saith the Pope was puld thence from the Altar Baronius i Jmperator dignam tanto Pontificè legationeÌ ornavit c. At Vigilius egredi nunquam consentit nisi prius c. Bar. an 552 nu 11 12. tels you the Emperour sent a most honorable message to intreat him to come from thence but the Pope refused till the Emperour yeelded to his demands in recalling his Edict Lastly Baronius k Hoc tempore vid. an 552. accidisse nosclitur quae Anastasius confundit cum prioribus quae acciderunt vivente Theodora Bar. an 552. nu 8 Theodora autem obijt an 548. ut ait Bar. illo anno nu 2â and Binius l Haec quae sequuntur contigerunt post obitum Theodorae Bin. not in vitam Vigilij § Tunc dedit will assure you that the buffeting of Vigilius his fleeing to the Church of Euphemia and their haling him from thence did all happen divers yeares three at least after the death of Theodora the Empresse but Anastasius referres all that to the time of Theodora and makes her another Eleutheria as great an agent in all this as Dioclesian himselfe belike as Eleutheria by a metempseuchosis was changed into Theodora so Theodora by a like Necromanticall tricke of Anastasius was raised out of her grave to buffet to beate and banish Pope Vigilius for not restoring Anthimus 21. That which as it seemes gave occasion of this whole errour to Anastasius was a matter done by Agapetus Hee when hee came to Constantinople had much contention with the Acephali who were oppugners of the Councell at Chalcedon among which Anthimus the Bishop of Constantinople was one and a most earnest defender of that sect It is not unlike but Iustinian at the first favoured Anthimus untill he perceived him to be hereticall Anastasius m Agapetus altercationem caepit habere cum Imperatore de religione c. Anast in vita Agapeti further saith that Iustinian favoured not onely the person but the very heresie of Anthimus and relates certaine threatning words used by Iustinian against Agapetus for that cause as if Iustinian had sayd either consent to us or I will banish thee which the Pope answered in the same manner almost as Vigilius is sayd to have done I thought I had come to Iustinian but now I perceive I have found Dioclesian upon which narration of Anastasius Baronius n Imperator ipse in suspitionem haeresis est adductus Bar. an 536. nu 18. et idem ait Binius Not. in vitam Agapeti §. Hic missus Et apud eum vâluit jussio pontificia Bar. an cit nu 19. and Binius having an implacable hatred to Iustinian say that he was suspected of heresie and to cleare himselfe he upon the Popes command o Non obtempârare Romano Pontifici nefas ratus editam confessionem iterat Bar. an 536. nu 18. published againe his profession of the true faith But that neither Anastasius nor Baronius are herein to bee credited may cleerly appeare partly because Iustinian had before published an orthodoxall profession in the beginning p Simulac Agapetus est creatus Papa Iustinianus rectae fidei professionem Romam misit Bar. an eod nu 18. of the Popedome of Agapetus and specially by that ample testimony which is given him by the Easterne and orthodoxall Bishops in the Councell under Mennas after the death of Agapetus who q Act. 1. pa. 429. a. say of him that à primordits regni sui usque nunc from the very beginning of his Empire till then he studied to keepe the whole body of the Church sound and intire and free from all infection of heresies So farre was he from supporting that heresie or Anthimus in it when he once knew him to defend the same Theodora the Empresse by whose meanes Anthimus who secretly oppugned the Councell of Chalcedon was translated from Trapezuntum to Constantinople she I say was indeed for a time more earnest for Anthimus both to prevent his deposition and after it was past to have him restored by the meanes of Vigilius Liberatus who then lived saying nothing of the Emperours threats which had Iustinian used for the ill will Liberatus bare to Iustinian he would not have omitted expresly mentioneth r Liber ca. 21. Augusta clam promittente munera et rursus Papae Agapeto minas intentante both how Theodora by rewards sought to corrupt Agapetus and when that prevailed not added threats therunto and how the Pope would not at all consent to her motion Victor Å¿ Vict. Tim. in Chron. sub Coss Iustin who also lived at that time saith that Agapetus communione privavit did excommunicate
judgement and definition of the whole generall Councill for in their Synodal relation to the Pope speaking of this very decree they say i Ibid. pa. 140. a. Confirmavimus ante we to wit this whole generall Councill have confirmed the sentence of the 150. Bishops for the prerogative of Constantinople A most cleare and undeniable demonstration and that by the warrant of one of the most famous Councils that ever were that the peevishnes perversnes or wilfull absence of one or a few Bishops yea of the Pope himselfe ought not nor could not hinder a Synod to judge and determine any needful cause much lesse a cause of faith about which there should happen as now there did a general disturbance of the whole Church Vpon these and other like reasons the holy Synod now assembled at Constantinople having done as much as in them lay c Cum nos per omnia quod decet servavimus servamus saepius petivimus Vigilium Col. 2. pa. 524. a. yea k as much in all points as was fit to be done for procuring the presence of Vigilius and having in their first and second Sessions done nothing but waited and expected for his comming seeing now all their invitations and intreaties to be contemned by him and their longer expectance to be but in vaine addresse themselves to the examining of the cause being stird l Pa. eadem b. up by the words of St. m 1 Pet. 3.15 Peter Be ready alwaies to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of your hope which readinesse if it must be in al Christians much n Incongruum auteÌ Sacerdotibus esse putanies protrahere dandum à nobis responsum Christianissimo Imperatori pa. eadem more in Bishops and if it must be declared towards all men most of all towards the Emperor who now required their speedy judgement and Synodall resolution in this cause 2. Having in their first and second Sessions declared their long and earnest but vaine expectance of Vigilius In their third Collation so their Sessions are called they set downe as a foundation to all their future acts a most holy confession of their faith consonant in all points to that which the holy Apostles preached which the foure former Councils explained and which the Holy Fathers with uniforme consent maintained 3. In the 4. and 5. Collations they at large and very exactly discusse the first Chapter concerning the person and writings of Theodorus B. of Mopsvestia adding so much also as was needfull touching the second Chapter which concerned the writings of Theodoret against Cyril 4. Now in that fifth Collation as Baronius tells o Vigilij libellus oblatus Synode Bar. an 553. nu 47. us the Constitution of Pope Vigilius touching the Three Chapters was brought unto the Synod The Pope promised p Ibid. that he would send his judgement thereof ad ipsum Imperatorem atque ad Synodum both to the Emperor and to the Synod which he ingenuously performed yea q An. eod nu 48 modo opportunè praestandum putavit he did it opportunely at this very time of the 5. Collation And the Card. is so resolute in this point that he peremptorily affirmeth of the Popes Constitution Cognoscitur r Jbid. it s knowne to pertaine to this very day of their fift Collation and it s Anno eod nu 41. was this day offered to the Councill for which cause he strongly imagining this Constitution t Constitutum hoc ex actis 5. SynodeÌ nosâitur esse sublatum an eod nu 47. to be stolne out of the Synodall acts now extant is bold to insert v Cum ad hunc ipsum annum et dieth Collationis 5. pertinere cognoscitur Ibid. nu 48. it into the 5. Collation as into his owne due and proper place wherein it was and now ought to be 5. The Card. is too confident about the day when it was sent to the Synod as also in his adding this Constitution to the Acts of the Synod as hereafter in due place will appeare Thus much is certaine and evident by the Synodall acts that this Constitution of Vigilius was made knowne to the Bishops of this holy Councill before their sixt Collation for in that sixt divers things are expressed which have a cleare and undoubted reference to the Popes decree as containing a refutation of the same and herein the Card. saith truly The x An. 553. nu 210. decree of Vigilius was first sent to the Emperor and from him to the Synod as by the sixt Collation may be perceived wherein those things which the Pope had alledged for defence of the Epistle of Ibas are refuted 6. As for the dignity credit and authority of this writing it is neither any ordinary nor private instruction but as the Pope himselfe calleth it a Constitution y Quae praesenti statuimus Constituto Vig Const apud Bar an 553. nu 208. a Statute z Statuimus et decernimus ibid. a Decree a Definition a Post praesentem definitionem ibid. or Definitive sentence and by the name of a Constitution it is subscribed unto both by the Pope b Vigilius Episcopus huic Constituto nostre subscripsi ib. nu 209. and all c Iohannes MarsoÌnum huic Constituto subscripsi alij similiter ibid. the rest of his Assemblie and for such it is commended by Card. d Ann. 553. nu 47. Baronius and Binius e Vigilij Papae Constitutum Bin. in Fragm 5. Conc. pa. 591. In it the Pope delivereth his Apostolicall sentence Iudgement touching the Three Chapters this being f Hunc ipsum esse scias quem de sua sententia interpellatus pollicitus est se missurum ad Jmperatorem Bar. ann 553. nu 47. that very same answer which Vigilius promised to send to the Emperor and for the advised setting downe whereof he g Const Vigit nu 58. requested of the Emperor the respite of twenty dayes During which time he did insudare and laborare as the Card. saith h Ann. 553. nu 28. with much sweat and toile elaborate this large decree containing no lesse i Apud Bar. nu 553 a nu 50. ad 210. then thirty six columes in folio that it might in every respect and for the exact handling of so weighty a cause be correspondent to the gravity and authority of his infallible Chaire specially seeing he set it forth of purpose that it might be notified k Bar. an 553. nu 47 not onely to the Emperor and the Synod then assembled sed universo orbi Catholico but to the whole Catholike Church as a publike direction in faith for them all in which kinde of teaching nullo casu errare potest saith Card. Bellarmine l Lib. 4. de Pont. Rom. ca. 3. § Sit. the Pope can by no meanes be possibly deceived For this cause also Vigilius at this time and in this businesse
used the help and advice of a Synod consisting of Italian Africane and Illyrian Bishops then present with him at Constantinople sixteene Bishops beside himselfe and three Romane Deacons These all consented with the Pope and subscribed m Vide subscriptiones loc cit nu 209. to his Constitution and in theirs was included the consent of the Africane of the Illyrian of the Italian and other Westerne Churches even of the Church of Rome also who all at this time agreed in judgement about the Three Chapters with the Pope as Card. Baronius professeth n Oâcidentales perstabant in sententia quâ semper fuerant pro trium defensione capitulorum an 547 nu 39. So deliberate and advised was the Pope in this cause that his resolution herein is not onely a Pontificall but a Synodall Sentence also yea a Decree and definitive judgement delivered by the Pope as himselfe expresly witnesseth o Vigilij Const apud Bar. loc cit nu 209. Ex authoritate sedis Apostolicae by the authoritie of the Apostolicke sea an whole Synod of Bishops the Westerne Churches consenting with them subscribing to the same for their number well-neere p In Sess 1. Conc. Trid. Archiepiscopi Episcopi non plures quam 26. ut ex actis liquet as many as there were Bishops present in some Sessions of their Oecumenicall Councill at Trent 7. This Apostolicall Constitution which had long laid in obscuritie about some 18. yeares since was brought to light and first q Bar. an 553. nu 48. of al published by Card. Baronius to the opeÌ view of the world copied by him out of an ancient r Ibidem manuscript in their Vaticane where still it is kept and more then halfe of it is set out by Binius s To. 2. pa. 591. annexed as a fragment to the fifth generall Councill But for what good purpose Binius clipt away the residue being a great no lesse then five or six columes in folio and by farre the most needfull part of the Popes Decree thereby not onely injuring the Popes Holines and deluding the world but foully maiming and disgracing his owne Tomes of the Councils you will easily perceive hereafter 8. The summe and effect of the Popes Constitution is the Defence of those three Chapters which the Emperor by his most religious Edict had condemned and accursed The Pope saith Baronius t An. 553. nu 218. during the time of the Synod set forth Decretum pro defensione trium Capitulorum his decree for defence of the Three Chapters Againe v Ibid. nu 218. Vigilius made knowne to the whole Church pro Tribus Capitulis Constitutum à se editum his Constitution published in defence of the Three Chapters Againe x Ibid. nu 272. pro ipsorum defensione laborat Vigilius labored for defence of the Three Chapters But the Constitution it selfe maketh this most evident 9. Concerning the first Chapter whether Theodorus being dead more then an hundred yeares before this Council ought to be condemned Vigilius thus decreed Nulli y Vigilij Const apud Bar. an 553. nu 179. licere noviter aliquid de mortuorum judicare personis That it is not lawfull for any to judge ought anew of those persons who are dead that is not to condemne those who as Vigilius explaining himselfe saith z Ibid. nu 176. minime reperiuntur in vita damnati are not found to have beene condemned while they lived This for the generality of the dead particularly for Theodorus B. of Mopsvestia he thus decreed a Ibid. nu 179. Seeing the holy Fathers had not as he saith condemned him eum nostra non audemus damnare sententia we dare not condemne him by our sentence sed nec ab alio quopiam condemnari concedimus neither doe we permit that any other shall condemne him 10. For the second Chapter which concernes the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill Vigilius was so tender of the credit of Theodoret that he would by no meanes permit his name to be blemished by coÌdemning his writings seeing as he saith b Jbid. nu 181. neither Cyril himself nor after him the Councill of Chalcedon had condemned them Nay Vigilius further adds c Nu. 180. that it is valde contrarium indubitanter inimicum very contrary and undoubtedly repugnant to the judgement of the Councill at Chalcedon to condemne any Nestorian doctrines under the name of Theodoret. Whereupon he definitively decreeth in this manner d Nu. 182. Statutimus atque decernimus we ordaine and decree that no injury or slaunder shall by any man be raised or uttered against Theodoret sub taxatione nominis ejus by taxing of his name So Vigilius decreeing that the condemning of those writings of Theodoret against Cyril is an injury to Theodoret. 11. The third Chapter which indeed is the most materiall but withall most intricate and obscure concerns the Epistle written against Cyril and the holy Ephesine Synod by Ibas B. of Edessa unto Maris a Persian and an Hereticke the copie whereof is set downe in the 10. Action of the Councill at Chalcedon and repeated in the 6. Collation of this fift Councill What the Pope decrees herein Baronius doth declare who explaining the words and meaning of Vigilius saith e Ann. 553. nu 191 That the Fathers of Chalcedon dixerunt eam Epistolam ut Catholicam recipiendam said that this Epistle of Ibas was to be received as Catholike and further adds f Ibid. nu 196. Ex eâ Ibam comprabatum essa Catholicum that by this Epistle Ibas himselfe was proved to be a Catholike yea that g An. 448. nu 71. he was so proved by the consenting judgement of all the Bishops at Chalcedon So Baronius 12. This to have beene indeed the true meaning of Pope Vigilius his owne words in his Constitution make manifest There he first sets downe the ground of his sentence and that was the sayings of Pascasinus and Maximus in the Councill at Chalcedon The h Const Vigil loco citato nu 187. Popes legats said by Pascasinus Relecta ejus epistolâ agnovimus eum orthodoxum By the Epistle of Ibas now read we acknowledge him to be orthodoxall Maximus said i Ibid. nu 189. Ex relecto rescripto epistolae orthodoxa est ejus declarata dictatio by the Epistle of Ibas now read his Epistle or writing is declared to be orthodoxall Vigilius grounding himselfe on these two speaches collects and sets downe two positions of his owne concerning this third Chapter The former that the Councill of Chalcedon approved that Epistle of Ibas as orthodoxall to which purpose hee saith the k Ibid. nu 192. Fathers of the Council at Chalcedon l Ibid. nu 193. Epistolam pronunciantes orthodoxam pronounced this Epistle to be orthodoxall and yet more plainly Orthodoxa est Iba à patribus pronunciata dictatio the Epistle or writing of Ibas was pronounced orthodoxall by the Fathers
consideration to all that hath beene said That this position decreed by Vigilius is such as doth not onely condemne the catholike church that is all the oppugners of it but even Vigilius himselfe and all who defend it Say you that a dead man may not noviter be condemned In saying so you condemne the holy Councell at Sardica of Constantinople of Ephesus of Chalcedon for they all did noviter condemne such persons being dead as in their lives time had not beene condemned Now the holy Fathers of those Councels having thus condemned the dead dyed themselves in the Lord and were in peace gathered to the Lord. If you say they should not have condemned the dead even in saying so you doe noviter condemne all those Fathers being now dead and so you doe that same thing which you say must not bee done and even by defending your position you overthrow your owne position for you doe noviter condemne all those holy Fathers being dead and yet you say that no man may noviter condemne the dead Nay you condemne not them only but even your own selfe also herein for you condemne those who condemne the dead and yet your selfe condemnes all those holy Fathers being now dead and you condemne them for doing that which your selfe now doe even for condemning the dead Such a strange discord there is in this hereticall position of Vigilius that it not only sights against the truth and the opposites unto it but viper-like even against it selfe and against the favourers and defenders of it CAP. VII That the second reason of Vigilius touching the first Chapter why Theodorus of Mopsvestia ought not to be condemned because he dyed in the peace and communion of the Church is erronious and untrue 1. THE second reason of Vigilius why Theodorus of Mopsvestia should not bee condemned is for that as he supposeth Theodorus dyed in the peace and communion of the Church to this purpose he saith that a Vigil Const apud Bar. an 553. nu 179. the rules of his predecessors which he applyeth to Theodorus did keepe inviolate the persons of Bishops in pace Ecclesiastica defunctoruÌ who dyed in the peace of the Church And again We b Ibid. nu 184. doe especially provide by this our present Constitution lest by occasion of perverse doctrine any thing be derogated from the persons of them who as wee have said in pace communione universalis Ecclesiae quieverunt have dyed in the peace and communion of the Catholike Church and that no contumelie be done to those Bishops qui in pace Catholicae Ecclesiae sunt defuncti who have dyed in the peace of the Catholike Church Now that Theodorus so dyed Vigilius proveth not but takes as consequent upon the former point which as we have c Sup. ca. 6. shewed was knowne and confessed because d Perspenimus si quid de his qui defuncti sum nunime reperiuntur in vita damnati Vig. loc cit nu 176. Quos vocat In pace Ecclesiae defunctos Ibid nu 179. 184. he was not in his life time condemned by the Church Nor was Vigilius the first founder of this reason he borrowed it of other Nestorians with whom in this cause he was joyned both in hand and heart They to wit the followers of Theodorus and Nestorius flee unto another vaine excuse saith e Iust Edict § Quod autem Iustinian affirming that Theodorus ought not to be condemned eò quod in communione Ecclesiarum mortuus est because he dyed in the communion of the Churches 2. I shall not need to stay long in refuting this reason of Vigilius The Emperour hath done it most soundly and that before ever Vigilius writ his Constitution Oportebat f Iust ibid. eas scire those men who plead thus for Theodorus should know that they dye in the communion of the Church who unto their very death doe hold that common doctrine of piety which if received in the whole Church Iste autem usque ad mortem in sua permanens impietate ab omni Ecclesia ejectus est but this Theodorus continuing in his impiety to his death was rejected by the whole Church Thus Iustinian To whose true testimonie Binius ascribeth so much as well hee might that whereas some reported of Theodorus that he recalled his heresie this saith he might g Bin. Notis in Conc. 5. verbo Theodorus be beleeved nisi Iustinianus unlesse the Emperor had testified that he dyed in his heresie 3. The same is clearly witnessed also in the fift h Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 552. a. Councell where as it were of purpose this reason of Vigilius is refuted in this manner Whereas it is said of some and one of those is Vigilius that Theodorus died in the peace and communion of the Church mendacium est calumnia magis adversus Ecclesiam this is a lie and slander and that especially to the Church For he is said to die in the communion and peace of the Church qui usque ad mortem rectae Ecclesiae dogmata servavit who hath kept and held the true doctrines of faith even till his death But that Theodorus did not keepe those doctrines certum est it is certaine by his blasphemies and Gregory Nissen witnesseth the same And after the words of Gregory recited they adde this quomodo conantur dicere how doe any say that such an impious and blasphemous person as Theodorus was dyed in the communion of the Church Thus testifieth the Councell 4. Can ought be wished more pregnant to manifest the foule errours of Vigilius in this part of his decree Vigilius affirmeth that Theodorus dyed in the peace and communion of the Catholike Church The Emperour and Councell not onely testifie the contrary but for this very cause the Councell impatient at such indignitie offered to Gods Church cals him in plaine termes a lyar and a slanderer yea a slanderer of the whole Catholike Church in so saying Vigilius from the not condemning of Theodorus in his life time collecteth that hee dyed in the peace and communion of the Church both the Emperour and Councell witnesse his doctrinall errour herein truly teaching that though an heretike live all his life time not onely uncondemned by the Church but in all outward pompe honour and applause of the Church either himselfe cunningly cloaking or the Church not curiously and warily observing his heresie while hee liveth yet such a man neither lives nor dyes in the intire peace and communion of the Church The Church hath such peace with none who have not peace with God nor communion with any who have not union with Christ It condemned him not because as it teacheth others so it selfe judgeth most charitably of all It judged him to be such as hee seemed and professed himselfe to bee It was not his person but his profession with which the Church in his life time had communion and peace As soone as ever it seeth
him not to bee indeed such as hee seemed to bee it renounceth all peace and communion with him whether dead or alive nay rather it forsaketh not her communion with him but declareth unto all that shee never had communion or peace with this man such as hee was indeed before though she had peace with such as he seemed to bee Shee now denounceth a double anathema against him condemning him first for beleeving or teaching heresie and then for covering his heresie under the visor of a Catholike and of the Catholike faith So justly and fully doth the Emperour and Councell refute both the personall errour of Vigilius in that hee affirmeth Theodorus to have dyed in the peace of the Church and the doctrinall also in that he affirmeth it upon this ground that in his life time hee was not condemned by the Church 5. Now whereas i Accesserunt dignae causae ac rationes Bar. an 553. nu 233. Baronius saith that Vigilius had just and worthy reasons to defend this first Chapter one of which is this because if this were once admitted that one dying in the communion of the Church might after his death be condemned for an heretike pateret ostium there would a gap be opened that every ecclesiasticall writer licet in communione Catholica defunctus esset although hee dyed in the communion of the Catholike Church might after death be out of his writings condemned for an heretike truly hee feareth where no feare is at all This gap nay this gate and broad street of condemning the dead hath laine wide open this sixteen hundred years Can the Cardinall or any of his friends in all these successioÌs of ages wherin have dyed many thousand millions of Catholikes can he name or finde but so much as one who hath truly dyed in the peace and communion of the Church and yet hath beene after his death condemned by the Catholike Church for an heretike He cannot The Church should condemne her owne selfe if shee condemned any with whom she had peace and whom she embraceth in her holy communion which is no other but the society with God Such indeed may dye in some errour yea in an errour of faith as Papias Irenee Iustine in that of the millenaries as Cyprian as is likely and other Africane Bishops in that of Rebaptization but either dye heretikes or be after their death condemned by the Catholike Church for heretikes they cannot 6. But there is most just cause why the Cardinall and all his fellowes should feare another matter which more neerely concernes themselves and feare it even upon that Catholike position that the dead out of their writings may justly bee condemned They should feare to have such an itching humour to write in the Popes Cause for his supremacy of authority or infallibility of his Cathedrall judgement feare to stuffe their Volumes as the Cardinall hath done his Annals with heresies and oppositions against the faith feare to continue and persist in their hereticall doctrine feare to die before they have attained to that which is secunda post naufragium tabula the second and onely boord to save them after their shipwracke to dye I say before they revoked disclamed condemned or beene the first men to set fire to their hereticall doctrines and writings and at least in words if not as the k In fine vitae reconciliatio petentibus et poenitentibus non est neganda dum tamen si haeretici sint recipiantur cum scriptura juramento Gloss in dist 1. de poenit ca. Multiplex custome was by oath and handwriting to testifie to the Church their desire to returne unto her bosome These are the things indeed they ought to feare knowing that howsoever they flatter themselves with the vaine name of the Church yet in very truth so long as their writings remaine testifying that they defended the Popes infallibility in defyning causes of faith or any other doctrine relying on that ground whereof in their life time they have not made l Satis est ut Ecclesiae judicio coâflet aliquem decessisse impoenitentem si non conflet de illius poenitentiâ qui haereticus post mortemcoÌvictus est Fran. Torrens lib. de 6 7 8. Synod pa. 13. ejusdem sententiae ait Pigh fuisse a certaine and knowne recantation they neither lived nor dyed in the peace and communion of the Catholike Church but may at any time after their death and ought wheÌsoever occasioÌ is offered be declared by the Church to have dyed in their heresies and therefore dyed both out of the peace of God and of the holy Church of God This unlesse they seriously and sincerely performe it is not I nor any of our writers whom they imagine but most unjustly out of spleene and contention to speake these things who condemne them but it is the whole Catholike Church Shee by approving this fift Councell and the true decree therof condemns this Apostolicall Cathedral definition of Vigilius and all that defend it that is all the members of the present Romane Church to be hereticall and as convicted heretikes she declares them to die anathematized that is utterly separated from God and from the peace and most blessed communion with the Church of God howsoever they boast themselves to be the onely children of the Church of God 7. If any shall here reply or thinke that by the former examples of Papias Irenee Iustine Cyprian and the rest Baronius and other meÌbers of the present Romane church may be excused that these also as the former though dying in their error may dye in the peace coÌmunion of the Church this I confesse is a friendly but no firme excuse for although they are both alike in this that the former as well as the latter dye in an errour of faith yet is there extreme odds and many cleare dissimilitudes betwixt the state or condition of the one and the other 8. The first ariseth from the matter it selfe wherin they erre The former erred in that doctrine of faith wherein the truth was not eliquata declarata solidata per plenarium Concilium as S. Austen m Aug. lib. 2. de bapt ca. 4. speaketh not fully scanned declared confirmed by a plenary Councell Had it bin we may well think the very same of all those holy men which Austen n Ibid. most charitably saith of S. Cyprian Sine dubio universi orbis authoritate patefacta veritate cessissent without doubt they would have yeelded to the truth being manifested unto them by the authority of the whole Church The latter erre in that which to use same Fathers o Aug. lib. eod c. 1. words per universae Ecclesiae statuta firmatum est which hath beene strengthened by the decree of the whole Church This fift Councell consonant to all precedent and confirmed by all subsequent generall Councels unto Leo the tenth decreeing this cathedrall sentence of Pope Vigilius to bee hereticall
Conc. Vig. a nu 60. ad nu 173. and in the Synodall h Conc. 5. coll 4. acts he thus saith i Vigil in const nu 173. Wee decree that by those foresaid chapters nulla injuriandi praecedentes patres praebeatur occasio no occasion be given to injure the former Fathers and Doctors of the Church And again k nu 184. We provide by this our Constitution that by these or the like doctrines condemned in Nestorius and Eutyches no contumely nor occasion of injury bee brought to those Bishops who have died in the peace of the Catholike Church and that Vigilius thought Theodorus so to have dyed we have before l Sup. ca. 7. declared yea that Vigilius knew it Baronius assured us Thus Vigilius to free Theodorus from condemnation pretends those hereticall writings to be none of his 31. What is it that Vigilius will not say for defence of this blasphemous and condemned heretike This cavill was used as Baronius m Defensores Theodori ea ipsius scripta esse negarunt Bar. an 435. nu 14. tells us by the old Nestorians and defenders of Theodorus denying those to bee the writings of Theodorus quae diffamata which were famously knowne through the whole East and which being afterwards detected and discovered to bee truly his writings both they and their author with them were condemned Now this old hereticall and rejected cavill Vigilius here reneweth those writings famously knowne to be the workes of Theodorus condemned as his writings and he with them and for theÌ Vigilius will now have thought to be none of his nor he by them nor for them may bee now condemned And that you may see how Vigilius herein doth strive against the maine streame of the truth Saint Cyrill n Cyrill Epistolae ad Proclum citata in Conc. 5. coll 5 pa. 550. b. who then lived testifieth Theodorus to be author of those hereticall and blasphemous writinââ That wee have found certaine things in the writings of Theodorus nimiae plena blasphemiae nulli dubium est full of blasphemie none that thinks aright can make any doubt And againe o Ibid. pa. 550 a. I examining the bookes of Theodorus and Diodorus have contradicted them as much as I could declaring that sect to be every where full of abomination Yea hee writ divers bookes p Qui Cyrilli libri citantur saepe in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 538. seq against Theodorus expressing the words of Theodorus and his owne confutation of the same So cleare and undoubted was this truth in Cyrills dayes who lived at the same time with Theodorus that hee thought them unwise who made any doubt of that which Vigilius now calls in question And particularly touching that impious Creed Cyrill saith q Prolata apud sanctâm Synodum expositione ab en composita sicut dicebant qui protulerunt c. Verba Cyrill in Epist ad Proclum citat in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 550. b. that they who brought it to the Synode of Ephesus said that it was composed by Theodorus which they said not as by way of uncertaine report but as testifying it to be so in so much that the whole Synode giving credit thereunto thereupon condemned Theodorus r His condemnatis qui sic sapiunt nullam viri Theodori memoriam fecerunt Ibid. though by a dispensation they expressed not his name 32 The same is testified by Rambulas Acatius and the whole Armenian Councell who after examination Å¿ Fiat unitas vestra contra Theodorum sacrilega capitula dogmata ejus Libell Episc Armen ad Proclum in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 542. b. of this cause found the true and indubitate writings of Theodorus to be sacrilegious and therefore by name condemned him exhorting both Cyrill and Proclus to doe the like The Imperiall Edicts of Theodosius t De quibus legibus supra hoc cap. Exta ât vero in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 544. and Valentinian leave no scruple in this matter who would never have so severely forbidden the memory of Theodorus and the reading or having of his bookes had it not by evidences undeniable beene knowne that those were indeed his workes and hereticall writings If all these suffice not when this cause about Theodorus was now againe brought into question the Emperour Iustinian and the fift Councell so narrowly and so exactly examined the truth hereof that after them to make a doubt is to seeke a knot in a rush They testifie those very hereticall assertions whereof Vigilius doubteth to be the doctrines and words u Habemus quae ex Theodori codicibus collegistu Conc. 5. coll 4. pa. 527. b. idem docet Iustin in suo Edict § Si quis defendit Theodorum of Theodorus that impious creed also whereof Vigilius is doubtfull to be composed by Theodorus they are so certaine x Jmpius Theodorus aliud Symbolum exposuit Iust in Edicto §. Tali Et impium ejus Theodori Symbolum coll 4. pa. 537. a. hereof that even in their Synodall sentence y Licet volentibus codices impij Theodori prae manibus accipere vel quae ex impijs codicibus ejus à nobis inserta his gestis sunt Conc. 5. coll 8. pa. 585. a. they referre the triall of what they decree herein to the true and undoubted bookes of Theodorus And in their sentence is included the judgement of the whole catholike Church ever since they decreed this which hath with one consent approved their decree 33 After all these Pope Pelagius in one of his decretall Epistles wherein at large he handleth this cause not onely testifieth that impious Creed z Ab ejus Theodori discâpulis dictatum ab eo symbolum in eâ âem Synodo Ephesina prolatum Pelagius Epist 7. §. In his and those hereticall a Ejusdem Theodori ex libris illius dicta replicemus ibid. writings to bee the workes of Theodorus alleaging many places of them but wheras some obstinately addicted to the defence of the three Chapters moved againe b Haec Theodori dicta utrum ejus sint fortasse dubitatur ibid. §. Haec this same doubt which Vigilius doth and as is likely by occasion of his decree Pelagius of purpose declareth those c Ibidem seq to have beene the true writings of Theodorus and consonant to his doctrine and that hee proveth by the testimonies of the Armenian Bishops of Proclus of Iohn of Antioch of Cyrill of Rambulas of Honoratus a Bishop of Cilicia and so a neighbor of Mopsvestia which is in the same d Secunda Cilicia sub qua Mopsvestia constituta est Conc 5. coll 5. pa. 547. b. Province of Hesychius of Theodosius and Valentinian the Emperours and of Theodoret then whom not any except perhaps Nestorius was more devoted to Theodorus insomuch that he is thought to have taken from Theodorus the name of Theodoret. After which cloud of witnesses produced Pelagius thus concludeth
e Epist 7. §. Etsi blasphemias has ejus esse quis dubitat who may doubt but that those blasphemies are truly his namely of Theodorus being by so many witnesses declared to be his Now when Pope Vigilius against all these Councells Bishops Emperors Popes of the same of succeeding ages yea against the consenting judgement of the catholike Church shall not onely doubt whether Theodorus be the author of those hereticall and blasphemous assertions and writings but by his Apostolicall Constitution decree it to bee an injury to ascribe those blasphemies unto him or for them to condemne him as the whole Church ever since the Ephesine Councell hath done doth it not argue nay demonstrate an hereticall and most extreme distemper in the Popes judgment and in his cathedrall sentence at that time 34. The other point which Vigilius observeth out of the Ephesine Councel is worse then this for as yet he hath onely found that Theodorus was not de facto condemned by the Ephesine Synode but in the next place he will finde by that Councell that Theodorus de jure ought not to bee condemned To which purpose he saith f Vigilius in Const nu 173. that Cyrill and so the Ephesine Synode consenting to him as President would not have the name of Theodorus contained in the Synodall Acts at Ephesus propter regulam quae de mortuis in sacerdotio servandae est for the rule which is to bee kept in such Bishops as are dead And that rule he explaines in the words following to be this that the dead should not bee condemned nor should the living bend their bow against ashes or insult over the dead whereby Vigilius even by his Apostolicall decree adjudgeth both Cyrill and the whole Ephesine Councell consenting therein with him to have beleeved and held a condemned heresie as an Ecclesiasticall rule or rule of their faith and actions That one who is dead may not bee condemned and so by the Popes Constitution both Cyrill and the holy Ephesine Synode were heretikes Such worthy points doe the Popes finde when they use their art and industry to review ancient writings with a reference to their owne determinations and so easie was it for Vigilius to finde the Ephesine Councell first injurious to the dead and then hereticall in a doctrine or rule concerning the dead 35. The very like he found also in the Councell of Chalcedon that Theodorus ought not to be condemned His reason is this Iohn g Vigil in Const nu 145. Bishop of Antioch writ a letter to the Emperor Theodosius in excuse of Theodorus of Mopsvestia ne post mortem damnari deberet that he ought not to bee condemned after his death Now this letter of Iohn Venerabiliter memoratur is with honour not onely with allowance and liking remembred by the Councell of Chalcedon in their Relation or Synodall Epistle to the Emperour Martianus Whence Vigilius collecteth that seeing the Councell with reverence embraceth that letter of Iohn and that letter importeth that Theodorus being dead ought not to be condemned therefore the Councell judgeth that none who are dead and particularly that Theodorus ought not to bee condemned which reason of Vigilius was borrowed from other Nestorians and defenders of the three Chapters as appeareth by Liberatus who explaineth it and sets h Liber ca. 10. it downe almost totidem verbis Iohn saith he writ three letters in the behalfe of Theodorus of Mopsvestia praising in them Theodorus and declaring his wisedome one of those letters he sent to the Emperour Theodosius another to Cyrill the third to Proclus Now the first and third containing the praises of Theodorus the Councell of Chalcedon in their Relation to Martianus the Emperour did i Duas Iohannis Epistolas laudes Theodori continentes Chalced. Synod suscepit et confirmavit Jbid. embrace and confirme Thus Liberatus agreeing wholly herein as you see with Vigilius 36. For answer of which reason of Vigilius I will intreat you to spare my labour and heare how fully and soundly Cardinall Baronius doth refute it but yet so that hee will not seeme to taxe or touch Vigilius that had beene great insolency and incivilitie in a Cardinall but he payes the Deacon home to the full who saith but the very same with the Pope Liberatus saith k Bar. an 435. nu 11. hee borrowed this narration of I know not what Nestorian incautè nimis and he affirmes too indiscreetly that the writings of Theodorus were praised in the letters of Iohn Bishop of Antioch and which is farre worse that those letters of Iohn containing the praises of Theodorus were received and confirmed by the Councell of Chalcedon in their Relation to Martianus for by that meanes adducit in idem crimen he makes the whole Councell of Chalcedon guilty of the same crime to wit of approving the praises doctrine of Theodorus So Baronius By whoÌ it is cleare that Vigilius saying the same w th Liberatus makes the whole CouÌcell of Chalcedon guilty of the same crime that is in plaine termes avoucheth them to be hereticall Videsne saith the l Jbid. Cardinall quot quales lateant colubri sub uno cespite Doe not you see how many and how vile and venemous snakes lye hid under this one turfe or tuft of untruth And that very tuft hath Pope Vigilius chosen to build up and beautifie with it his Apostolicall decree Now if under that one turfe there lurke as indeed there doth and the Cardinall acknowledgeth so great a number of Vipers what infinite and innumerable heapes of most deadly and poisonfull untruths are compacted into the whole body of his Apostolicall Constitution which containeth if one listed narrowly to examine it more than a thousand like turfes nay beyond comparison worse than this 37. But the Cardinall hath not yet done with Liberatus Let us saith m Bar. ibid. et nu 12. hee put the Axe to the roote of the tree and citing the very words of the Councell and their Relation to Martianus he addeth You see that here is no mention at all of Theodorus of Mopsvestia which reason of Baronius Binius n Bin. notis in Liberatum § Breviarium hoc explaneth saying That which Liberatus affirmeth that the Councell of Chalcedon received the praises of Theodorus is not onely untrue sed etiam ipsi relationi Synodicae contraria but it is plainly contrary to the Synodall Relation of the Councell at Chalcedon to which Liberatus referreth himselfe Change but the name and all this is everie whit as forcible against Vigilius as against Liberatus But the Cardinall had well learned the old lesson Dat veniam corvis vexat censura columbas the Pope offends more than any but the poore Deacon must feele the smart and beare all the blowes and yet by your leave through the Deacons sides the Cardinall hath cunningly given a deadly wound and cut the very roote of the Popes Apostolicall decree although he will not bee
calumnie and slander so vile and incredible that it alone should cause any Catholike minde to detest this Apostolicall Constitution of Vigilius But to say truth the Popes reason is without al reason Had the holy CouÌcell admitted Theodoret before he had renounced his heresie or manifested the sincerity of his faith unto them the Pope might have had some colour to have accused them of dissembling as condemning Nestorianisme yet receiving a known Nestorian into their communion but it was quite contrary In the former actions till Theodoret had cleared himselfe of heresie hee was as we have declared no otherwise admitted than onely as a plaintiffe who y Gloriosiss Iudices dixerunt Theodoretus in locum accusatoris nunc ingressus est unde patiamini ea quae inchoata sunt finiri reservata post hac omni accusatione et vobis et illi Conc Chal. Act. 1. pa. 6. a. accused Dioscorus for injuriously deposing him and placing another in his See And in the eight Action wherein hee came to cleare himselfe and to be reconciled to the Church he had no sooner almost set his foot in the Synod but the Bishops cryed z Act. 8. Conc. Chal. out Theodoretus modo anathematizet Nestorium let Theodoret forthwith anathematize Nestorius let him doe it instantly and without any delay And when Theodoret to give the Councell better satisfaction offered them first a book to reade containing the sincere profession of his faith and when that being a Nihil relegi volumus anathematizet Nestorium Ib. refused he purposed at large by words b Ego inquit Theoretus quomodo credo c. Ibid. to have expressed the same the Synod suspecting the worst and that hee used those delayes as being loath to anathematize Nestorius cryed out He is an heretike he is a Nestorian haereticum for as mitte out with the heretike and so they had indeed thrust him out but that he leaving all circuition presently before them all cryed Anathema to Nestorius Anathema to him who doth not confesse the blessed Virgin to bee the Mother of God with which profession the Synod being fully satisfied the glorious Iudges said omnis dubitatio now all doubt is quite taken away concerning Theodoret and then the Synod both received him into their communion as an orthodoxe and restored him to his See from which in the Ephesine latrocinie hee was deposed they all crying out Theodoret is worthy of his See let his Church receive their orthodoxall Bishop To Theodoret a Catholike Doctor let the Church be restored 10. What greater detestation of heresie could the Synod possibly shew what greater tokens of the sinceritie of his faith could either Theodoret expresse or the Synod require It was too great rashnesse if not simplicitie in Vigilius to collect that the holy Councell did dissemble in their faith because they received him who had sometimes swarved in the faith The hereticall Theodoret they exclude and reject the orthodoxall Theodoret they reverence and embrace That which Saint Austen c Aug. lib. 2. de Adulter conjug ca. 9. saith in another cause that the husband who had put away his adulterous wife ought againe to receive her being purged by unfained repentance but so receive her non ut post viri divortium adultera revocetur sed ut post Christi consortium adultera non vocetur that same may bee accommodated to any other offence and not unfitly to this of heresie and the repentant hereticke whom they before for that cause had from themselves disioyned but they neither call nor count him an hereticke whom Christ hath now upon his repentance unto himselfe conjoyned So neither is the Popes reason consequent that the Councell did dissemble in their receiving of Theodoret nor his conclusion true which he would thence inferre that Theodoret writ not against Cyrill and the Catholike faith 11 The second personall matter which Vigilius taketh for another ground of his decree is that neither Theodoret himselfe did nor did the Councell of Chalcedon require him to anathematize his writings d Vig. Const nu 180. There was saith he divers in the Councell of Chalcedon who said that Theodoret had anathematized Cyrill and was an heretike yet those holy Fathers most diligently examining this cause of Theodoret nihil aliud ab eo exigisse noscuntur are knowne to have required no more of him than that hee should anathematize Nestorius and his impious doctrines hoc sibi tantummodo sufficere judicantes judging this alone to be sufficient for them to receive Theodoret. Now it is unfit saith e Ibid. nu 181. he further nos aliquid quaerere velut omissum à patribus that we should seek or require more than did the Councell of Chalcedon as if they had omitted any thing in this cause of Theodoret seeing then they required no anathematizing of his writings against Cyrill neither ought any others to anathematize or require of any the anathematizing of the same 12. As you saw Vigilius in the former Chapter to use haeretica astutia so may any man here easily discerne that hee useth an evident and fallacious sophistication The Councell indeed required not that nor did Theodoret in explicite or expresse termes performe it saying I anathematize my owne writings against Cyrill but in implicite termes in effect and by an evident consequent both the Councell required and Theodoret performed this before them all for hee subscribed f Ego autem et definitioni fidei subscripsi ait Theod. in Conc. Chal. Act. 8. to the definition of faith decreed at Chalcedon one part of that definition is the approveing g Approbamus Synodicas Epistolas Cyrilli Conc. Chal. Act. 5. in definit of the Synodall Epistles of Cyrill a part of one of those Epistles h Nam continentur in Epist Cyrilli et Conc. Alexand. ad Nestorium quae extat inter acta Concilij Ephes to 1. Act. ca. 14. et repetitur in Conc. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 568. et seq are the twelve Chapters of Cyrill which Theodoret refuted in every one of those chapters is an anathema denounced to the defenders of the contrarie doctrine Then certainely Theodoret by subscribing to the definition subscribed to the Epistles of Cyrill by them to the twelve chapters and by doing so he condemned and anathematized all who oppugned those twelve chapters and then undoubtedly his owne writings which were published as a confutation of those twelve chapters And it seemes strange that Vigilius professing that Theodoret did devota mente suscipere with a devout affection receive and approve the Epistles of Cyrill and the doctrine of them could deny or be ignorant that in doing so he did anathematize his owne writings which by the twelve chapters of Cyrill are anathematized 13. Besides this how often how plainely doth the Councell of Chalcedon i Act. 8. require and urge Theodoret to anathematize Nestorius and his doctrines how willingly did Theodoret performe this What else is
contradict their interloquutions verumetiam apertissimum eis noscuntur praebuisse consensum but also they are knowne to have assented and that most manifestly unto those interloquutions So Vigilius It had beene enough and too much to have said that the Councell had assented or had but seemed to assent but Vigilius in saying that all the rest did most manifestly assent to those interloquutions uttered a papall and supreme untruth whereof no colourable pretence can be made witnesse the fift general Councell and the whole Catholike Church which hath approved it They expresly e Conc. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 576. a.b. testifie that the Councell of Chalcedon did pro nullo habere esteeme as nothing that which was spoken by one or two those were Pascasinus and Maximus for that Epistle but of this also I have spoken before 4. Now both these vntruths whereof Vigilius is so evidently and by so ample witnesses convicted Cardinall Baronius hath againe revived telling with a face more hard than Brasse or Adamant Patres f Bar. an 553. nu 191. dixerunt eam Epistolam ut Catholicam recipiendam the Fathers of Chalcedon said that this Epistle of Ibas is to be received as orthodoxall and g Ba an 448. nu 71 againe ex ipsa Ibam fuisse probatum orthodoxum aequè una fuit sententia omnium Episcoporum that Ibas was by this Epistle approved for a Catholike it was the consent and uniforme judgement of all the Bishops at Chalcedon then which two lowder untruths and well worthy of a golden whetstone could hardly have beene uttered And though he tooke them from Pope Vigilius yet are they farre more inexcusable in the Cardinall than in the Pope his Master Vigilius dyed before he saw the judgement of succeeding Popes and generall Councels which had he knowne wee may charitably thinke that his Holinesse would have casseired and defaced such palpable and condemned untruths But Cardinall Baronius knew all this hee knew that the fift h In 6. collatione Conc. 5. allata ab ipso Vigilio pro defensione Ibae Epistolae confutantur Bar. an 553. nu 210. generall Councell had condemned these untruths in Vigilius he knew that Pelagius i Gregorius cum praedecessoribus successoribus ejus omnes quintam Synodum confirmasse noscuntur Bar. an 553 nu 229. Gregory and their successors that the sixt k Bar. ibid. seventh and other generall Councels had approved the fift Councell and so in approving it had condemned those same untruths and yet against the knowne consent and judgement of all those Popes and generall Councels that is against the knowne testimonie of the whole Catholike Church for a thousand yeares together he is bold to avouch both those former sayings for truths which all those former witnesses with one voyce proclaime to be condemned untruths Such account doth the Cardinall make of Fathers Popes Generall Councels and of the whole Catholike Church when they come crosse in his way 5. A third personall matter there is concerning this Chapter of which not Vigilius but Cardinall Baronius doth enforce me to intreate and that is whether Ibas was indeed the author of this Epistle or no for although it be not materiall to the intent of the fift Councell which against the decree of Vigilius we now defend whether Ibas writ it or not seeing neither this fift nor the former Councell of Chalcedon condemned the author of this Epistle but onely the Epistle it selfe yet seeing the Cardinall was pleased to undertake the defence of a needlesse untruth that this is not the Epistle of Ibas I am desirous that all should see how wisely and worthily hee hath behaved himselfe in this point 6. Baronius speaking against this Epistle first makes it doubtfull whose it is saying l Bar. an 432. nu 71. author qui fertur nomine Ibae quisquis ille fuerit the author of this Epistle which passeth under the name of Ibas whatsoever he be and having thus bred a distrust in your mindes then as the serpent dealt with Eve hee positively sets downe his untruth It is not the Epistle of Ibas in this manner Caeterum m Ibid. ut publica acta testantur producta in Concilium Epistola illa non esse Ibae comperta but the publike acts doe testifie that when this Epistle was produced in the Councell at Chalcedon it was found not to be the Epistle of Ibas and so it being condemned Ibas was absolved Thus Baronius who for proofe hereof alleageth the publike acts n Conc. Chalc. Act. 10. Conc. Nic. 2. Act. 6. citantur à Bar. ibidem both of the Councell of Chalcedon and of the 2. Nicene Synod And truly in the second Nicene Synod that which the Cardinall saith is read indeed by Epiphanius a Deacon in that Synod but it is the testimony of the whole Councell Epiphanius onely reading and proposing it in the name o Epiphanius scitam à patribus appositam responsionem per legit Bar. nu 787. nu 34. and behalfe of the Synod And because it is a testimony very pregnant for the Cardinalls assertion and is cited out of a Councel which he much honoreth affecteth I will do him the favour as at large to expresse that passage the rather because this as the whole answer read by Epiphanius is not onely commended as a matter delivered p Quam confutationem nobis spiritus sanctus dedit Conc. Nâc 2. Act. 6. pa. 356. a. unto them by the holy Ghost but they further request q Rogamus autem quicunque etc. ibid b. all who shall happen to light on that commentarie of theirs that they will not read it slightly or perfunctorily but with singular indagation and search of the same And I am loth to deny those Nicene Fathers so very just and reasonable a request 7. In that place r Conc. Nic 2. Act. 6. pa. 371. a. there was read on the behalfe of the Iconoclasts a testimonie out of the ancient Father Epiphanius Bishop of Cyprus forbidding to set up Images either in the Churches or Å¿ Epiphanius Cyprius sic inquit Ne in ecclesiam imagines infer atis neque in coemiterijs statuatis neque in domo communi tolerentur ibid. in Churchyards or in their common dwelling houses but every where to carie about God in their hearts This saying netled the Nicene Fathers not a little who were very superstitiously devoted to Image-worship and therefore in stead of a better answer they say that the booke whence that is alleaged is falsly t Id ex Epiphanio lectum nequaquam illius existit ibid. a. Et verum ut novitij libelli et alieni falsique sunt ibid b. ascribed to Epiphanius hee was not the author of it Epiphanius they honor u Commentarium illum reijcimus beatum autem patrem Epiph. ecclesiae Doctorem agnoscimus ibid. b. as an holy Father and Doctor of the Catholike Church but that booke going under his name they reject which
Ibae à patribus pronunciata dictatio therefore for that confession of faith which Ibas by his Epistle sheweth that he embraceth for that did the Fathers of Chalcedon pronounce the writing or Epistle not the end onely of it to be orthodoxall So he takes this one part of which hee made no doubt but it was approved at Chalcedon as a Medium to prove that which was doubted to wit that the Epistle it selfe even the whole Epistle was by the same Fathers approved yea and Baronius also though hee in words pretends the contrary yet seemes to be indeed of the same judgement for he useth the very like reason as Vigilius doth quod c Bar. an 553. nu 191. ex illa because Ibas in this Epistle professeth himselfe to consent to the union therefore Patres dixerunt eam Epistolam ut Catholicam recipiendam the Fathers at Chalcedon said that the Epistle loe the Epistle saith the Cardinall not a part onely of it ought to bee received as Catholike 10. Which will be more plaine if we observe one other point out of Vigilius and Baronius which may not well be omitted for whereas all contained in any part of the Epistle respects things done either before or at or after the union in none of these if ye will beleeve them is this writing hereticall or against the faith for what was done before the union though therein much be spokeÌ against Cyrill the Ephesine Councell and Cyrill called an heretike yet is all that saith d Bar. an 448. nu 71. Epistola historiam continet rerum gestarum inter Iohannem Cyrillum et quae inter eos transacta essent refere c. Baronius spoken by way of an historical narration as declaring what was done not as allowing that which was done ut ex hac parte nihil adversus Cyrillum obloquutus videatur that in this part there is no wrong done to Cyrill At the union or when it was concluded then was Ibas reconciled to Cyrill and received to the communion of the Church and so would not write against the faith so teacheth the Cardinall Ibas saith e An. eodem nu 59. he tooke part with Nestorius usque ad tempus per Paulum Emissenum untill the time that the union was made by Paul Bishop of Emisa quando ipse sicut alij communicare cum S. Cyrillo Ecclesia Catholica caepit at which time Ibas as the rest begun to communicate with Cyrill and with the Catholike Church Vigilius f Vigil Const nu 192. noteth the same and out of him Baronius seemes to have borrowed it By Paulus Bishop of Emisa Iohn atque omnes orientales Episcopi and all the Easterne Bishops then Ibas among them returned to concord with Cyrill And Baronius further by the Epistle it selfe makes this plaine for by it saith g Bar. an 448. nu 75. he is declared that Ibas though before that time he had doated tunc temporis fuisse Catholicum yet then to wit when he writ this he was a Catholike and Ibas writ this Epistle eodem h Ba. an 553. nu 211 momento pacis initae at the verie time and moment when the peace was made and concluded after which he never spake one undecent word against Cyrill so at the time of the union being a Catholike hee would not oppugne or write against the faith much lesse after the time of the union for after that time Vigilius i Vig. Const nu 194 testifieth that Ibas remained still a catholike and in the catholike communion usque ad exitum even to his dying day And Baronius expresseth the same saying k Bar. an 553. nu 211. that after the union it could not bee proved aliquod verbum indecens adversus Cyrillum protulisse that Ibas spake any unseemely word against Cyrill Hereupon now it followeth that the whole Epistle is to be approved written by Ibas when he was a catholike written with a catholike minde and affection by him who both at and after the union would not write against the faith which himselfe professed and what is spoken of matters before the union that is all historically narrated not by assent approved 11. Oh how doe these men even labour and study to be miserable and to tye more fast the knots of those Anathemaes denounced against them by the holy Councell which nothing but renouncing their hereticall defences of this Epistle can ever dissolve what will they doubt or feare to say who would justifie that whole Epistle as affirming nothing repugnant to the faith for a narration is no assertion of that which is related of which the holy Councell and catholike Church hath pronounced that it is wholly hereticall and every part head and taile beginning and ending an absolute and positive deniall of the faith what untruth will they not avouch who deny Ibas after the union to have injured Cyrill whereas the holy generall Councell witnesseth and that truly as you shall straight see that even in this union which Ibas mentioneth he wrongeth Cyrill and all catholikes more than in any part of his Epist yea more thaÌ Nestorius himself ever did But omitting for this time al the other untruths which are not a few in those assertions of Vigilius and Baronius there are two things therein which I may not wel passe over in silence 12. The former is at the consideration whereof I could not refraine from laughter how curious and even superstitious the Cardinall is in calculating the nativity of this impious Epistle as if he had performed the office of Iuno Lucina unto it and knew the very moment of time when this faire babe was first brought to light It was written saith hee eodem momento pacis initae in that very moment when the union was made betwixt Iohn and Cyrill At that very moment Sure the Cardinals Ephemerides or the constellations deceived him It was neither written in that moment nor in that moneth nor in that yeare nor at the least two whole yeares after the union was concluded for the Epistle mentioneth not onely the praise of Theodorus of Mopsvestia but his commendation by Rambulas Now neither did the Nestorians so much honour nor did the catholikes by name condemne Theodorus till the Emperour had by his Edict straightly forbidden the reading writing hearing or having of the bookes of Nestorius till then the name and writings of Nestorius being a Patriarke and of so eminent a citie as Constantinople was farre more fit to credit and countenance their doctrines than the name of Theodorus being but a Bishop and of a very obscure and ignoble towne or corner rather which in likelihood had beene buried in eternall oblivion had not he by his owne infamy made it famous as Herostratus l Herostratus ut nomen memoria sceleris extenderet inâendium nobilis fabricae quod inter 7. orbis miracula unuÌ erat manu sua struxit sicut ipse fassus est Sol. n. ca. 53.
reproved the holy Ephesine Councell as if things had been spoken and done therein amisse What did Cyrill answer Hujusmodi epistolas equidem non admisi truly I did not admit or allow of this their second Epistle neither seeing therein they did adde new contumelies who should have asked pardon for the old But where as Paulus did very earnestly excuse the matter affirming and that upon his oath also that their purpose was not to exasperate Cyrill but to accord with him dilectionis gratia excusationem admisi I in charity was content to admit of this excuse And Paulus being very desirous to effect the union consented to anathematize Nestorius and his heresies to consent also to the deposing of Nestorius and the electing of Maximianus in his place which when Paulus had performed and subscribed suo chyrographo with his owne hand-writing which was all that either the Emperor or Cyrill required ad synaxim recepi I received him to the communion of the Church But when Paulus would further have perswaded Cyrill that seeing he was sent in the name of the rest and had subscribed this pro omnibus tanquam ex communi omnium orientalium persona for them all and as it were in the person of them all and therefore laboured with Cyrill that this his subscription might satisfie for the others also and that he would require no more of them but be content with their letters which by him they had sent nulla ratione id fieri passus sum saith Cyrill I could by no meanes indure that I told Paulus also that his subscription in condemning Nestorius and his heresies Ipsi soli sufficere could satisfie but only for himselfe but as for the rest Iohn u Modis omnibus opus esse dixi ut Johannes scriptam de â his confessionem coleret c. Cyrill Epist ad Acatium and they must personally and for themselves subscribe or else they could not bee received into communion whereupon Cyrill writ an orthodoxall profession x Nisi chartam qua significavi si Iohannes illi subscripserit tum communionem illis reddite Cyrill Epist ad Dynat to that same effect whereunto Paulus had subscribed and sent it unto Iohn requiring his personall subscription to it This was the summe of all that was done by Paulus at his first comming 32. Paulus returning to Antioch brought this resolute answer of Cyrill to Iohn and the Bishops of his Synod They seeing no other meanes to make an union but onely by consenting to Cyrill and seeing that Paulus whom they put in trust as their agent had both himselfe consented and further undertaken that Iohn and they should likewise consent unto the same which hee had done did now at length yeeld y Cum Johannes subscripsisset caeterique qui majore authoritate apud ipsum erant Cyrill Epist ad Dynat to all the demands of Cyrill and for an assurance of their sincerity therein they writ a Synodall z Ea extat inter Epist Cyrilli Epist 27. in Act. Conc. Ephes to 5. ca. 5. and Encyclicall Epistle unto Cyrill which they likewise sent unto Pope Sixtus to Maximianus and other principall Bishops wherein they first set downe a very sound true and orthodoxall confession of their faith and then testifie their willing assent and subscription to the deposing b Placuit nobis Nestorium pro deposito habere pravasque illius prophanasque novitates anathematizare Epist Synodalis Iohannis Antioch Synodi Antioch to 5. Act. Ephes ca. 5. of Nestorius and the condemning of his heresies a Miserunt autem eandem Epistolam quam ad me scripserunt ad Xistum Maximianum Cyrill Epist ad Dynat 33. This Synodall letter they sent to Cyrill by Paulus c Nos Dominum nostrum Paulum ad sanctitatem tuam mittendum duximus Epist Ioh. Synod Antioch loco jam citato ex charta quam Dominus meus Paulus nunc attulit evidenter cognoscimus Continet enim inculpatam fidei confessionem Cyrill Epist 28. quae est ad Johannem Antioch extat tom 5. Act. Ephes ca. 6. Bishop of Emisa that he might make a finall peace and union At whose comming to Alexandria this second time and bringing with him this undoubted testimony of the orthodoxie of Iohn and the chiefe of the Easterne Bishops and that they had now consented to all which either the Emperour or Cyrill required of them the union was fully concluded on every part and peace made in the Church In token whereof Paulus preached at Alexandria in the month of December d Nempe 29. mensis Chiath i. Decembris to 6. Act. Ephes ca. 13. in tit making there before Cyrill and the whole City so orthodoxall a profession of the faith that the people for joy interrupting him foure or five times exclamed e Ibid. to 6. ca. 13. Bene venisti Orthodoxe O Orthodox Paul thou art welcome to us Cyrill is orthodoxall Paulus is orthodoxall and Cyrill for his part writ that learned Epistle f Epist Cyrilli 28. qua extat tom 5. Act. Ephes ca. 6 in congratulation unto Iohn and the rest which beginneth Let the Heavens rejoyce and let the earth be glad publishing it as an hymne of joy and thanksgiving for the union now effected in the Church singing Glory unto God and peace among men 34. This is the true narration of the whole proceedings betwixt Cyrill and the Easterne Bishops touching this matter of the union as they who diligently peruse the Epistles of Cyril to Acatius Bishop of Melitene to Dynatus and Iohn and compare therewith the Epistle of Iohn and the Synod of Antioch sent to Cyrill and Xistus will clearly perceive whence three things may be observed The first is the most shamelesse dealings of the Nestorians who slandered Cyrill to have at the time of the union consented in all points unto them and to their heresie and to have condemned his former doctrine and the Ephesine Councell wheras the quite contrary was true He was most inflexible and constant in maintaining the true faith more inexorable than Aeacus or rather as Moses g Exod. 10.26 would not consent to Pharoah no not in the least hoofe so would not Cyrill yeeld one heire-bredth unto them but brought them to subscribe wholly and in every point to that which he desired 35. The second is the occasion which the Nestorians tooke for their pretended calumnie They knew that Iohn and the Easterne Bishops had written to Cyrill willing him to condemne his owne Chapters yea that they had writ so resolutely that unlesse Cyrill did so they would not consent unto any peace or union Thus much was true as by the letter of Acatius Bishop of Berea to Cyrill is evident Now they saw that Cyrill afterwards and in that very yeare consented with Iohn and made union with him whereupon they boasted that Cyrill did it upon the condition required by Iohn at the first
diligently be remembred which we before have shewed that as when they commend the infallibility of the Church or Councell they meane nothing else then the Popes infallibility by consenting to whom the Church and Councell is infallible even so to the point that now I undertake to shew it is all one to declare them to teach that the Church or generall Councell is the foundation of faith as to say the Pope is the foundation thereof seeing neither the Church or Councell is such a foundation but onely by their consenting with and adhering to the Pope who is that foundation 14. This sometimes they will not let in plaine termes to professe Peter saith Bellarmine k Lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 3. § Secundo and every one of his successors est petra fundamentum Ecclesiae is the rocke and foundation of the Church In another place l Praef. in lib de Pont. § Quae. he calleth the Pope that very foundation of which God prophesied in Isaiah I m Isa 28.16 1 Pet. 2.8 lay in the foundations of Sion a stone a tried stone a precious corner stone a sure foundation Ecce vobis lapidem in fundamentis Sion saith Bellarmine pointing at the Pope behold the Pope is this stone laid in the foundations of Sion And in his Apology under the name of Schulkenius n Ca. 6. pa. 255. he cals these positioÌs of the Popes supremacy CardineÌ fundamentuÌ summaÌ fidei Christianae the Hinge the foundation the very summe of the Christian faith To the like purpose Pighius cals o Lib. 4 Hier. ca. 6. § Habes the Popes judgement Principium indubiae veritatis a principle of undoubted verity and that he meaneth the last and highest principle his whole Treatise doth delare Coster observes p Euch ca. de sum Pont § Nequc that the Pope is not onely the foundation but which is more the Rock other Apostles were foundations other Bishops are pillars of the Church but Peter and his Successor is that solid Rocke quae fundamenta ipsa continet which supporteth all other pillers and foundations To this purpose tends that assertion which is so frequent in their mouthes and writings q Bell. li. 4. de Pont. ca. 1. et l. 2. de Conc. ca. 14. § Vltima et Gretz def ca. 1. lib. 1. de verbo Dèi pa. 16. that in causes of faith ultimum judicium est summi Pontificis the last judgement belongs to the Pope Now if it bee the last in such causes then upon it as on the last and lowest foundation must every doctrine of their Church relie into his judgement it must last of all be resolved but it because it is the last into any higher judgement or lower foundation cannot possibly bee resolved 15. But their most ordinary and also most plausible way to expresse this is under the name of the Church teaching men to rest and stay their faith on it although in very truth as wee have shewed before all which they herein say of the Church doth in right and properly belong to the Pope onely and to the Church but onely by reason of him who is the head thereof The r Lib. de Eccl. milit ca. 10 § Ad haec tradition of the Scriptures and all doctrines of faith whatsoever doe depend of the testimony of the Church saith Bellarmine Againe The Å¿ Lib. de effect Sacr. ca. 25 § Tertium certainty of all ancient Councels and of all doctrines doth depend on the authority of the present Church And yet more fully t Lib. 6. de grat et lib. arb ca. 3. § At Catholici The faith which Catholikes have is altogether certaine and infallible for what they beleeve they doe therefore beleeve it because God hath revealed it and they beleeve God to have revealed it quoniam Ecclâsiam ita dicentem vel declarantem audiunt because they heare the Church telling them that God revealed it So Bellarmine who plainly professeth the testimony of the present Church that is of the Pope to bee the last reason why they beleeve any doctrine and so the very last and lowest foundatioÌ on which their faith doth relie None more plentifull in this point than StapletoÌ The externall testimony of the Church saith he u Tripl cont Whit. ca. 11. § Venies Fundamentum quoddam fidei nostrae verè propriè est is truly and properly a foundation of our faith Againe x Dupl cont Whit. ca. 16. sect 4. the voyce of the Church est regula omnium quae creduntur the rule and measure of all things which are beleeved Againe y Tripl ca. 16. § At qui. whatsoever is beleeved by the Catholike faith wee Catholikes beleeve that propter Ecclesiae authoritatem by reason of the Churches authority we z Relect. Cont. 4 q. 1 art 3. ad 8. beleeve the Church tanquam Medium credendi omnia as the Medium or reason why we beleeve all other things And yet more fully in his doctrinall principles a Doct. Prin. lib. 8. ca. 21 § Hic when we professe in our Creed to beleeve the Catholike Church the sense hereof though perhaps not Grammaticall for the Pope and his divinity is not subject to Grammer rules yet certainly the Theologicall sense is this Credo illa omnia quae Deus per Ecclesiam me docuit I beleeve all those things which God hath revealed and taught mee by the Church But how know you or why beleeve you this Deum per Ecclesiam revelare that all those things which the Church teacheth are revealed and taught of GOD What say you to this which is one peece of your Creede To this Stapleton both in that place b Ca. Eod. § Adsecundam and againe in his Relections c Reâ Cont 4. q. 3. art 2. ad 8. gives a most remarkeable answer This that God revealeth those things by the Church is no distinct Article of faith sed est quoddam transcendens fidei Axioma atque principium ex quo hic alij omnes Articuli deducuntur but this is a transcendent Maxime and principle of faith upon which both this it owne selfe note this especially and all other Articles of faith doe depend upon this all Articles of faith doe hang hoc unum praesupponunt they all praesuppose this and take it for granted This and much more hath Stapleton 16. But what speake I of Bellarmine or Stapleton though the latter hath most diligently sifted this cause This position that the Church is the last Iudge and so the lowest foundation of their faith is the decreed doctrine of their Trent Councell and therefore the consenting voyce of their whole Church and of every member thereof For in that Councell d Sess 4. § Praeterea the Church is defined to bee the Iudge of the sense and interpretation of the Scriptures and by the like reason it is to judge of traditions and of the
learned but willing to learne and who sets this among the prayses of a Bishop that hee ought not onely to teach with knowledge but learne with patience hee I doubt not would readily have demonstrated not onely how learned but how willing to learne himselfe had beene had this question in his life time beene debated by such learned and holy men as afterwards it was I often admire that one observation among many which the same Å¿ Lib. 1. ca. 18. Augustine makes touching this error in Cyprian of whom being so very learned he saith Propterea non vidit aliquid ut per eum aliud eminentius videretur He therefore saw not this one truth touching Rebaptization that others might see in him a more eminent and excellent truth And what truth is that In him we may see the truth of Humilitie the truth of modestie the truth of Charitie and ardent love to the peace and unitie of the Church but the most excellent truth that I can see or as I thinke can be seene in erring Cyprian is this that one may be a true Catholike a Catholike Bishop a pillar of Gods Church yea even a Saint and glorious Martyr and yet hold an error in faith as did that holy Catholike Bishop and blessed Martyr Saint Cyprian To him then and the other Africane Bishops who in like sort erred as he did may fitly be compared the state of those servants of God who in the blindnesse and invincible ignorance of those times of Antichrist together with many golden truths which they most firmely beleeved upon that solid foundation of the Scriptures held either Transubstantiation or the like errors thinking them as Cyprian did of Rebaptization to be taught in that foundation also They erred in some doctrines of faith as Cyprian did yet notwithstanding those errors they may be Catholikes and blessed as Cyprian was because they both firmely beleeved many Catholike truths and their error was without pertinacie as Cyprians was For none who truly beleeves the Scripture and holds it for the foundation of his faith can with pertinacie hold any doctrine repugnant to the Scripture seeing in his very beleeveing of the Scripture and holding it as the foundation he doth in truth though implicitiè and in radice as I may say beleeve the flat contrarie to that error which explicitè he professeth And because he doth implicitè beleeve the contrarie thereof he hath even all the time while he so erreth a readinesse and preparation of hart to professe the contrarie whensoever out of the Scripture it shall bee deduced and manifested unto him 23. A second way of holding those doctrines is of them who together with the truths hold the errours also of their Church Transubstantiation Purgatorie or the like thinking them to bee taught in Scriptures as did the former but adding obstinacie or pertinacie to their holding of them which the former did not And their pertinacie is apparant hereby if either they will not yeeld to the truth being manifested out of the Scriptures unto them or if before such manifestation they be so addicted and wedded to their owne wills and conceits that they resolve either not to heare or if they doe heare not to yeeld to the evidence of reason when they are convinced by it For it is certaine that one may bee truly pertinacious not onely after conviction and manifestation of the truth but even before it also if he have a resolution not to yeeld to the authority and weight of convincing reasons Of this sort were all those who ever since their second Nicen Synod about which time the Romane Church made their first publike defection from the true and ancient faith tooke part with that faction in the Church which maintained the adoration of Images and after that Deposing of Princes then Transubstantiation and other like heresies as they crept by degrees into the Church in severall ages From that time untill Leo the tenth the Church was like a confused lumpe wherein both gold and drosse were mingled together or like a great Citie infected with the plague All as well the sicke as sound lived together within the walls and bounds of that Citie but all were not infected and of those that were not all alike infected with those hereticall diseases which then raigned more and more prevaled in the Church Some openly and constantly withstood the corruptions and heresies of their time and being worthy Martyrs sealed with their blood that truth which they professed Others dissented from the same errors but durst not with courage and sortitude oppose themselves such as would say to their friends in private Thus Å¿ Paralip ad Abb. Vsperg pa. 448. I would say in the schooles and openly sed maneat inter nos diversum sentio but keepe my counsell I thinke the contrarie Many were tainted with those Epidemicall diseases by the very contagion of those with whom they did converse but that strong Antidote in the foundation which preserved Cyprian and the Africane Bishops kept from their hearts and at last overcame all the poyson wherewith they were infected Onely that violent and strong faction which pertinaciously adhered to the hereticall doctrines which then sprung up the head of which faction was the Pope and who preferred their owne opinions before the truth out of the Scriptures manifested unto them and by some Councels also decreed as namely by that at Constantinople in the time of Constantinus Iconomachus and that at Frankford these I say who wilfully and maliciously resisted yea persecuted the truth and such as stood in defence of it are those who are ranked in this second order who though they are not in proprietie of speech to bee called Papists yet because the errors which they held are the same which the Popish Church now maintaineth they are truly and properly to be tearmed Popish Heretickes 24. The third way of holding their doctrines beganne with their Lateran decree under Leo the tenth at which time they held the same doctrines which they did before but they held theÌ now upon another Foundation For theÌ they cast away the old and sure Foundation and laid a new one of their owne in the roome thereof The Popes word in stead of Gods and Antichrists in stead of Christs For although the Pope long before that time had made no small progresse in Antichristianisme first in usurping an universall authority over all Bishops next in upholding their impious doctrines of Adoration of Images and the like and after that in exalting himselfe above all Kings and Emperors giving and taking away their Crownes at his pleasure yet the height of the Antichristian mysterie consisted in none of these nor did he ever attaine unto it till by vertue of that Laterane decree he had justled out Christ and his word and laid himselfe and his owne word in the stead thereof for the Rocke Foundation of the Catholike faith In the first the Pope was but Antichrist nascent In the
second Antichrist crescent In the third Antichrist regnant but in this fourth he is made Lord of the Catholike faith and Antichrist triumphant set up as God in the Church of God ruling nay tyrannizing not onely in the externall and temporall estates but even in the faith and Consciences of all men so that they may beleeve neither more nor lesse nor otherwise then he prescribeth nay that they may not beleeve the very Scriptures themselves and word of God or that there are any Scriptures at all or that there is a God but for this reason ipse dixit because he saith so and his saying being a TransceÌdent principle of faith they must beleeve for it selfe quia ipse dixit because he saith so In the first and second hee usurped the authority and place but of Bishops in the third but of Kings but in making himselfe the Rocke and Foundation of faith he intrudes himselfe into the most proper office and prerogative of Iesus Christ For t 1 Cor. 3.11 other foundation can no man lay then that which is laid Iesus Christ 25. Here was now quite a new face of the Romane Church yea it was now made a new Church of it selfe in the very essence thereof distinct from the other part of the Church and from that which it was before For although most of the Materialls as Adoration of Images Transubstantiation and the rest were the same yet the Formalitie and foundation of their faith and Church was quite altered Before they beleeved the Pope to doe rightly in decreeing Transubstantiation because they beleeued the Scriptures and word of God to teach and warrant that doctrine but now vice versa they beleeve the Scriptures and word of God to teach Transubstantiation because the Pope hath decreed and warranted the same Till then one might be a good Catholike and member of their Church such as were the Bishops in the generall Councels of Constance and Basill and those of the fift sixt seventh and succeding Councels and yet hold the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to bee not onely fallible but hereticall and accursed as all those Councels did But since Supremacie and with it Infallibilitie of judgement is by their Laterane decree transferred to the Pope he who now gainsayeth the Popes sentence in a cause of faith is none of their Church as out of Gregory de Valentia he is an heretike as out of Stapleton Canus and Bellarmine was u Sup. hoc cap. nu 7 declared He may as well deny all the Articles of his Creed and every text in the whole Bible as deny this one point for in denying it he doth eo ipso by their doctrine implicitè and in effect deny them all seeing he rejects that formall reason for which and that foundation upon which they are all to be beleeved and without beleefe of which not one of them all can be now beleeved 26. These then of this third sort are truly to he counted members of their present Romane Church these who lay this new Laterane foundatioÌ for the ground of their faith whether explicitè as do the learned or implicitè as do the simpler sort in their Church who wilfully blind-folding themselves and gladly persisting in their affectate and supine ignorance either will not use the meanes to see or seeing will not embrace the truth but content themselves with the Colliars x Hos de author sac Script lib. 3. § Quaerit Catechisme and wrap up their owne in the Churches faith saying I beleeve as the Church beleeveth and the Church beleeveth what the Pope teacheth All these and onely these are members of their present Church unto whom of all names as that of Catholikes is most unsutable and most unjustly arrogated by themselves so the name of Papists or which is equivalent Antichristians doth most fitly truly and in propriety of speech belong unto them For seeing forma dat nomen esse whence rather should they have their essentiall appellation then from him who giveth life formality and essence to their faith on whom as on the Rocke and corner-stone their whole faith dependeth The saying of Cassander to this purpose is worthy remembring There are some saith hee y Lib. de offic viri âij § Sunt alij who will not permit the present state of the Church though it be corrupted to be changed or reformed and who Pontificem Romanum quem Papam dicimus tantùm non deum faciunt make the Bishop of Rome whom we call the Pope almost a god preferring his authority not onely above the whole Church but above the Sacred Scripture holding his judgement equall to the divine Oracles and an infallible rule of faith Hos non video cur minus Pseudo-catholicos Papistas appellare possis I see no reason but that these men should be called Pseudo-catholikes or Papists Thus Cassander upon whose judicious observatioÌ it followeth that seeing their whole Church and all the members thereof preferre the Popes authority above the whole Church above all generall Councels and quoad nos which is Cassanders meaning above z Ecce potestas Ecclesiae supra Script Enchyr. tit de Eccles the Scriptures also defending them not to be a Enchyr. Ibid. authenticall but by the authority of the Church that there is multo b Th. Boz lib. de signis Eccl. 16. ca. 10. § Illud major authoritas much more authoritie in the Church than in them that it is no c Non adeo absurde dictum est c. Gretz Appen 2. ad lib. 1. de verb. dei pa. 396. absurd nay p Potuit illud pio sensu dici Hos lib. 3. de author Script § Fingamus it may be a pious d saying That the Scriptures without the authoritie of the Church are no more worth than Aesops Fables seeing they all with one consent make the Pope the last supreme and infallible Iudge in all causes of faith there can bee no name devised more proper and fit for them than that of Papists or which is all one Antichristians both which expresse their essentiall dependence on the Pope or Antichrist as on the foundation of their faith which name most essentially also differenceth them from all others which are not of their present Church especially from true Catholikes or the Reformed Churches seeing as we make Christ and his word so they on the contrary make the Pope that is to say Antichrist and his word the ground and foundation of faith In regard wherof as the faith religion of the one is from Christ truly called Christian and they truly Christians so the faith and religion of the other is from the Pope or Antichrist truly and properly called Papisme or Antichristianisme and the professors of it Papists or Antichristians And whereas Bellarmine e Lib. de not Eccl. ca. 4. glorieth of this very name of Papists that it doth attestari veritati give testimony to that truth which they
of Rome and members thereof professe to hold the faith of the fift generall Councell and so professe implicitè the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith to be fallible and hereticall but they lye in making this profession for they beleeve not the Popes sentence in such causes to be fallible but with the Laterane and Trent Councels they hold it to be infallible It is the practice of all heretikes to make such faire though lying professions For should they say in plaine termes that which is truth indeed wee beleeve not the scriptures nor the Councells of Nice Ephesus or Chalcedon every man would spit at them and detest them cane pejus angue nor could they ever deceive any or gaine one proselyte But when they commend their faith that is their heresie to be the same doctrine with the scriptures which the Councells of Nice Ephesus and Chalcedon taught by these faire pretences and this lying profession they insinuate themselves into the hearts of the simple deceiving hereby both themselves and others 16. The other consequent is this That the profession of all heretikes is contradictory to it selfe For they professe to hold the scriptures and so to condemne every heresie and yet withal they professe one private doctrine repugnant to scripture and which is an heresie The like may be said of the Councells The Nestorians by professing to hold the faith decreed at Nice professe Christ to bee but one person and yet withall by holding Nestorianisme they professe Christ to be two persons The Eutycheans by professing to hold the Councell of Ephesus professe two natures to remaine in Christ after the union which in that Councell is certainly decreed and yet by professing the heresie of Eutyches they professe the quite contradictory that one nature onely remaines after the union The Church of Rome and members thereof by professing the faith of the fift Councell professe the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith to be fallible and de facto to have beene hereticall and yet they professe the direct contradictory as the Councell of Laterane hath defined that the Popes sentence in such causes is infallible and neither hath beene nor can be hereticall So repugnant to it selfe and incoherent is the profession of all heretikes that it sighteth both with the truth and with it owne selfe also The very same is to be seene in Vigilius and his Constitution For in professing to defend the three Chapters and in decreeing that all shall defend them he professeth all the blasphemies of Nestorius and decreeth that all shall maintaine them and professing to hold the faith decreed at Chalcedon and decreeing that all shall hold it hee professeth that Nestorianisme is heresie and decreeth that all shall condemne it for heresie and so decreeing both these he decreeth that all men in the world shall beleeve two contradictories and beleeve them as Catholike Truths Such a worthy Apostolicall decree is this of Vigilius for defending whereof Baronius doth more then toyle himselfe 17. You will againe demand Seeing Vigilius doth so earnestly and plainely professe both these why shall not his expresse profession to hold the Councell of Chalcedon make him or shew him to bee a Catholike rather then his other expresse profession to defend the Three Chapters make or shew him to bee an hereticke Why rather shall his hereticall then his orthodoxall profession give denomination unto him I also demand of you Seeing every hereticke in expresse words professeth to beleeve the whole Scripture which is in effect a condemning of every heresie why shall not this orthodoxall profession make or shew him to be a Catholike rather then his expresse profession of some one doctrine contrarie to Scripture say for example sake of Arianisme make or shew him to bee an Arian hereticke The reason of both is one and the same Did an Arian so professe to hold the Scriptures that hee were resolved to forsake his Arianisme and confesse Christ to bee ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã upon manifestation that the Scriptures taught this certainely his professioÌ of Arianisme with such a professioÌ to hold the Scriptures could not make him an hereticke no more then Cyprians profession of Rebaptization or Irenees of the millenarie heresie did make them heretikes Erre hee should as they did but being not pertinacious in error hereticke hee could not be as they were not But it falls out otherwise with all heretickes They professe to hold the Scripture yet so that they resolve not to forsake that private doctrine which they have chosen to maintaine That they will hold and they will have that to be the doctrine of the Scripture notwithstanding all manifestation to the contrarie even of the Scriptures themselves They resolve of this that whosoever Bishops Councells or Church teach the contrarie to that or say judge that the Scripture so teacheth they all erre or mistake the meaning of the Scriptures Thus did not Cyprian nor Irenee And this wilfull and pertinacious resolution it is which evidently sheweth that in truth they beleeve not the Scriptures but beleeve their own fancies though they say a thousand times that they beleeve and embrace whatsoever the Scriptures teach for did they beleeve any doctrine say Arianisme eo nomine because the Scripture teacheth it they would presently beleeve the contrarie thereunto when it were manifested unto them as is was to the Arians by the Nicen CouÌcell that the Scripture taught the contrarie to their error Seeing this they will not doe It is certaine that they hold their private opinioÌ eo nomine because they will hold it and they hold it to bee the doctrine of scripture not because it is so but because they will have it to bee so say what any will or can to the contrarie So their owne will and not Scripture is the reason why they beleeve it nay why they hold it with such a stiffe opinion for beleife it is not it cannot be This pertinacie to have beene in the Nestorians Eutycheans and the rest is evident Had they beleeved as they professed the faith decreed at Nice and Ephesus then upon manifestation of their errors out of those Councels they would have renounced their heresies but seeing the Nestorians persisted to hold two persons in Christ notwithstanding that the whole Councell of Ephesus manifested unto them that the Nicene Councel held but one person and seeing the Eutycheans persisted to hold but one nature after the union notwithstanding that the whole Councell at Chalcedon manifested unto them that the holy Ephesine Synod held two natures to abide in him after the union they did hereby make it evident unto all that they so professed to hold those Councels as that they resolved not to forsake their Nestorian and Eutichean heresies for any manifestation of the truth or conviction of their error out of those Councels and their profession of them was in effect as if they had said we hold those Councels and will have them to
Nations and kingdomes 4. Now behold a miracle e Ita plane magno veluti miraculo factum est c. Ibid. nu 11. indeed by fleeing away Vigilius overcommeth by being persecuted hee is victorious all humane power even hell gates doth and must yeed to him For the Emperor understanding that he was fled away repented f Iustinianus facti poenitens dignam tanto Pontifice legationem ârnavit c. Ib. him of that which hee had done against the Pope and therefore sent messengers to recall him from Chalcedon and those not ordinary souldiers sed dignam tanto Pontifice legationem but honourable embassadours worthy the estate of so great a Bishop who should assure him even upon their oathes g Iuramento praestito honorificè revocaret Ibid. that he should be honorably received But so stout nay magnanimous was the Pope and so very circumspect and wise h Nuncijs licet magna pollicentibus haud putaevit esse credendum utpote quod in proverbio est Graecorum fides Bar. 552. nu 12. as remembring the proverbe Graecorum fides that he would neither come out of the Church nor beleeve i Neque juratis patricijs voluit fidem adhibere nisi Imperator quae contra Rom. Pontificis voluntatem de tribus Capitulis appendisset Edicta protinus revocaret atque penitus aboleret Ibid. nu 12. the messengers though swearing unto him unles the Emperour would presently recall and abolish his Edicts against the Three Chapters The Emperour yeelded k Constat cessisse tandem Vigilio Jmperatorem atque appensa amoveri jussisse a se prolata de tribus Capitulis Edicta c. Ibid. an 552. nu 15. et Jmperator appensa antea de tribus Capitulis tolli jussit Edicta Ibid. nu 19. to all that the Pope prescribed yea constat cessisse it is certaine and evident that he submitted himselfe to the Popes pleasure and that penitus in every point hee commands the Edicts which hee had published to be taken away to bee removed ex sontentia l Ibid. an 552. nu 19. Vigilii quod fecerat abrogavit and according to Vigilius direction he abrogated what before he had done Nor onely did the Emperour repent but Theodorus l Theodorus facti poenitens ad eum accedens humilis libellum supplicem ipsi Vigilio offert Ibid. an 552. nu 19. Praestitit id ipsum etiam Mennas Ibid. nu 20. also and Mennas they came and offered libellum supplicem Vigilio a booke of supplication to intreat Vigilius that he would be appeased towards them and crying Peccavi suppliciter m Ibid. nu 29. veniam petunt they beseech him in a suppliant manner to forgive their n Quis ista considerans non miretur atque obstupescat c. Ibid. nu 20. offence Oh how admirable is this in our eyes the Rocke which the builders refused is now laid againe in the head of the Corner and those Princes and Prelates which opposed themselves to the Pope doe now submit supplicate and yeeld themselves unto him The Pope o Tali praemissa satisfactione Vigilius eosdem in communionem accepit redditaque est Ecclesiae pax Ibid. nu 20. after this so ample satisfaction was pleased to be reconciled to them all and admitted them into his communion so the storme of persecution being past the Church injoyed tranquillity the Pope was brought againe with great joy from Chalcedon to Constantinople For the joy p Hoc ipso anno 552 Mennas Const Episcopus à Vigilio in communionem admissus Encaeâia celebravit c. Bar. ibid. an 552. nu 22. and solemnity whereof Mennas that same yeare which was the 26 q Anno hoc 552. exordio mensis Aprilis incipit numerari Justiniani annus 26. of Iustinian and next before the generall Councell celebrated a feast of the Encaenia or dedication of the Church of three Apostles Andrew Luke and Timothy and the holy reliques r Cum sacrae reliquiae curru aâreo circumvectae ab âedem Menna reconditae sunt Bar. Ibid. nu 22. of their bodies being then found Mennas carried them round about the City in a Chariot of Gold and then laid them up in the Church After all which Mennas in the peace of the Church and communion with Vigilius in an happy manner gave up the ghost and Å¿ Bar. an 552. nu 23. so the Pope t Sic itaque animis junctis restitutoque in pristinaÌ dignitatem atque honorem Vigilio indicta est Synodus c. Bar. an 553. nu 14. being restored to his former dignitie animis junctis their mindes being joyned together the generall Councell long wished for by Vigilius was summoned against the moneth of May in the twenty seventh yeare of Iustinian This is the summe of the narration of Baronius touching the Decree of Taciturnity and the manifold consequents thereof 5. Concerning which none I thinke can judge otherwise but that Baronius as he is miserably infatuated in this whole cause of the Three Chapters so in this passage hee was growne to that extremity of dotage that hee seemes utterly to have beene bereft both of common sense and reason For I doe constantly avouch that in no part of all this his narration which as you see is very large and copious and runneth like a great streame through divers yeares in Baronius Annals there is any truth at al. No such Decree of Taciturnity ever made by Vigilius no Synod wherein it was decreed no assent either of Mennas or Theodorus or the Emperour unto it no violating of that Decree by Mennas or Theodorus no excommunication of them or other Bishops for doing contrary to it no hanging up of the Emperours Edict after it no resistance made by Vigilius against the Emperour no persecuting of Vigilius no buffeting of him no objecting of murder unto him no fleeing either to Saint Peters Church or to Chalcedon no thundring out from thence of his Pontificall Censures no embassage sent from the Emperour to call him thence no such magnanimitie in Vigilius as to refuse to returne no recalling or abrogating of the Emperiall Edict by the Emperour no submission of Mennas or Theodorus to the Pope no solemnizing of the Encaenia for those three Apostles at that time by Mennas no carying of those holy reliques in a triumphing manner and in a golden Chariot no laying them up by Mennas and in a word in that whole passage of Baronius there is not so much as one dramme nor one syllable of truth The Cardinall from an Historian is here quite metamorphozed into a Poet into a Fabler and in stead of writing Annals matters of fact and reall truths he guls his readers with fictitious anile and more than Aesopicall fables 6. For the clearing whereof I will begin with the Decree it selfe which is the ground of the whole fiction and therefore if it bee demonstrated to bee but an idle dreame and fancie all the
after his returne about a year after out of exile 3. The Cardinall gives yet another evidence hereof Pelagius saith he h Bar. an 553. nu 236. the successor of Vigilius did thinke it fit that the fift Synod should bee approved and the three Chapters condemned moved especially hereunto by this reason that the Easterne Church ob Vigilij constitutum schismate scissa being rent and divided from the Romane by reason of the Constitution of Vigilius might be united unto it How was the Easterne Church divided from the Romane in the time of Pelagius by reason of that decree of Vigilius in defence of the Three Chapters if Vigilius by another decree published after it had recalled and adnulled it If the Popes condemning of those Chapters and approving of the fift Councell could unite the Churches then the decree of Vigilius had there beene any such would have effected that union If the Apostolike Decree of Vigilius could not effect it in vaine it was for Pelagius to thinke by his approbation which could have no more authority then Apostolicall to effect that union If the cause of the breach and disunion of those Churches was as Baronius truly saith the Constitution of Vigilius in defence of the Three Chapters against the judgement of the fift Synod seeing it is cleare by the Cardinalls owne confession that the disunion continued till after the death of Vigilius it certainly hence followeth that the Constitution of Vigilius which was the cause of that breach was never by himselfe repealed which even in Pelagius time remained in force and was then a wall of separation of the Easterne from the Westerne Church Againe if the Popes approving the fift Councell and condemning the three Chapters was as in truth it was and as the Cardinall noteth i Cujus Vigilij postremam sententiam pro approbatione 5. Conc. condemnatione triuÌ Capitulorum posteri omnes sequuti universa Dei Ecclesia paucis schismaticis exceptis eandem Synodum ut oecumenicam semper novit Bar. an 554. nu 7. it to have beene the cause to unite those Churches seeing by his owne confession in Vigilius time they were not united for Pelagius k Bar. an 553. nu 236. after Vigilius his death sought to take away that schisme it certainly hence followeth that Vigilius never by any Decree approved that Synod and their Synodall condemning of those Chapters for had he so done the union had in his time presently beene effected 4. The same may be perceived also by the Westerne Church For as that Pontificall decree of Vigilius had there beene any such would have united the Easterne so much more would it have drawne the Westerne the Italian and specially the Romane Church to consent to the fift Councell and condemning of the three Chapters but that they persisted in the defence of the three Chapters and that also to the very end of Vigilius his life may divers wayes be made evident WheÌ Pelagius being then but a Deacon was chosen Pope after the death of Vigilius and was to be consecrated Bishop there could no more then two Bishops l Dum non essent Episcopi qui eum ordinarent inventi sunt duo Iohannes Bonus Andreas Presbyter de Ostia ordinaverunt eum Episcopum Anast in vita Pelagij 1. be found in the Westerne Church that would consecrate or ordaine him Bishop wherefore contrary to that Canon both of the Apostles m Can. Apost 1 and Nicene Fathers n Conc. Nic. Can. 4. requiring three o Certe omnimodo 3 Episcopi debent esse congregati ita faciant ordinationem Can. 4. Conc. Nic. Bishops to the consecration of a Bishop which they so often boast p Bell. lib. de Notis Ecclesiae ca. 8. §. Ex quo Et Bin. in Notis ad Can. 1. Apost alijque of in their disputes against us the Pope himselfe was faine to be ordained onely by two Bishops with a Presbyter of Ostia in stead of the third Anastasius very ignorantly if not worse sets downe the reason thereof to have beene for that Pelagius was suspected q Subduxerunt se à communione ejus dicentes quia in morte Vigilij se miscuit Anast in vitae Pelag. 1. to have beene guilty by poison or some other way of the death of Vigilius A very idle fancie as is the most in Anastasius for Pelagius was in banishment long before the death of Vigilius and there continued till Vigilius r Nam Vigilius obijt anno praecedente quum Pelagius de exilio revocatus est Vict. Tun. in Chron. ad an 16. corrupte legitur 17. Basilij et ad an sequentem was dead he had little leisure nor oportunity to thinke of poisoning or murdering his owne Bishop by whose death he could expect no gaine The true cause why the Westerne Bishops distasted Pelagius is noted by Victor who then lived Hee Å¿ Pelagius condemnans ea tria Capitula quae dudum constantissime defendebat à praevaricatoribus ordinatus est Vict. ad an 17. corrupte legitur 18. post Cons Basilij before hee came from Constantinople consented to the fift Synod and condemned the Three Chapters Now the Westerne t Adeo exhor ruisse visi sunt Antistites occidentales ferè omnes aliam post 4. admittere Oecumenicam Synodum ut non potuerit Pelagius reperire Episcopos Romae à quibus consecraretur Bar. an 556. nu 1. Bishops so detested the fift Synod and those who with it condemned those Chapters that among them all there could be found but two Bishops who held with the Synod and so allowed of Pelagius and his act in consenting thereunto and those two with the Presbyter of Ostia were the ordainers of Pelagius whom Victor in his corrupted language calls prevaricators Let any man now consider with himselfe whether it bee credible that in all Italy and some Provinces adjoyning there should be but two Bishops who would conseÌt to the Apostolicall decree of Vigilius for approving the fift Councell if he had indeed published such a decree If they knew nor the Popes sentence in this cause which they held and that rightly for a cause of faith to be infallible how was not the westerne or the Romane Church hereticall at this time not knowing that point of faith which is the transcendent principle and foundation of all doctrines of faith If they knew it to bee infallible seeing his judgement must then over-sway their owne how could there bee no more but two bishops found among them all who approved the Popes Cathedrall sentence and consented to his infallible judgement Seeing then it is certaine that the Westerne Church did generally reject the fift Synod after the death of Vigilius and seeing it is not to bee thought that they would have persisted in such a generall dislike thereof had they knowne Vigilius to have by his Apostolicall sentence decreed that all should approve the same of which his sentence had
absque dubio Vigilius after his returne out of exile consented to the fift Councell If now wee can clear this reason wherein consists the whole pith of the Cardinals cause I well hope that this consent of Vigilius of which he so much boasteth will be acknowledged to bee nothing else then a Baronian dreame 12. And first admitting for a while the Cardinalls antecedent the consequent sure is inconsequent Iustinian might upon the entreatie of Narses send Vigilius home though Vigilius had not consented to the Synod after the end thereof Narses was a man for his pietie prudence fortitude felicitie in warre exceedingly beloved honored by Iustinian They who are conversant in histories are not ignorant that Emperors doe yeeld many times greater matters then the restoring of Vigilius at the entreatie of such as Narses was When the Romane Matrones g Theod. histor lib. 2. ca. 17. their husbands not daring to motion such a matter entreated Constantius to restore Liberius to his See from which he was then banished the Emperour though he was most violently bent against Liberius and had placed an other Bishop in his See yet as Theodoret writeth sic inflectebatur hee was so affected with their entreatie that he yeelded to their request thinking it sitter that there should be two Bishops at once in Rome rather then he would seeme so obdurate and unkinde as to deny that petition in the time of his triumph It was as great incongruitie and disproportion in the government of Constantius an Arian to restore Liberius then a Catholike as for Iustinian being a Catholike Emperor to restore Vigilius being now an hereticall Bishop The hatred of Constantius to Liberius was farre greater then Iustinians against Vigilius The parties entreating are so unequall that Constantius seemes to have yeelded onely for popularitie and to get the opinion of courtisie they having done nothing to merit such favour at his hands but Narses had by his valor and late victories not onely won great honor to Iustinian and to the whole Empire but had freed Italie from the servitude of the Gothes and by that meanes besides many other had merited the love and favour of Iustinian who might have seemed not onely unkind but unjust in denying the petition of one so well deserving 13. Nay what if the intreaty of Narses and narration of Anastasius doe prove the quite contrary to that which Baronius from them collects that Vigilius had not consented to the Synod when hee was restored upon that entreaty Narses did this to gratifie h Tunc adunatus clerus rogaverunt Narsete ut rogaret Principem c. Anast in vita Vig. the Romane Clergy and the Italian Bishops who intreated him to bee a meanes for the restoring of Vigilius unto them And who I pray you were they or how affected in this cause of the three Chapters Truly they were eager in defending of them and for that cause rent and divided from the Easterne Churches as Baronius i Cum Vigilius cerneret universum Orientem ab Ecclesia Romana divisum nisi Synodo consentiret Bar. an 553. nu 235 witnesseth It had beene no gratifying but a very heart griefe and vexation to such to have Vigilius the condemner of those Chapters that is in their judgement an heretike restored unto them It was Vigilius the defender of those Chapters whom they desired for whom Narses intreated and whom if any the Emperour upon his intreaty restored which by the Anastasian narration is made very evident for he k Anast in vita Vig. sheweth how the Emperour upon his suggestion mox misit jussiones suas presently sent forth his command to bring Vigilius and the rest from exile He sent not to see if they would consent to the Synod and upon their consent to release them but without any questioning of that matter hee commands that they howsoever they stood affected should be free and brought out of banishment when they were returned did the Emperour aske them one word whether they would consent to the Synod or no He did not but al that he demanded of them was this vultis habere Vigilium will yee have Vigilius to continue your Pope as hee was before or will you have Pelagius who is here among you A demonstration that Vigilius had not then consented to the Synod when the Emperor said this for there was no cause either to deprive Vigilius or elect any other in his roome but his persisting in heresie had he consented to the Synod and condemned the Three Chapters the Emperor should have done wrong unto him to have suffered any other to have beene chosen nay the See being full Pelagius could not though all the banished Clergy had desired it have beene chosen Bishop in his stead Seeing then both the Emperours words and the answer of the Clergy as Anastasius relateth them doe shew that if they had pleased they might lawfully have chosen another Pope and seeing they could not by right have done that unlesse Vigilius had continued in his pertinacious defence of heresie even hereby it may bee perceived that at his restoring he persisted in the same hereticall minde of which he was before and that hee had not then consented to the Synod nor to the condemning of those Three Chapters So blinded was the Cardinall in this cause that he could not or rather would not see how his owne reason drawne from the intreaty of Narses and the narration of Anastasius doth quite overthrow the conclusion which by them he intended to confirme 14. And all this have I said upon supposall onely of the truth of that narration touching Narses his intreatie and the Emperors yeelding thereupon to restore Vigilius out of exile But now I must adde another answere which I feare will bee much more displeasing to the Cardinal and his friends and that is that this whole narration touching the exile of Vigilius after the Synod the intreaty of Narses the restoring him from that banishment and the rest depending thereon is all untrue fictitious such as hath no ground in the whole world but onely the Cardinals owne Poeticall pate For the manifesting whereof I will insist on the two principall points in the Cardinals narration the untruth of which being declared all the rest will easily be acknowledged to bee untrue and fabulous 15. The former concernes the restoring of Vigilius out of Banishment Baronius l Bar. 554. nu 1. following Anastasius saith that the Emperour together with Vigilius restored all the rest who were banished with him Dimisit omnes cum Vigilio and by name Pelagius is expressed to bee one of them of whom the Emperour then said Hic habetis Pelagium you have here Pelagius Vigilius then with him by name among the rest was dismissed home A very fiction and fable witnesse whereof Victor Bishop of Tunea who then lived and who himselfe m Victor Tunnensis author hujus operis post custodias simul et plagas
to consent unto it is neither mentioned by Victor Bishop of Tunen nor by Liberatus nor by Evagrius nor by Procopius who all then lived and in relating the affaires of the Church were full out as exact as Facundus and Procopius nor by Photius nor by Zonaras nor by Cedrenus nor by Nicephorus nor by Glicas nor by Constantinus Manasses nor by Anastasius nor by Paulus Diaconus nor by Aimonius nor by Luitprandus nor by Albo Floriacensis nor by Otho Frisingensis nor by Conrade Abbat of Vrsberge nor by Hermanus Contractus nor by Sigebert nor by Lambertus Scaffuaburgensis nor by Martinus Polonus nor by Gotofridus Viterbiensis nor by Albertus StadeÌsis nor by Vernerus nor by Marianus Scotus nor by Rhegino nor by Bede nor by Platina nor by Nauclerus nor by Tritemius nor by Krantzius nor by the magnum Chronicon Belgicum nor by the Chronicon Reicherspergense nor by ChronicoÌ Germanicum per MonachuÌ Herveldensem nor by Chronica Compendiosa or Compilatio Chronologica nor by Blondus nor by Sabellicus nor by Aventinus nor by Huldericus Mutius nor by Sigonius nor by Palmerius nor by Karanza nor by Papirius Massonius nor by Genebrard nor by Sanders nor by Stapleton and I challenge the welwillers of Baronius by that love they beare unto him his estimatioÌ to name if they can but any one writer before Baronius who affirmeth Vigilius to have beene banished after the Synod for not consenting unto it that therby it may be knowne that their great Annalist playes the Historian and not the Poet in relating the Ecclesiasticall affaires of the Church Or if they can at any time doe this which I am verily perswaded they neither will nor ever can performe yet seeing none of all these doe mention that banishment truly if Baronius from the silence of two writers might conclude against Anastasius that he was a lyar in the former narration I thinke none will deny but à fortiori it will follow that seeing more than two score are silent in this matter it may farre more justly bee said aperti mendacij redarguitur which is the Cardinals owne doome and words that hee bestoweth on Anastasius and here much more fitly may the Cardinals reason take place res adeo ignominiosa so ignominious a matter nay so glorious a peece of martyrdome on the Popes part as the banishment and cruell persecution of the Pope the chiefe Bishop in the world for such a cause as for not assenting to the Synod could not have bin unknowne unto those writers who most diligently prosecute the affaires of their times and such as concerned the Church Nay from the most of these wee may draw an affirmative argument also and reason more strongly than the Cardinall doth in his disputes Anastasius Aimonius Diaconus Platina and divers moe of the forenamed authors to the number at least of twenty affirme Vigilius was banished before the Synod and in the life time of Theodora and withall teach but one banishment of Vigilius and therefore they not onely are silent of that which the Cardinal saith but they say the quite contrary unto him and so both by their silence and by their speech refute that as an untruth which the Cardinal so positively and historically narrateth 20. Now as the negative kinde of arguing disproves the Baronian so doth it also the Anastasian banishment and forcibly concludes that Vigilius was not at all banished either before or after the Councel for there is no banishmeÌt at all of Vigilius mentioned either by Victor or by Liberatus or by Evagrius or by Procopius who all lived writ at that time or by Photius or by Zonaras or by Cedrenus or by Glicas or by Constantinus Manasses or by Nicephorus or by Aimonius though Sanders falsely affirmed them to teach this or by Luitprandus or by Bede or by Krantzius or by Mutius or by Papirius Massonius or by Caranza besides others Adde now here againe the Cardinals words Res adeo ignominiosa surely so ignominious and shamefull a fact as the banishing of a Pope could not have beene unknowne to those who writ as exactly as Facundus and Procopius the Ecclesiasticall affaires and occurrents in their times and therfore seeing these so many so exact writers mention not that Anastasian banishment of Vigilius it may be rightly concluded that Anastasius therin aperti mendicij redarguitur or if none but the Cardinall may give the lye to Anastasius yet confessing his narration to be untrue let us leave that as a priviledge of the Cardinals that he alone shal bestow lies for liveries upon Anastasius Nay seeing none of these Writers mention any banishment at all of Vigilius it must further be concluded from their silence that Vigilius neither first nor last neither before nor after the Synod was banished but that the whole narration touching his banishment is a meere fiction and fable devised partly by Anastasius and partly by Baronius 21. Which may much rather be affirmed considering that Victor who was himselfe exiled and brought to Constantinople is not onely careful but even curious that I say not proud in recounting the most eminent persons specially Bishops which were either deposed or imprisoned or banished about this cause of the three Chapters either before or after the Synod In this ranke he l Vict. in Chron. an 8. post Coss Bas nameth Benenatus Bishop of Iustinianea Zoilus Patriarch of Alexandria Reparatus Bishop of Carthage Verecundus Bishop of Nica Macarius Bishop of Ierusalem Rusticus a Romane Deacon Foelix a Monke of Guilla Frontinus Bishop of Salone Theodosius Bishop of Sebarsuse himselfe being Bishop of Tunen and Pelagius then a Deacon but afterwards Bishop of Rome and successor to Vigilius Had Baronius this negative argument à testimonio in hand how would hee insult and even triumph in it how easily would he perswade the world that certainly Bishop Victor who by name and so particularly recounteth meaner Bishops yea Deacons and Monkes who suffered banishment for this cause would never have omitted the Prince of Bishops had hee beene exiled for it as they were That one example had graced the defenders of the Three Chapters more than twenty nay than twenty hundred besides seeing by this it would have beene evident that the Oracle of the world the infallible Iudge had sealed the truth of that cause with his glorious banishment which is a kinde of Martyrdome Anastasius Diaconus Otho and all the rest who say he was banished should have had the lye an hundred times at the Cardinals hands for saying that he was banished either before or after the Councell rather than Bishop Victor who then lived at Constantinople and was fellow-partner in those troubles and banishments should have beene thought either ignorant or forgetfull to expresse that banishment of Vigilius had there beene truly any at all 22. Thus from the Cardinals owne Topicks it is concluded that both the Anastasian the Baronian banishments are both fictitious Nor can I find what they
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 nââ 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 âam 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
Councell for the honour of the See of Constantinople we have condemned the heresie of Eutyches Thus writ the whole Councell to Leo declaring evidently that act of approving that Canon to be the Act of the whole Synod although they knew the contradiction of the Pope and his Legates to cleave unto it 30. You see now that in every sentence of a generall and lawfull Councell there is an assent of all Bishops and Presbyters they all either explicitè or tacitè or implicitè consenting to that decree whether they be absent or present and whether in that particular they consent or dissent Now because there can bee no greater humane judgement in any cause of faith or ecclesiasticall matter than is the consenting judgement of all Bishops and Presbyters that is of all who have power either to teach or judge in those causes it hence clearly ensueth that there neither is nor can be any Episcopall or Ecclesiasticall confirmation or approbation whatsoever of any decree greater stronger or of more authority then is the judgement it selfe of such a generall Councell and their owne confirmation or approbation of the decrees which they make for in every such decree there is the consent of all the Bishops and Presbyters in the whole world 31. Besides this confirmation of any synodall decree which is by Bishops and therefore to bee called Episcopall there is also another confirmation added by Kings and Emperors which is called Royall or Imperiall by this later religious Kings not onely give freedome and liberty that those decrees of the Councell shall stand in force of Ecclesiasticall Canons within their dominions so that the contemners of them may be with allowance of Kings corrected by Ecclesiasticall censures but further also doe so strengthen and backe the same by their sword and civill authority that the contradicters of those decrees are made liable to those temporall punishments which are set downe in EZra i Ez. 7.16 to death to banishment to confiscation of goods or to imprisonment as the quality of the offence shall require and the wisedome of that Imperiall State shall think fit Betwixt these two confirmations Episcopall and Imperiall there is exceeding great oddes and difference By the former judiciall sentence is given and the synodall decree made or declared to be made for which cause it may rightly be called a judiciall or definitive confirmation by the later neither is the synodal decree made nor any judgment given to define that cause for neither Princes nor any Lay men are Iudges to decide those matters as the Emperours Theodosius and Valentinian excellently declare in k Nefas est eum qui Episcoporum catalogo adscriptus non est Ecclesiasticis negotijs se immiscere nempe ut IudiceÌ qui definiat Epist Imp. ad Synod Ephes to 1. Act. Ephes Conc. ca. 32. their directions to Candidianus in the Councell of Ephesus but the synodall decree being already made by the Bishops and their judgement given in that cause is strengthened by Imperiall authority for which cause this may fitly be called a superemineÌt or corrobotative confirmation of the synodall judgement The former confirmation is Directive teaching what all are to beleeve or observe in the Church the later is Coactive compelling all by civill punishment to beleeve or observe the Synodall directions The former is Essentiall to the Decree such as if it want there is no Synodall decree made at all the later is Accidentall which though it want yet is the Decree of the Councell a true Synodall Decree and sentence The former bindes all men to obedience to that Decree but yet onely under paine of Ecclesiasticall censures the latter bindes the subjects only of those Princes who give the Royall Confirmation to such Decrees and binds them under the pain only of temporal punishmeÌt By vertue of the former the contradicters or contemners of those Decrees are rightly to be accounted either heretikes in causes of faith or contumacious in other matters and such are truly subject to the censures of the Church though if the later be wanting those censures cannot bee inflicted by any or upon any but with danger to incurre the indignation of Princes By vertue of the later not onely the Church may safely yea with great allowance and praise inflict their Ecclesiasticall censures but inferiour Magistrates also may nay ought to proceed against such contemners of those Synodall decrees as against notorious convicted and condemned heretikes or in causes which are not of faith but of externall discipline and orders as against contumacious persons The Episcopall confirmation is the first in order but yet because it proceeds from those who are all subject to Imperiall authority it is in dignitie inferiour The Imperiall confirmation is the last in order but because it proceeds from those to whom everie soule is subject it is in dignity Supreme 32. This Imperiall confirmation as holy generall Councels did with all submission intreate of Emperours so religious Emperors did with all willingnesse grant unto them Of the great Nicene Councell Eusebius saith l Lib. 4. de vita Constant ca 27. Constantine sealed ratified and confirmed the decrees which were made therein The second general Councel writ m Epist Synod 2. post Act. Concil pa. 518. thus to the Emperour Theodosius We beseech your clemency that by your letters ratum esse jubeas confirmesque Concilij decretum that you would ratifie and confirme the decree of this Councell and that the Emperour did so his Emperiall Edict before n Hoc cap. nu 19. mentioned doth make evident To the third Councell the Emperor writ thus o Act Ephes Conc tom 3. ca. 17. Let matters coÌcerning religion and piety be diligently examined contention being laid aside ac tum demuÌ Ã nostra pietate confirmationem expectate and then expect from us our imperiall confirmation The holy Councell having done so writ p Act. Conc. Eph. to 4. ca. 8. thus to the Emperour We earnestly intreate your piety ut jubeat ea omnia that you would coÌmand that all which is done by this holy and Oecumenical Councell against Nestorius may stand in force per vestrae pietatis nutum et consensum confirmata being confirmed by your roall assent And that the Emperour yeelded to their request his Edict q Imperator sententia Synodi publicè approbata Nestorio exilium indicit Act. Con. Eph. to 5. ca. 11. et lege ult de haeret Cod. Theod. against Nestorius doth declare In the fourth Councell the Emperour said r Act. 6. We come to this Synod not to shew our power sed ad confirmandam fidem but to confirme the faith And wheÌ he had signified before all the Bishops his royall assent Å¿ Jn perpetuum quae à vobis termÃnata sunt serventur Jbid. to their decree the whole Councell cryed out Orthodoxam fidem tu confirmasti thou hast confirmed the Catholike faith often ingeminating those joyfull acclamations That
Iustinian confirmed the fift Councell his imperiall Edict for condemning those Three Chapters which after the Synodall judgment stood in more force than before his severity t Vict. in Chron. an post Coss Bas 13 14.15 c. in punishing the contradicters of the Synodall sentence partly by exile partly by imprisonment are cleare witnesses The sixt Councell said u Act. 18. thus to the Emperour O our most gracious Lord grant this favour unto us signaculum tribue seale and ratifie all that we have done vestram inscribito imperialem ratihabitionem adde unto them your imperiall confirmation that by your holy Edicts and godly constitutions they may stand in firme force And the Emperour upon their humble request set forth his Edict wherein he saith x Edict Constát Pogon Act. 18. Conc. 6. We have published this our Edict that we might corroborare atque confirmare ea quae definita sunt corroborate and confirme those things which are defined by the Councell To all which that may bee added which Basilius the Emperour said in the eighth Synod as they call it I had y Act. 10. purposed to have subscribed after al the Bishops as did my predecessors Constantine the great Theodosius Martian and the rest thereby evidently testifying not onely the custome of imperiall confirmation to have been observed in all former Councels but the difference also betwixt it and the Episcopall subscription the Bishops first subscribing and thereby making or declaring that they had made a Synodall decree the Emperours after them all subscribing as ratifying by their Imperiall confirmation what the Bishops had decreed 33. By this now it fully appeareth what it is which maketh any Synod or any Synodal decree to be and justly to be accounted an approved Synod or an approved Synodall and Oecumenicall decree It is not the Popes assent approbation or confirmation as they without all ground of truth doe fancy which at any time did or possibly can doe this It is onely the Vniversall and Oecumenicall consent of the whole Church and of all the members thereof upon any decree maââ by a generall Councell which truly makes that an approved decree which generall and Oecumenicall consent or approbation is shewed partly by the Episcopall confirmation of that decree made by the Bishops present therein wherein there is ever either an ââpresse or a vertuall and implicite consent of all the Bishops and Presbyters and so of all the Clergy in the world partly by the royall and imperiall confirmation given to that decree by Christian Kings and Emperours in which there is an implicite consent of all Laickes in the whole Church Kings and Princes assenting not onely for themselves but in the name of all their Lay subjects for whom they undertake that either they shall willingly obey that decree or else by severity of punishments be compelled thereunto If these two confirmations or either of them be wanting the Councell and decree which is supposed to be made therein is neither an approved or confirmed Councell nor decree though the Pope send forth ten thousand Buls to approve and confirme the same But if these two confirmations concurre in any decree of a generall and lawfull Councel though the Pope reprobate and reject that Councell or decree never so often yet is both that Councell an approved generall Councel and the decree thereof an approved or confirmed Synodall and Oecumenicall decree approved I say and confirmed by the greatest humane authority and judgement that possibly can bee either found or desired even by the whole catholike Church and every member whether Ecclesiasticall or Laicall therein And whosoever after such an ample approbation or confirmation shall at any time contradict or contemne such a Councell or decree he doth not nor can he thereby impare the dignity and authority of it but he demonstrates himselfe to be an heretike or at least a contumacious person insolently and in the pride of his singularity despising that judgement of the Councell which the whole Church and every member thereof yea even himselfe also among them hath approved 34. You will yet demand of mee why generall Councels have sought the Popes approbation and confirmation of their decrees as did the Councell of Chalcedon z Rogamus tuis decretis nostrum honora judicium Epist Synod Chal. ad Leonem post Act. 16. of Pope Leo after the end of the Synods and what effect or fruit did arise from such confirmations if it added no greater authority to the Synodall sentence than before it had I also aske of you another question Why did the Councell of Constantinople confirme a Statuerunt 318. Patrum fidem firmam ac flabilem manere oportere Conc. Const ca. 1. the Nicene Synod and the faith decreed therein or why did the Councell of Chalcedon confirme b In definit fidei Act. 5. Confirmavimus Patrum 150. regulam Epist Conc. Chal. ad LeoneÌ post Act. 16. Conc. Chal. praedicta concilia firmavit Epist Episc Europae post CoÌc Chal pa. 152. all the three former generall Councels or why did their second Nicene confirme all the sixe Synods which were before it saying c Eorum constitutionem integram illabefactabilem confirmamus we confirme the divine Canons and constitutions being inviolable Was not the great Nicene Councell and decree of faith of as great authority before it was confirmed by the second or fourth Councel as afterwards or what greater strength and authority had either it or any of the sixe first generall Councels by the confirmation of the second Nicene Synod which unto all the former is as much inferiour as is drosse or clay to the gold of Ophir If the confirmations of one generall Councell by another give no greater authority unto it than before it had ââ it is certain by these examples that it doth not what marvell if the Popes confirmation doe not worke that effect If notwitstanding all this the confirmations of former by subsequent Councels bee not fruitlesse truly neither the confirmation of the Pope or any other Bishop that is absent must bee thought fruitlesse though it adde no more authority to the Synod or Synodall decrees than before they had 35. Neither did only general but even Provincial CouÌcels yea particular Bishops confirme generall Synods and the decrees therof The Synod at Millane was assembled by the direction of Pope Leo in which the Acts of the first Ephesine Councell per subscriptionem Episcoporum absentium sunt confirmata were confirmed by the subscription of those Bishops who were absent So writeth d Not. in Conc. Rom. 3. tempore Silvestri Binius The like was done after the Councell of Chalcedon for when some began to quarrell at it Leo the Emperour that he might confirmare c Bin. not in Conc. Chalc. § Incipiunt pa. 190. ea confirme the decrees of that Councell published an Edict to that end at the sollicitation of Pope Leo f Epist 73. hoc classico
consent of the Bishop of Rome either attained or at least sought for The Canon which Iulius mentioned might well ordaine and if there were no such Canon yet even reason and equity doe teach that such decrees as concerne the whole Church and are to binde them all ought to be made by the helpe judgement and advise of them all according to the rule Quod d Reg. Iuris 29. omnes tangit ab omnibus approbari debet The wilfull omission of any one Bishop much more of the Bish of Rome who then was the chiefe Patriarch in the world declares the Councell not to be generall seeing unto it there was onely a partiall and not a generall summons or calling 4. As this first condition is required to the generality so are the other two for the lawfulnesse and order of Synods For if the Apostles rule Let c 1 Cor. 14.40 all things be done decently and in order must bee kept in every private and particular Church how much more in those venerable assemblies of Oecumenicall Councels which are the Armies of God of the Angels of all the Churches of God amoÌg whom doth and ought to shine gravity prudence and all sacred and fitting orders no lesse than in the coelestiall Hierarchy and in the very presence of the Majesty of God If they bee gathered in Gods name how can they be other than lawfull and orderly Assemblies seeing God f 1 Cor. 14.33 is not the God of confusion g ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã tumultuationis incoÌpositi status or disorder but of peace in all Churches Now the lawfulnesse and order of Synods consists partly in their orderly assembling and partly in their orderly government and proceedings when they are assembled whensoever the Bishops of any generall Councell first assemble together by lawfull authority and then are so governed by lawfull authority also that orderly lawfull and due synodall proceedings be onely used therein as well in the free and diligent discussion of the causes proposed as in the free sentencing thereof the same is truly and properly to bee called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã h Act. 19.39 a lawfull Synod But if either of these conditions be wanting it becomes unlawfull and disorderly If the Bishops assemble together either not being called or if called yet not by such as have right and authority to call them though this in a large acception may bee called a Synod that is an assembly of Bishops yet because they doe unlawfully disorderly assemble together it is in propriety of speech to be termed a CoÌventicle a riotous tumultuous seditious assembly even such as that was of Demetrius i Ib. v. 24. et seq the other EphesiaÌs who without calling and order ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã rusht k Ibid. v. 29. run headlong together to uphold the honour of their great Diana which both the Spirit of God condemneth as a confused l ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã v. 32. or disorderly assembly and the more wise among them taxed as a riotous and seditious m Periclitamur argui seditionis v. 40. tumult If being lawfully called yet they either want a lawfull President to governe them or having one yet want freedome and liberty either in discussing or giving judgement in the cause such a Synod though in respect of their assembling it be lawfull yet in respect of their proceedings and judgment it is unlawfull and disorderly and therefore in propriety of speech to be termed a conspiracy because those men conspire and band themselves as did the Councell n Mat. 26.59 ca. 27.2 Act. 4.27 of the Priests with Pilate by unjust and unlawfull meanes to suppresse the truth and oppresse innocency 5. But unto whoÌ belongs that right to call general Councels wheÌ they are called to see orderly synodal proceedings observed therein To whom to whom else but only to those who have Imperiall Regal authority whether they be one as wheÌ the Empire was united the whole ChristiaÌ world subject to his authority or moe as it was when the Empire was devided and ever since that great dissolution of it in the time o Circa an 800. of Charles the great To them and them onely this right to belong I have in two other bookes the one concerning the calling the other concerning the Presidencie in Councels at large and clearly demonstrated I hold them to be so evident truths both by the doctrine of Scripture and by the constant judgement and practice of the Catholike Church for more than eight hundred yeares after Christ that if any would reade the Tomes of the Councels hee had need put out both his eyes if he will not see this 6. To them and them onely is the sword p Rom. 13.2 3. given by God that by it they might maintaine the faith and use it to the praise of them that doe well but take vengeance on them that doe evill They are the nursing q Isa 49.23 fathers of the Church unto whom the eare is committed by God that all his Children to whom they next unto God are fathers be fed with the sincere milke r 1 Pet. 2.2 of Gods word all mixture and poison of heresie and impiety being taken away and severed from it They are like Ioshua Å¿ Numb 27.17 Psal 78.71 72. and David appointed by God to be ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã the Pastours t Tam Hebraicè quam in 70. Interpr et apud Hier. legitur ad pascendum Iacob populum suum et pavit eos quod alij vertunt ad regendum even supreme Pastours of the Israel of God not indeed to teach and give the food themselves which duty belongs to their inferiour servants yet to performe those which are the principall most u Non propriè dicitur pascere alium qui cibum quacunque ratione ministrat sed qui procurat et providet alteri cibum quod est certè Praepositi et gubernatoris Actus Pastoralis non est tantum praebere cibum sed etiam ducere c. Bell. lib. 1. de Pont. Rom. ca. 15. § PrimuÌ et § Deinde proper Pastoral acts offices procurare ac providere alteri cibuÌ ducere reducere tueri praeesse regere castigare to provide that all the sheepe of Christ have wholesome and convenient food given unto them to lead them bring them backe defend governe and chastise them when they will not obey their Pastorall call and command None of all which Pastorall duties were it possible for Kings to performe if for publike tranquillity and instruction of Gods people they might not by their authority assemble a generall Councell of Bishops and being assembled if they might not defend and uphold all just and equall but castigate and keepe away all violent fraudulent and unjust proceedings in such Councels 7. I purposely said supreme Pastours for none is ignorant that Peter
unavoydably followeth that Bishops neither without that Imperiall command may in a riotous manner assemble in generall Councels nor being commanded by them may deny to assemble nor being assembled may refuse to bee ordered and governed by their Imperiall Presidency 9. After these precepts of GOD looke to the practice of the Church and you shall see that lawfull Synods or Assemblies about Ecclesiasticall affaires have beene gathered by no other than Imperiall authority as well in the old as new Testament In the time of IOSIA when the Temple was purged from those manifold Idolatries wherewith it was polluted who assembled Israel the Priests no but the King u 2 Chr. 34.29.30 sent and gathered all the Elders of Iuda and went into the house of the LORD with the Priests and Levites The like had ASA done in the oath of Association He x 2 Chron. 15.9 10. gathered all Iuda SALOMON in the Dedication of the Temple He y 2 Chron. 5.2 assembled the Elders and the heads of the Tribes DAVID in bringing the Arke and in ordering the offices of the Temple DAVID z 1 Chron. 13.5 cap. 15.4 gathered all Israel together Hee a 1 Chron. 23.2 gathered together then all the Princes with the Priests and Levites HEZECHIA in clensing the house of the Lord b 2 Chron. 29.4 Hee gathered the Priests and Levites called c Jbid. v. 11. them his sonnes and they were gathered together juxta d Jbid. v. 15. mandatum Regis according to the commandement of the King Ioshua at the renewing of the Covenant He e Iosh 24.2 assembled all the Tribes of Israel And to mention no more for what King is there or Iudge or Captaine who had all kingly authoritie though somewhat qualified and tempered in them more than in Kings who is not an example hereof Consider but Moses who was the first that had soveraignty in their common-wealth how often and still with a warrant from God did he assemble the people upon urgeÌt occasions At the first making of the covenant with God Moses called f Exod. 19.7 the Elders at the publishing of the law Moses brought g Exod. 19.17 the people out of their tents unto God after the bringing of the two Tables from God Moses assembled all h Exod. 35.1 the congregation of Israel at the anointing and investing of Aaron Moses i Levit. 8.3 4. assembled all the congregation at the repeating of the Covenant he k Deut. 5.1 ca. 31.28 commanded all the Elders of the Tribes of Israel to come unto him Yea at the very first time when God appointed him to be a Captaine and Ruler over his people even then God gave unto him that authority which afterwards he renewed in the tenth l Num. 10.2 Make thee two Trumpets that thou maist use them for the assembling of the congregation of Numbers to congregate and assemble the people of God Goe saith God m Exod. 3.16 and gather the Elders of Israel together thereby teaching the power of assembling Gods people to be inseparably annexed unto Imperiall regall and soveraigne authority that none hath the one who hath not the other by the very warrant of God committed unto him to the end the assemblies of Gods people might not be tumultuous and seditious as was that of Demetrius and of Corah n Num. 16.2 c. Dathan and Abiram which the Lord severely revenged but lawfull and orderly as God is the author not of confusion but of order in all Churches and in all ages of the Church 10. Come we to the times of the Gospell The power and rightfull authority to call Synods was ever in the Emperours and Kings even in those three hundred years while the Church was in most grievous persecution under Heathen Emperours The right and power was in the Heathen as well as in Christian Emperours in Tiberius as well as Theodosius in Dioclesian as well as in Constantine or Iustinian But that power which they rightly had they did not use aright not to call Synods to maintaine the faith but to abolish Synods Bishops Christians and utterly extirpate the Christian faith Now because Christ had layd an absolute necessity o 1 Cor. 9.16 Matth. 28.19 upon the Apostles and their successors to feed to teach and maintaine the doctrine of faith and seeing they could not doe this with the allowance or so much as connivence of the Emperours who in duty should have protected them in so doing yea have caused them so to doe this very necessity enforced them and was a lawfull warrant unto them both to feed the flocke preach the Gospell and to hold Synods in the best and most convenient manner that they then could not onely without but against the will and command of the Emperors that higher command of Christ over-ruling theirs Whereby are warranted as lawfull to say nothing of that Acts 15. those Synods at Antioch against Paulus Samosatenus at Rome against the Novatians in Africke many in the time of Cyprian and divers the like For even the law of God to yeeld unto necessity the example of David p Matth. 12.1 2. c. the doctrine of our Saviour doth demonstrate besides those many Maximes which are all grounded on this truth as that necessity q Necessitas non habet legem sed ipsa sibi facit legem Caus 1. q. 1 ca. 39. Remissionem hath no law nor is subject to any law but is a law of it selfe that many things are lawfull in case of necessity r Gloss in cap. Discipulââ de consec distinct 5. in marg which otherwise are unlawfull that of Leo Inculpabile judicandum quod necessitas intulit Å¿ Citatur à Iohannâ 8. in Epist 199. §. Nââ that is blamelesse which necessity doth warrant and many the like which Pope Iohn t Ibidem alledgeth This and nothing else doth declare those Synods to have beene lawfull though assembled without Imperiall authority as the times were extraordinary so their extraordinary assembling was by those times of necessity made lawfull But as soone as Emperours began to professe the faith and to use their owne and Imperiall authority in assembling Bishops for consulting about causes of faith the Catholike Bishops knowing that from thence that law of Necessity was now expired and out of date attempted not then to come to Synods uncalled nor refused to come when they were called though sometimes they came with an assured expectance of the crowne of Martyrdome before they departed as in the Councels of Millane Arimine and Syrmium called by the Arrian Emperour Constantius is most cleare 11. Hence it is that all the ancient generall Councels yea all that were held for the space of a thousand yeares after Christ were all assembled by no other than this Imperiall authority Take a short view of some and of the chiefe of them Of the first Nicen Eusebius l Euseb lib. 3.
Church for a thousand years together these rights of calling and ordering generall Councels doe belong and were acknowledged to belong onely to Kings and Emperours they called and commanded the Bishops the Bishops came at that call and command they governed the assemblies in those Councels all the Bishops without murmuring or so much as once contradicting willingly submitted themselves to that Imperiall government And by this may now easily be discerned wherein the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of any Synod consisteth For wheresoever to Imperiall calling and Imperiall Presidencie there is added the rightfull use of that Imperiall authoritie in seeing liberty freedome diligent discussion of the causes and all due synodall order preserved in any generall Synod the same is and ought to bee truly called a generall lawfull Councell But what generall Councels soever have beene heretofore or shall bee at any time hereafter either assembled by any other than Imperiall and regall authority or governed for the observing of synodall order by any other than Imperiall Presidencie or misgoverned by the abuse thereof they all are and are to bee esteemed for no other than generall unlawfull Councels 19. Suffer mee here to propose some examples of each kinde partly in the ancient partly in the later times of the Church In the order of lawfull generall Councels principally and by a certaine excellency above all the rest are the five first approved Councels to bee reckned The first at Nice the second at Constantinople the third at Ephesus the fourth at Chalcedon the fift at Constantinople in the time of Iustinian unto these the Sardicane and that at Constantinople under Mennas are to bee added like two Appendant Synods the former to that at Nice the later to that at Chalcedon For the sixt which was held at Constantinople in the time of Constantinus Pogonatus I am out of doubt and doe firmely hold it to have beene both generall and lawfull But I mention it apart by reason of that scruple touching the Canons thereof concerning which I intend if ever I have opportunity to make a severall tract by it selfe For their second Nicene and the next unto it to wit that at Constantinople in the time of Basilius and Hadrian the second besides that there are just exceptions against their lawfulnesse in regard of the proceedings used therin it may be justly doubted whether either of them may be esteemed generall specially considering that the Councell at Frankford utterly condemned p Synodus qua ante paucos annos sub Irene Constantino congregata ab ipsis non solum septima veruÌ etiaÌ universalis erat appellata ut nec septima nec universalis haberetur dicereturve quasi supervacua in totum ab omnibus in Conc. Francofordensi abdicata est Aim lib. 4. ca. 85. Similia habet Ado Vien in Chron. Hincm Rhem. in lib. contra Hincm Land ca. 20. Rhegino Hermann Strabus Fuld Egolis Monac alii quam multi that second Nicene and decreed that it should not bee called a generall Synod and in very like manner did the Councell at Constantinople held in the time of Pope Iohn the eighth or as some call him the ninth the next successor to Hadrian the second condemne q Quarius Canon Concilii Constant sub Johan 8. superiores synodos adversus Photium habitas Nicholai Hadriani temporibus explodit rejicit imo ut de Synodorum numero tollantur jubet Fran. Turrian lib. de 6 7 8. synod pa. 95. that Councell which they call the eighth held in the time of Hadrian the second Now although by the judgements of these two Councels those other which they reckon for the seventh and eighth be wholy repealed and that most justly yet if the authority of these Synods were omitted there are so many and so just exceptions against the two former that I am out of doubt perswaded that neither of them ought to stand in the order of generall lawfull Councels nor will any I suppose judge otherwise who shall unpartially examine the Acts of them compare them with the histories of those times If any at all after the sixt be to be ranked in the number of generall and lawfull Councells I would not doubt to make it evident if ever I should proceed so farre in this argument about Councels that the Councell held at Constantinople in the time of Constantinus Iconomachus whom they incontempt have with no small token of their immodesty nicknamed Copronimus that this ought to bee judged the seventh that at Frankford the eighth and that at Constantinople which even now I mentioned held in the time of Pope Iohn the eighth or as some call him the ninth the ninth of that order For both the generality of all these three is by the best Writers acknowledged and all of them were called by Imperiall authority governed by Imperiall presidency and that in a lawfull free and synodall manner as if ever I come to handle the Councels of those times I purpose to explaine This rather for this time I thinke needfull to observe that as a Councell may be generall and yet not lawfull so may one be both generall and lawfull and yet erroneous in the decrees thereof which one point rightly observed shewes an exceeding difference betwixt those five first generall Councels with the Sardicane and that under Mennas and all the rest which follow the fift Synod The former which were all held within the six hundred yeares after Christ in the golden ages of the Church are wholly and in every decree and Canon orthodoxall and golden Councells no drosse nor dramme of corrupt doctrine could prevaile in any one of them and so they are and ever since they were held were esteemed not onely generall and lawfull but in every part and parcell of their decrees holy and orthodoxall Councels approved by all Catholikes and by the whole Catholike Church But in all generall Councels which follow that fift which were held after the 600. yeare and in those times wherein dross and corruption began to prevaile above the gold in them all there is some one blot or other wherewith they are blemished and by reason whereof although they be both generall and lawfull yet are they not in every decree holy and orthodoxall nor approved by the succeeding ages of the Church Such in the sixt is the 2. 52. and 53. Canons in that under Constantinus Iconomachus the 15. and 17. definitions in that at Frankford their condemning of the fact of the Iconoclasts which untill the decree for breaking them downe was repealed by the Councell at Frankford was both pious and warranted by the example of Hezekias dealing with the brazen serpent In that under Iohn the 8. their denying of the holy Ghost to proceed from the Son And these examples which I have now named are all the examples of generall and lawfull Councels which as yet have beene held in the Church 20. Wee come now to unlawfull Synods wherein it is very
he should for ever want the Bishopricke But if either they did not within such time examine the cause or examining it finde the accusations untrue that then the See of Paros should be restored unto Athanasius as unjustly deposed and that Sabinianus should remaine but a substitute unto him untill Maximus could provide him of another Bishopricke Thus ordered the secular Iudges and the whole Councell of Chalcedon approved this sentence crying out Nihil justius nothing is more just nothing is more equall this is a just sentence you judge according to Gods minde O that once againe the world might bee so happy as to see one other such holy Councell as was this of Chalcedon and such worthy Iudges to be Presidents thereof All the Anathemaes and censures of their Councell at Trent where the Romane Domnus our capitall enemy was the chiefe nay rather the onely Iudge would even for this very cause be adjudged of no validity nor of force to bind I say not other Churches such as these of Britany but not those very men who are otherwise subject to the Popes Patriarchall authority as Athanasius was to Domnus Such an holy Councell would cause a melius inquirendum to be taken of all their judgements and proceedings against the Saints of God and unlesse they could justifie which while the Sun and Moone endureth they can never their slanderous crimes of heresie imputed unto us and withall purge themselves of that Antichristian apostasie whereof they are most justly accused and convicted not onely in foro poli but in their owne consciences and by the consenting judgement of the Catholike Church for six hundred nay in some points for fifteene hundred yeares after Christ they should and would by such a Councell bee deposed from all those Episcopall dignities and functions which they have so long time usurped and abused unto all tyranny injustice and subversion of the Catholike Faith 36. As the proceedings in that Councell were all unlawfull on the Popes part so were they also both unlawfull and servile in respect of the other Bishops who were assessors in that Assembly Could there possibly be any freedome or safety for Protestants among them being the children of that generation which had most perfidiously violated their faith and promise to Iohn Hus in the Councell of Constance and murdered the Prophets Among whom that Canon authorizing trecherous and perfidious dealing stood in force Quod f Const Const sess 19. non obstantibus that notwithstanding the safe conducts of Emperours Kings or any other granted to such as come to their Councels Quocunque vinculo se astrinxerint by what bond soever they have tyed themselves by promise by their honour by their oath yet non obstante any such band they may bring them into inquisition and proceed to censure to punish them as they shall thinke fit and then vaunt and glory in their perfidiousnesse saying Caesar obsignavit g Campian Rat. 4. Christianus orbis major Caesare resignavit The Emperour hath sealed this with his promise and oath but our Councell which is above the Emperour hath repealed it it shall not stand in force 37. Could there be any freedome or liberty among those who were by many obligations most servilely addicted to the Pope The Apulian Bishops h Carol. Molin lib. de Concil Trident. nu 21. crying out aliorum omnium nomine in the name of all the rest in their Councell Nihil aliud sumus praeterquam creaturae mancipia sanctissimi patris O we are all but the Popes creatures his very slaves The complaint i Cl. Espenc cont in Epist ad Tit. ca. 1. pa. 42. of the Bishop of Arles might here be renewed which he made of such like Councels at Basil that must bee done and of necessity be done and decreed in Councells quod nationi placeat Italicae which the Italian nation shall affect which country alone k Vt quae sol â Episcoporum numero nationes alias aequet aut superet ibid. for multitude of Bishops doth equall or exceed other nations and this very Italian faction to have prevailed at Trent their owne Bishop Espencaeus who was at the Councell doth testifie Haec l Jbid. illa Helena est this is the Helena which of late prevailed at Trent this Italian faction overswayed all whereof Molineus m Car. Mol. locò citato gives a plaine instance For when an wholesome Canon that the Pope might not dispence in some matters had like to have beene decreed many in the Councell liking well thereof the Pope procured a respite n Pont fex ad sesquimensem decreti conclusionem ampliari fussit ibid. for that businesse for a month and an halfe during which time some forty poore Bishops of Italy and Sicily were shipped and sent to Trent like so many levis armaturae milites and so the good Canon was by their valour discomsited and rejected by that holy Synod Some of the Councell also were the Popes pensioners and stipendary Bishops nay rather ought than Bishops such as among others were Olaus âagnus o Olaus lagnus Suevus qui Archiepiscopi Vpsalensis nomen et titulum vendicabat quae quidem regio nec Pontificem unquâm nec Ecclesiam Romanam agnovit Gent. Exam. Conc. Trid. sess 1. nu 3 the titular Archbishop of Vpsala in Gothia and Robertus Venantius the titular p Jbid. and blinde Bishop of Armach and yet not halfe so blinde in body as in minde Archbishops q Archiepiscopi sine Archiepiscopatu sine Ecclesia sine Clero sine ullo censu reditu ibid. without Archbishoprickes without a Church without a Clergy without Diocesse without any revenues save a small * Hos Archiepiscopos rerum tenues inopes Romae suis stipeÌdiis aluerat Pontifex ibid. Olao in singulos menses 15. aureos nummos suppeditabat ibid. pension which the Pope allowed them that they might be cyphers in the Councell and taking his pay might doe him some service for it and grace his Synod with their subscriptions But all the other bonds are as nothing to that r Extr. ad Iurejur ca. Ego N. oath wherewith every one of them was tyed and fettered to the Pope swearing to uphold the Papall authority against all men and to fight Å¿ In nova juramenti forma insuper hoc jurant Episcopi se haereticos omnesque rebelles Pontifici extremè infestaturos persequuturos Grav oppos Conc. Trident p. 2. caus 4 pa. 52. against all that should rebell against him an oath so exercrable that Aeneas Sylvius is t Ibidem in Paral ad Abbat Vsper pa. 41â mentioned to have said Quod etiam verum dicere contra Papam sit contra Episcoporum juramentum that even to speake the truth to speake for the truth if it be contrary to the Pope is against the oath of Bishops By this they were so tyed ut u Ibid. pa. â1 ne mutire quidem
many things are praised quae omnia monstrosa sunt prorsus explodenda all which are utterly to be hissed at where also he seemeth to allow the impious Art of Magicke and Divinations His approving of Appolonius and Danis two wicked Magitians who both are relegati ad inferos condemned to Hell And to omit very many of this kinde of impieties and fables which abound in Suidas His narration in verbo Iesus which not onely Baronius rejecteth but Pope Paul the fourth for that cause beside some other k Exploserit in Jndicem lib. prohib exploded the booke of Suidas and placed it in the ranke librorum prohibitorum Such even by the confession of their owne Iesuite is this Suidas a depraver of good a commender of wicked men a fabler a lyer a falsifier of Histories a Magitian an Heretike whose booke is by the Pope forbidden to bee read Such a worthy witnesse hath the Cardinall of his Suidas with whom he conspireth in reviling Iustinian as one utterly unlearned Concerning which untruth I will say no more at this time than that which Gotofrid doth in his censure l Arte lib. Instit of those words of Suidas where calling it in plaine termes a slander he rejects it as it justly deserveth in this manner Valeant calumniae nos sinceriora sequamur Away with this and such like opprobrious slanders of Suidas and Baronius but let us follow the truth 5. His second reproofe of the Emperour is for presuming to make lawes in causes of faith which for Kings and Emperours to doe brings as he saith an hellish confusion into the Church of God The wit of a Cardinal Iustinian may not doe that which King Hezekiah which Asa which Iosiah and Constantine the great the two Theodosii Martian and other holy Emperours before had done and done it by the warrant of God to the eternall good of the Church and their owne immortall fame Had hee indeed or any of those Emperours taken upon them by their lawes to establish some new erronious or hereticall doctrine the Cardinall might in this case have justly reproved them but this they did not what doctrines the Prophets delivered the word of God taught and holy Synods had before decreed and explaned those and none else did Iustinian by his Edict and other religious Emperours ratifie by their imperiall authority Heare Iustinians owne words Wee f Edict Justin in causa trium Capitul in princip have thought it needfull by this our Edict to manifest that right confession of faith quae in sancta Dei Ecclesiâ praedicatur which is preached in the holy Church of God Here is no new faith no Edict for any new doctrine but for maintaining that onely faith which the holy Catholike Church taught and the Councell of Chalcedon had decreed wherein that Iustinian did nothing but worthy of eternal praise the whole fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church approving it is a witnesse aboue exception which entreating of that which Iustinian had done in this cause of the Three Chapters the chiefe of all which was the publishing of his most religious Edict to coÌdemne 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 coÌcerning 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 prudeÌce 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.
2. et 552. nu 8. was buffeted and beaten at Constantinople before the time of the Councell and forced to slee to Chalcedon partly when he was banished i Bar. an 553. nu 221. et 222. c. after the end of the Councell for not consenting with the Synod in condemning the Three Chapters Alas how hath heresie and malice quite blinded the Cardinall and bereft him of his understanding Iustinian neither before the Councell nor after it persecuted Vigilius Vigilius was neither beaten nor buffeted nor fled hee either to Saint Peter or to Saint Euphemia nor was he banished at all these all are nothing but the Poeticall and Chimericall fictions of the Cardinall no truth no realty at all in them as we have before k Sup. ca. 16. et 17. fully demonstrated Iudge now I pray you whether any but some Ajax furiosus or who were deprived of his wits would call the Emperour madde franticke sacrilegious possessed and guided by the Devill for persecuting and banishing him who neither was persecuted nor banished but enjoyed the latitude of liberty and all the benefits thereof even the Emperours favour and the comforts accompanying it But admit Vigilius had been banished as indeed many other Bishops were for defending the Three Chapters against the Decree of the holy generall Councell was Iustinian a persecutor a monstrous sacrilegious persecutor for banishing or punishing condemned heretikes and Nestorians such as all the defenders of the Three Chapters to have beene wee have * Ca. 4.5 et seq before declared what a monstrous persecutor then was holy Constantine for banishing Theognis l Socrat. lib. 1. c. 10. Bishop of Nice and Eusebius Bishop of Nicomedia for refusing to consent to the Nicene Synod What a persecutor was Theodosius the the elder who commanded m L. 3. de fide Cath. Cod. Theod. all that held the Macedonian heresie to bee banished and shut out of their Churches without any hope to recover the same againe What a persecutor was Theodosius the younger who forbad all men n Leg. ult de haer Cod. Theod. to have or reade the bookes of Nestorius or to admit the Nestorians into any City Towne Village or house What an horrible and monstrous persecutor was Martian who made a law o Extat in Conc. Chal. Act. 3. pa 86. that if any should teach the Eutichean heresie ultimo supplicio coercebitur he shall bee put to death If Constantine Theodosius the elder and younger and Martian bee no persecutors notwithstanding this severity in exiling punishing and putting to death heretikes what a malicious slanderer is Baronius for coÌdemning Iustinian as a persecutor for banishing imprisoning or punishing with like severity the defeÌders of the three Chapters who were every way as detestable as damnable as truly convicted condeÌned heretikes by the judgment of an holy general Councel as either the Arians Macedonians Eutycheans or old Nestorians Thus to persecute that is justly punish heretikes is laudable thus to be persecuted is ignominious Non est pecoatum malos persequi p Lib. cont Fulgent Donat. art 20. saith Saint Augustine To persecute and justly punish wicked men is no offence neither are they just who are so persecuted but he who is persecuted for righteousnesse sake Had Iustinian done this to Vigilius hee had beene no persecutor But Vigilius who oppugned the truth Baronius who with such a virulent tongue reviles and railes at the defenders of Gods truth they and none but they are persecutors in this cause They kill not the Prophets nor Apostles but they kill murther as cruelly as they can that truth of God which the Prophets and Apostles imbraced and for defence of which they were ready to bee killed This spirituall persecution as Saint Augustine teacheth q Lib. 1. cont liter Petil. ca. 27 exceeds the corporall They r Aug. lib. 2. cont lit Petil. ca. 14. murther the Prophets who contradict the doctrines of the Prophets Mitius ageretis It were lesse crueltie in you to thrust your swords into the bodies of the Prophets then with your tongues to murther the doctrine and words of the Prophets And a thousand like sayings hath the same Augustine by which it were easie to demonstrate Baronius himselfe and not Iustinian to bee the unjust impious sacrilegious and franticke persecutor if by that which hath beene said this were not abundantly apparent 8. Now followeth the other Pageant of this Baronian Tragedy in declaming against Iustinian That respects his last yeares and his death in which part as being the last and therefore likeliest to leave deepest impression in the hearts of the readers because Baronius hath couched together the most vile accusations of all the rest and the very venome of his poysonfull affections and splene against the Emperour I am most unwilling to forsake the religious Emperour in the last act of all but am exceeding desirous to testifie my love unto him both for other causes and for this especially that he next unto God was the preserver of the Catholike faith when in this cause of the Three Chapters the Nestorians and especially Pope Vigilius laboured with might and maine for ever to abolish and extinguish the same in regard of which act alone if there were none else hee deserved to bee eternized in the blessed memory and by the best indeavors of all that love the Catholike faith Baronius Å¿ An. 563. nu 1. intreating of the 37. yeare of Iustinian which was about two yeares before his death tels us how at that time Iustinian Vnhappy Iustinian ranne headlong into the heresie of the Aphthardokites or incorrupticolae who t Evagr. lib. 4. ca. 38. Leont lib. de sect Act. 10. et Prateoll de Haeres har 55. Dicebant carnem quam ex virgine Servator assumpsit ante passionem incorruptibilem fuisse denyed the body of CHRIST to bee subject to passions death or corruption These as Liberatus saith u Liberat. Brev. ca. 19. were also called Phantasticks because upon their doctrine it followed that CHRIST had not a true and truely humane but onely an imaginary and phantasticall body Into this phantasticall heresie saith Baronius did Iustinian fall and runne headlong in his last age and for proofe hereof hee alleageth x An. 563. nu 8. most ample witnesses Authores omnes tam Graci quam Latini All Authors both Greeke and Latine they all testifie that hee fell into this heresie and they detest that impiety in him Nor did he onely fall himselfe into it but hee sought to draw all others into the same errour Ita ebrius y Bar. ibid. nu 9. factus est ut mente motus Iustinian was so drunke that being out of his wits hee writ an Edict z Illud constat Jmperatorem haeresin comprobasse eandemque scripto Edicto firmasse An. 564. nu 3. to confirme that heresie and bring all the Church to beleeve the same When hee prevailed not
that is utterly untrue In Procopius there is not any mention either of Abgarus or of Christs Epistle or of that Image made without hands or of any praediction touching the unconquerable City of Edessa or that the Edessanes brought forth any such Image in the time of the Siege or that they laid it in the ditch or that by the meanes of it Cosroes was vanquished all these are the fictions of Evagrius and those also quite contrary to the true relation of Procopius for hee o Proc. lib. 2. de bel Pers ascribes the repulsing of Cosroes from the City to the noble military skill and stratagem of the Romane Captaines by reason whereof when Cosroes perceived his attempt to bee in vaine hee made peace with the Romanes but yet so that the Romanes yeelded to pay unto him quinquaginta millia aureorum those fifty thousand pieces of Gold which hee at the beginning of the siege demanded and for which he offered to desist from warre 34. Againe whereas Evagrius to justifie that lying prediction as divine and propheticall such as the faithfull then beleeved as a prophesie of God saith that the Event did prove it to bee true in that Evagrius proves himselfe to bee so extremely false that almost nothing in him may be credited but certainly not for his authority for in the first yeare of Heraclius at which time it is not unlike but Evagrius lived for he writ his history but some sixteene yeares before the event plainely demonstrated the contrary and this to bee no divine prophesie but a lying fiction Then the Persians came against Syria saith the Author * Lib. 18. an 1. Heracl of the miscella historia ceperunt Edessam and they won and took Capessa and Edessa and proceeded as farre as Antioch yea Cosroes then so prevailed against Christians that Heraclius p Jbid. an 3. an 4. an 8. was faine to send many Legacies to intreate peace offering to pay what q Rogavit ut definiret tributa et pacta acciperet Ibid. tribute hee would impose but the Persian disdainefully answered Non parcam vobis donec Crucifixum abnegetis adoretis Solem I will not spare you till you renounce the profession of Christ and with us adore the Sunne r Ibid. an 8. Zonar to 3. iâ Heracl How did their Palladium that divine Image now defend them or how could that bee a divine praediction which for such Evagrius commends and saith the event proved it to bee true when the event within lesse than twenty yeares after demonstrated it to bee a lye 35. But that which is the principall fault in this narration is that Evagrius approves as true and certain that Epist of Christ sent to Abgarus which is indeed the ground of the whole fable Now that Epistle to be a reprobated and rejected writing condemned by the Church is so cleare that their owne Writers proclamâ the same Bishop Canus Å¿ Loc. Theol. lib. 11. c. 6. Rejiâiâ among other bookes which the Church as hee saith rejecteth recites Epistolam Iesu ad Abgarum and Historiam Eusebij those two by name the Church saith he rejecteth because some ignoraÌt persons thought that touching Eusebius History not to be the words of Gelasius and the Councell Canus refuting those gives this as the reason why Eusebius is rejected because in it is set downe the Epistle of Iesus to Abgarus quam Gelasius explodit which Epistle Gelasius doth hisse out of the Church This Epistle of Iesus to Abgarus saith Sixtus t Bibl. sanc li. 2. Senensis Pope Gelasius inter scripturas Apochryphas rejicit doth reject among other Apocryphall writings Coster their Iesuit saith u Enchir. Tit. de sac Scrip. Palam Eusebius relates how Christ sent a letter to Abgarus but that letter was never pro ejusmodi accepta ab Ecclesia esteemed for such that is not for Christs by the Church But the words of Gelasius the whole Roman Councel with him are of all most remarkeable They x Concil Rom. 1 sub Gelas having expressed and named a long Catalogue of such fabulous writings and particularly this Epistle of Christ to Abgarus which Evagrius approveth set downe this censure of them all These and all like unto these wee confesse to bee not onely refused but also eliminata cast out of the Church by the whole Romane Catholike and Apostolike Church atque cum fuis authoribus authorumque sequacibus sub anathematis indissolubili vinculo in aeternum confitemur esse damnata and wee confesse as well these writings as the Authors and the followers also of them to bee eternally condemned under the indissoluble bond of an Anathema So Gelasius and the whole Romane Councell whereby it is evident that not onely this Epistle and the Author of it but that the followers of the Author the approvers of that Epistle that is Evagrius and the whole second Nicene Synod and Baronius himselfe that these also are anathematized condemned and accursed by the judgement of the whole Romane Catholike Church and that also by an indissoluble bond of an Anathema Such an untrue and fabulous yea miserable and accursed witnesse hath the Cardinall chosen of Evagrius by the warrant and authority of whom hee might insult upon and revile the Emperour but now the Cardinall hath farre more neede to excuse Evagrius from lies than by his lying reports to accuse others and now hee may clearly see that censure of condemnation which hee with Evagrius most rashly and unjustly objecteth to the Emperour to fall on Evagrius their second Nicene Fathers and the Cardinals owne pate since they all by approving that Narration touching Abgarus or being sequaces of the Author thereof are pronounced to bee eternally condemned by the judgement of the whole Romane Catholike Apostolicall Church It is fit such a censure should ever passe on them who open their mouthes in reviling manner against religious and holy Emperours the anointed of the Lord. 36. You doe now evidently see not onely Iustinian to bee cleared of those odious and indigne imputations of heresie tyranny persecution and other crimes which the Cardinall in such spitefull manner upbraideth unto him but all those witnesses whom hee hath nominated and produced in this cause to be so light and of so little account that they are utterly unworthy to bee put in the skales or counter-poized with those honourable and innumerable witnesses which as wee have shewed doe with a loud and consenting voyce proclamo that Faith Piety Prudence Iustice Clemencie Bounty and all other Heroicall and Princely vertues have shined in Iustinian which have beautified any of the most renowned and religious Emperors that the Church hath had Let us now proceed to those effects which Baronius observeth to have ensued upon the heresie of Iustinian and the persecution raised by his maintaining of the same Now indeed this whole passage might justly be omitted for sublata causa tollitur effectus seeing
Iustinian held no such heresie as hee is slandered withall there neither was nor could there bee any effects or consequents of a cause not existent Yet will I not so sleightly reject the Cardinals calumnie in this point but fully examine first the publike and then the private mischiefes which hee without all truth hath fancied and objected against the Emperour 37. The publike was partly the subversion and overthrow of the faith and partly the decay of the Empire in the time and under the government of Iustinian Disertus esse posset Hee that would in an elaborate speech refute this calumnie of Baronius might have an ample scope to display all his Art and skill in this so large an argument My purpose is onely to point at the severall heads and not expatiate at this time Truly the Cardinall could hardly have devised any calumny more easie to be refuted or more evidently witnessing his malicious and wilfull oppugning of the truth I will not insist on those private testimonies of Procopius a Lib. 3. de aedif Justin pa. 433. Iustinian seemeth to have beene advanced by God to that Imperiall dignitie ut totum Imperium repararet that he might repaire and beautifie the whole Empire Of Otho b Lib. 5. ca. 4. Iustinian being a most valiant and most ChristiaÌ Prince ImperiuÌ quasi mortuuÌ resuscitavit did raise the Empire as it were from death to life and exceedingly repaired the Common-wealth being decayed Of Gotofrid c In Chron. part 16. in Justinian The whole glory of God was repaired by his vertue and the Church rejoyced in the stable peace which under him it injoyed Of Wernerus d An. 504. Hee was in all things most excellent and by his just lawes and wisedome he governed the world by his impiety he glorified God Of Aimonius e De gest Fr. lib 2. ca. 8. He was a Catholike a pious a just Emperour therefore all things prospered under his hands I oppose to that Baronian calumny the judgment of Pope Agatho and of the Romane Councell with him wherin this is expresly witnessed f In Epist Agaââ Act. 4. Conc. 6. pa. 18. a. His integritie in faith did much please God exalt the Christian Common-wealth and againe g Ibid. in Epist Synod pa. 22. His vertue and pietie omnia in meliorem ordinem restauravit restored all things into a better state and condition All both Church and Common-wealth both the Civill and Ecclesiasticall state he restored all I oppose the sixt generall Councell that is the judgement of the whole Church in which the suggestions of Agatho eveÌ in that point according to the Cardinals doctrine h Vid. sup heâ cap. nu 18. are approved as uttered by S. Peter yea by the holy Ghost himself These pregnant and irrefragable testimonies of so many so holy and divine witnesses are able I say not to confute but utterly to confound overwhelme Baronius w th his deformed decrepit calumnie 38. If any further please to descend to particulars whether hee cast his eyes on the Church or Common-wealth he shal see every Region every Province almost every City Towne proclaming the honour of Iustinian Besides his happy appeasing of those manifold broyles and suppressing sundry heresies which infested the Church in his dayes among which this concerning the Three Chapters was the chiefe How infinite monuments did he leave of his piety and zeale to Gods glory the good of his Church in building new in repairing decaied Churches reducing both to a most magnificeÌt beauty The Church of Christ called Sophia built by him at Constantinople was the mirrour of all Ages Of it Procopius an eye-witnesse testifieth i Proc. lib. 1. de aedif Iustin pa. 423. that the magnificence thereof amazed those who saw it but was incredible to those that saw it not the k Assurgit in altitudinem caeli Ibid. height of it mounted up into the heaven the splendor of it was such as if it received not l Diceres locum illum non externo sole illuminari Jbid. light from the Sun but had it in it selfe the roofe deckt with Gold the pavement beset m Pavimentum ex diversi coloris unionibus perfectum Glic Annal. part 4. with Pearle the silver of the Quire onely contained foure * Myriadas 4. caelati argenti habuisse fertur Proc. loc cit Myriads that is forty thousand pounds in so much that it is said n Hoc aedificio Solomonem esse superatum Glic loc cit to have excelled the Temple of Salomon Further in the honour of the blessed Virgin hee builded every where so many houses so stately and sumptuous throughout the Roman Empire that if you should comtemplate but onely one of them you would thinke saith Procopius o Lib. 1. his whole raigne to have beene imployed in building that alone At Constantinople he builded three p Ibid. one in Blacernis another in Pege a third in Hierio besides others builded in honour of Anna of Zoa of Michael of Peter and Paul of Sergius and Baccus utrumque fulgore lapillorum Solem vincit either of which by the brightnesse of precious stones excelled the Sunne of Andrew Luke and Tymothy of Acatius of Mocius of Thirsis of Theodorus of Tecla of Theodota Haec omnia ex fundamentis erexit All these he raised from the very ground and foundation and that at Constantinople the beauty and dignity of which cannot by words bee expressed by viewing be perlustrated Nor did he this to one onely Citie he builded like magnificent Churches at Antioch q Pro. lib. 2. at Sebastia at Nicopolis at Theodosia at TZani at Iustinianea r Lib. 4. where hee was borne at Ephesus Å¿ Lib. 5. at Helena at Nice at Pythia at Ierusalem so magnificent ut nullum aliud aequipare possit that none other may compare with it at Iericho at mount Gerazim at mount Sinai at Theopolis at Aegila t Lib. 6. pa. 453. where they sacrificed to Iupiter Hammon and Alexander the great even to that time at Boreion at Tripolis at Carthage at the Gades or Hercules pillers which was the uttermost border of the known world in those dayes So that one may truly say of him Imperium Oceano famam qui terminat astris his piety and zeale reacheth as farre as the earth his honour as high as the heaven And yet have I said nothing at all of the Monasteries Zenodochies Nosodochies and other like Hospitals which out of his most pious affection to God and Gods Church he not onely erected but inriched with large patrimonies and possessions which for number are as I suppose equall for expences greater than the former all the particulars whereof I referre to be read in Procopius who considering beside other matters al these magnificent and sumptuous buildings did truly say of IustiniaÌ u Lib. 1. pa. 424 Nulla honorandi Dei satietas eum cepit he was never
equivalent word called Chapters which heretikes specially the Nestorians collected and falsely boasted to bee taught by the Councell of Chalcedon whereas in very truth the holding of any one of them much more of them all is the overthrow of the whole Councell at Chalcedon yea of the whole Catholike faith that Councell contradicteth and condemneth them all no lesse than the fift Councell which as Gregory truly saith is in omnibus sequax it doth in every point follow and consent unto the Councell of Chalcedon The like may be said of that which out of Facundus Baronius observeth and citeth as a proofe of his saying that the Emperours Edict is repugnant and contrary to the orthodoxall faith Baronius will still keepe his old wont in applauding Vigilius and the defenders of the Three Chapters For if the Edict condemning them be contrary then is the defence of them consonant to the faith and then not the Imperiall Edict of Iustinian but the Pontificall Constitution of Vigilius must be approved as orthodoxall And what is this else but to condemne the judgement of the fift generall Councell of Pope Pelagius Gregory and all Popes after them of all generall Councells following it in a word to contradict and utterly condemne the consenting judgement of the whole Church for the space of 11. hundred yeares they all approve the determination of the fift Councell and it so fully consenteth with the Edict in condemning the Three Chapters that in their definitive sentence they differ very little in words but in substance and sense nothing at all from the Emperours Edict which caused Binius to say the Edict of the Emperour was approved by the Pope and the Councell So Catholike and orthodoxall is it so advisedly and orthodoxally penned To seeke no further proofe Baronius himselfe was so infatuated in this cause that he oftentimes confuteth his owne sayings for himselfe gives a most ample and most observable testimony of this Edict and of the orthodoxy thereof saying Å¿ an 534. nu 21. of it Est veluti Catechismus fidei Catholicae exacta declaratio this Edict of Iustinian is as it were a Catechisme or an exact declaration of the Catholike faith and an exact discussing of the Three Chapters which were afterwards long controversed in the Church So untrue is that his first calumnie against the Edict whereby hee would perswade that it is contrary to certaine Chapters of the holy Councell of Chalcedon or as Facundus plainly but most untruely affirmeth contrary to the Catholike faith 4. For the second calumnie that his Edict was a seminary of sedition Baronius might as justly condemne the decree of Nice of Ephesus of Chalcedon yea the very Scripture it selfe and preaching of the Gospell Christ himselfe is set as signum t Luk. 2.34 contradictionis as a butt of contradiction against which they will ever bee striving and shooting their arrowes of opposition sedition contention himselfe u Luk. 12.49 51 saith I am come to set fire on the earth and what would I but that it should bee kindled and againe Suppose yee that I am come to give peace on the earth I tell you nay but rather division and no sooner was the Gospell preached abroad in the world but that which our Saviour foretold them x Mat. 10.21 came to passe Brother shall deliver up brother the father the Childe the Children shall rise against their Parents and cause them to bee put to death and ye shall be hated of all men for my names sake what a seminary of sedition may the Cardinal call the Gospell that caused all these troubles warres seditions murders and burnings in the whole world what another Seminary was the Nicene decree against Arianisme and Constantines Edict to ratifie the same after that how seditiously was Athanasius and the Catholikes persecuted put to flight to torments by Constantius and the Arians how seditiously did the Councels of Ariminum and Syrmium oppugne and fight against that Nicene Decree till they had so farre prevailed that well-neare there had needed no longer contending the whole world almost being turned Arians and even groaning under Arianisme If the Cardinall by reason of those manifold troubles and oppositions which ensued upon this Edict will condemne it for being a Seminary of sedition let him first condemne the Nicene Decree and Imperiall Edict for it let him condemne the Gospell and Christ himselfe which were all such Seminaries as that Edict was If notwithstanding all the oppositions seditions coÌtentions raysed by heathen heretical other wicked men against these they were as most certainly they were Seminaries of truth let the Card. know acknowledge his malicious slander against this most religious and orthodoxall Edict of Iustinian which was as all the former a sacred Sanctuary for the Catholike faith Seditions oppositions tumults persecutions and the like disturbances in the Church spring not from Christ nor from his Word and Gospel either preached by Bishops or decreed by Councels or confirmed by Imperiall Edicts all these are of themselves causes onely of unity concord peace and agreement in the Church these onely are the proper native and naturall fruits and effects that proceed from them but contentions and seditions come from the perverse froward wicked and malicious mindes of men that hate the truth and in hatred of it fight against all that uphold the truth bee it by preaching by decreeing or by enacting the truth these are as Wolves which by continuall tumbling in the mire disturbe and trouble the streame The fountaines whence the truth springeth are most pure and most peaceable 5. Now whereas in the third place Baronius seekes to disgrace the Edict by the Author of it whom he describes to have beene not onely an heretike but a most detestable person even the plague of the whole Church let us suppose and admit the Author to have beene such a man indeed nay to have beene Iudas himselfe and worse than Iudas hee could hardly bee seeing CHRIST himselfe called y Iohn 6. v. 71. Iudas a Devill Is the Edict or the truth of God thereby published worse because Iudas uttered or penned it was the Arke to bee refused or contemned because wicked men framed and built it Did not Christ say z Luk. 10.16 of Iudas a Devill as well as of Peter a Saint Hee that heareth you heareth mee he that despiseth you despiseth me Hath Baronius forgotten the lesson of Saint Iames a Iam. 2 v. 1. My brethren have not the faith of our glorious Lord Iesus Christ in respect of persons love it for it selfe but neither love it nor refuse it because of him that speaketh penneth or bringeth the same Did the Cardinall never heare of the Scribes and Pharisees they sit b Mat. 23. v. 2.3 in Moses chaire that is deliver Gods truth out of Moses and the Prophets unto you whatsoever therefore they bid you that observe doe but after their workes doe not Or if this
of the Fathers in defence of the three Chapters Heretike Is that a brave and elegant booke that defendeth heresie can heresie be fortified by the testimonies of the holy Fathers What is this else but to make the holy Fathers heretikes So hereticall and spitefull is Possevine that together with himselfe he would draw the ancient and holy Fathers into one and the same crime of heresie The other point concernes Baronius hee sayth d An. 547. nu 30 that the controversie or contention about the three Chapters was inter Catholicos tantum onely among such as were Catholikes doth not he plainly thereby signifie his opinion of Facundus that he was a Catholike for Facundus was as hot and earnest a contender in that controversie as Vigilius himselfe he writ in defence of the three Chapters twelve whole bookes elegant and brave bookes as Possevine saith he bitterly inveighed against the Emperour against all the condemners of them against Pope Vigilius himselfe when hee after his comming to Constantinople consented to the Emperor Seeing this Facundus a convicted and condemned hehetike is one of the Cardinals Catholikes must not heresie and Nestorianisme bee with him Catholike doctrine must not the impious Epistle be orthodoxall and the overthrow of the faith and decree of the Councell at Chalcedon bee an Article of Baronius faith even that which he accounted the Catholike faith But this by the way We see now what manner of Bishop Facundus was an obstinate heretike pertinaciously persisting in heresie What though Facundus call Theodorus of Caesarea an Origenist Did not the old Nestorians call Cyrill and other Catholikes Apollinarians of whom it seemes the defenders of the three Chapters learned to calumniate the Catholikes with the names of heretikes and Origenists when they were in truth wholly opposite to those and other heresies Can any expect a true testimony concerning Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea from Facundus concerning Catholikes from heretikes their immortall and malicious enemies nor theirs onely but enemies to the truth Such and of such small worth is the former witness of Baronius in this cause and against Theodorus 15. His other witnesse is Liberatus the Deacon who indeed sayth as e In Brev. ca. 24 plainly as Baronius that Theodorus was an Origenist and refers the occasion of that whole controversie touching the three Chapters to the malice of the same Theodorus For as Liberatus saith Pelagius the Popes Legate when he was at Constantinople entreated of the Emperour that Origen and his heresies wherewith the Easterne Churches specially about Ierusalem were exceedingly troubled might be condemned whereunto the Emperour willingly assenting published an Imperiall Edict both against him and his errors when Theodorus being an Origenist perceived that Origen who was long before dead was now condemned he to be quit with Pelagius for procuring the condemnation of Origen moved the Emperour also to condemne Theodorus Bishop of Mopsvestia who had written much against Origen whose writings were detested of all the Origenists the Emperour at Theodorus his suggestion made another Edict wherein he condemned Theodorus of Mopsvestia and the two other Chapters touching the writings of Theodoret and Ibas which bred so long trouble in the Church Thus Liberatus Who as you see speaketh as much and as eagerly against Theodorus as Baronius could wish and Liberatus lived and writ about that same time 16. Liberatus in many things is to be allowed in those especially wherein by partiality his judgement was not corrupt But in this cause of the Three Chapters in the occasion and circumstances thereof hee is a most unfit witnesse himselfe was deepely interressed in this cause partiality blinded him his stile was sharpe against the adverse part but dull in taxing any though never so great a crime in men of his owne faction Of him Binius f Jn notis suis in Brev. Liber to 2. Conc. pa. 626. gives this true censure hee was one of their ranke who defended the Three Chapters who also writ an Apology for Theodorus of Mopsvestia againe Baronius and Bellarmine have noted g Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 5. § Caâsa Bell. et Baronius in Liberâti breviario haec cautè legenda admonueriit Binius loco citato that divers things are cautè legenda in Liberatus of him Possevine h In Appar in verbo Liberatus writeth There are many things in Liberatus which are to bee read with circumspection those especially which hee borrowed of some Nestorians and those are his narrations touching Theodorus of Mopsvestia that his writings were praised both by the Emperour Theodosius his Edict and by Cyrill and approved also in the Councell of Chalcedon all which to be lies Baronius doth convince Againe i Ibid. what Liberatus saith of the fift Councell is very warily to be read for either they were not his own or he was deceived by the false relation of some other but certainly they do not agree with the writings of other Catholike fathers Thus Possevine out of Baronius who might as well in plaine termes have called Liberatus a Nestorian heretike for none but Nestorians and such as slander the Councel of Chalcedon for hereticall can judge the writings of Theodorus which are ful of all heresies blasphemies and impieties to be approved in that holy Councell Againe Possevine rejecting that which Liberatus writeth of the fift Councell gives a most just exception against all that he writeth either touching Theodorus of Cesarea as being an Origenist or of the occasioÌ of this coÌtroversie about the 3. Chapters as if it did arise from the coÌdemning of Origen in all this Liberatus by the Iesuites confession was deceived by the false relation of others they agree not to the truth nor to the narrations of Catholike fathers Liberatus being an earnest favourer and defender of Theodorus Mopsvestenus could not chuse but hate Theodorus of Cesarea for seeking to have him and his writings condemned The saying of Ierome k Apol. 1. contra Ruffin ad Pammach et Marcel pa. 204. ought here to take place Professae inimicitiae suspitionem habent mendacij the report of a professed enemy ought to be suspected as a lye The true cause why Liberatus is so violent against Theodorus of Cesarea was not for that Theodorus was an Origenist as Liberatus and out of him Baronius slandereth him but because this Theodorus condemned the writings of Theodorus of Mopsvestia whom Liberatus defended and the two other Chapters Neither was the condemning of Origen the occasion of condemning the three Chapters as Liberatus untruly reporteth but as both Iustinian and the whole Councell witnesse the true occasion thereof were the Nestorian heretikes who pretending and boasting the three Chapters to bee allowed in the Councell of Chalcedon both the Catholikes in defence of the Councell justly denyed the same and the Emperour first then the Councell to confirme the faith condemned the three Chapters which were the overthrow of the faith as before l Ca. 1
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
fift Synod they obtained now they added to the words of the Synod this clause qui est Dominus unus de sancta Trinitate A very perilous corruption sure to expresse that clause which all the Bishops of Rome semper excipio Hormisdam with all Catholikes beleeved and taught which whosoever denieth or wil not professe is anathematized and excluded from the Catholike Church Is not this thinke you a very sore corruption of the Councell of Chalcedon Is not the Cardinall a rare man of judgement that could spie such a maine fault in these Acts of the fift Councell that they professe Christ to be unum de sancta Trinitate to which profession both they and all other were bound under the censure of an anathema 7. Yea but in the Acts those words are cited as the words of the Councell of Chalcedon whose they are not A meere fancy and calumny of the Cardinall they are plainly set downe as the words of the fift Synod whose indeed they are and it relateth not precisely the words of the Councell of Chalcedon nor what it there expressed totidem verbis but the true summe and substance of what is there decreed For thus they say i Coll. 6. pa. 575. a. The holy Synod of Chalcedon in the definition which it made of faith doth professe God the Word incarnate to be made man this is all they report of the Councell of Chalcedon as by the opposition of Ibas his Epistle is apparent wherein they oppose not that he denyed Christ to be one of the Trinity but that hee called them heretikes who taught the Word incarnate to be made man That clause which they adde That Christ is one of the Trinity is an addition of the fift Councell it selfe explicating that of Christ which the Emperours Edict bound them to professe as being the true sense and meaning of the Councell at Chalcedon but not as being word for word set downe in the decree of Chalcedon And even as he were more than ridiculous who would accuse one to corrupt the Councell of Chalcedon for saying they professed Christ to be God and man who was borne in Bethleem and fled from Herod into Aegypt so is the Cardinall as ridiculous in objecting this as a corruption of the Synod or addition to the Councell of Chalcedon that they say the Councell taught the Word of God to bee man who is our Lord Iesus Christ one of the holy Trinity Both additions are true but neither of them affirmed to be expresly and totidem verbis set downe in the Councell of Chalcedon Why but looke to the Cardinals proofe for he would not for any good affirme such a matter without proofe What doe yee aske for proofe of the Cardinall I tell you it is proofe enough that he sayth it and truly in this poynt he produceth neither any proofe nor any shadow of reason to prove either that those words are falsely inserted into the Acts of the fift Councell or that the fift Councell cited them as the very expresse words of the Councell of Chalcedon all the proofe is grounded on his old Topicke place Ipse dixit which is a sory kind of arguing against any that love the truth for although against the Pope or their popish cause any thing which he writeth is a very strong evidence against them seeing the Cardinall is very circumspect wary to let nothing no not a syllable fall from him which may in the least wise seem to prejudice the Popes dignity or the cause of their Church unlesse the maine force and undeniable evidence of truth doe wrest and wring it from his pen yet in any matter of history wherein he may advantage the Pope or benefit their cause it is not by many degrees so good to say the illustrissimus Cardinalis affirmes it which is now growne a familiar kinde of proofe among them k Vide Gretz tractatus varios alios ejus farinae as to say Ovid Aesop or Iacobus Voraginensis affirme it therefore it is certainly true His Annals in the art of fraudulent vile and pernicious untruths farre excell the most base fictitious Poemes or Legends that ever as yet have seene the Sunne CAP. XXVI The second alteration of the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius for that Ibas is sayd therein to have denyed the Epistle written to Maris to be his refuted 1. THe second thing which our Momus a Dum falsa quaedam ibi in Actis 5. Concilij asserta reperiuntur de impostura non mediocrem suspicionem inducunt cum viz. ibi dictum habetur Ibam negasse EpistolaÌ esse suam Bar. an 553. nu 211 carpeth at is for that in these Acts it is sayd that Ibas denyed the Epistle written to Maris to bee his which saith Baronius is untrue for Ibas professed the Epistle to be his And Binius not content to call it with the Cardinall an untruth in plaine termes affirmes b Duo aut plura mendacia de Ibae epistola leguntur Bin. Notis in Conc. 5. pa. 606. b. Acta Conc. 5. noÌ uno loco indicant quod Ibas Epistolam non agnoverit veruÌ haec sententia c. iid p. 607. a it to be a lye Had not hatred to the truth corrupted or quite blinded the judgement of Baronius and Binius they would never have quarelled with the Acts about this matter nor for this accused them to have beene corrupt They may as well collect the Edict of Iustinian or that famous Epistle of Pope Gregorie wherein he writeth of Ibas and the three Chapters to be corrupted and of no credit as well as the Acts of the fift Councell for in both c Ibas non est ausus eam suam dicere Epistolam Iustin edictum pa. 496. b. Epistolam Jbas denegat suam Greg. lib. 7. Epist 53. them the same is said concerning the deniall of Ibas which is in these Acts. If notwithstanding the avouching of that denyall they may passe for sincere and incorrupt it was certainly malice and not reason that moved the Cardinall and Binius to carpe at the Acts for this cause which will much more appeare if any please but to view the Acts themselves For this is not spoken obitèr nor once but the Councell insisteth upon it repeateth it in severall d Abnegans Epistolam Coll. 6. pa. 563. b. Eo quod abnegabat Ibas illa Coll. eadem pa. 564. a. Vnde Jbas eam abnegabat ibid. alibi places and divers times and if those words were taken away there would be an apparent hiatus in the text of those Acts. The words then are truly the words of the true Acts the corruption is onely in the braine of Baronius and Binius 2. Now whereas the Cardinall and Binius so confidently affirme this to be untrue or a lye that Ibas denyed his Epistle and so accuse the whole Councell to lye in this matter they doe but keepe their owne tongues and pens inure with calumnies the untruth
Constitution of Pope Vigilius concerning the three Chapters is wanting therein refuted 1. THe fift defect which the Cardinall hath spyed in these Acts is that the Constitution of Pope Vigilius is not now extant therein Of it the Cardinall sayth a An. 553. nu 48 That it belongeth to the Acts of the fift Synod is evidently declared by that which we have spoken and againe this b Ibid. nu 47. Constitution as also many other things Noscitur esse sublatum is knowne to be taken out of the Acts of the fift Synod How prove you Sir that either it belongs to it or is taken out of these Synodall acts What againe so rude and unmannerly as aske a reason of the Cardinall Is it not proved sufficiently when Baronius hath sayd it Truly then it is disproved sufficiently when an opposer of Baronius hath denyed it For any man for truth and credit may easily oversway Baronius I pray why should the Popes Constitution bee part of the Acts rather than the Emperours Edict or why doth the Cardinall finde a defect in wanting the Papall which is hereticall and not of the Imperiall which is an orthodoxall decree 2. Baronius will further tell you out of which part of the Acts this is stolne It c Libellus Synodo oblatus pridie Idus Maij. an 553. nu 41. et Papae libellus oblatus Synodo nos hic in 5. Collatione suo loco restituenduÌ esse putamus ibid nu 47. was offered to the Synod in their fift Collation Ad d Jbid. nu 48. hunc ipsum diem quintae Collationis pertinere cognoscitur It is knowne that the Popes Constitution belongs to this yeare and to this very day of the fift Collation And how I pray you is that knowne Because e Ibid. the Constitution hath in the end of it the date of the day and yeare wherein Vigilius published it A reason fit for none but a Cardinall As if all Constitutions Letters and Edicts which beare date of a yeare and a day belonged to that fift Collation and were certainly stolne out of it Was ever any infatuated if not Baronius in this cause But the Constitution beares date f Pridie Idus Maij. Bar. an 553. nu 210. eo autem die habita 5. Collatio an eodem nu 41. on the 14. day of May in the reigne of Iustinian and the fift Collation of the Synod was on the same day A like reason to the former as if all Letters or Constitutions written on that day must needs be published in the Councell or on that very day in their Collation Admitting it was read yet the contrary seemes much rather to follow that it was not read on that day but on some other after for the Constitution is directed g Gloriosissimo et clementissimo filio Iustiniano Vigilius Episcopus ita incipit Constit Vigil apud Bar. an 553 nu 50. and was sent h Vigilius pollicitus fuit se missurum decretuÌ suum seu Constitutum ad ipsum Imperatorem atque ad Syodum quod et ingenue praestitit Bar. an eodem nu 47. to the Emperour that could not be before the fourteenth day on which it is dated and in likelihood the Emperour both read and examined it with leasure before he sent it from him to the Councell the length of the Constitution may easily perswade any that one day was little enough for that businesse supposing no other affaires to have distracted the Emperour Binius considering this and being better advised hereof dissenting from the Cardinall herein tels us that the Constitution was read in their sixt Collation which was on the nineteenth k 14. Kalendas Iunias Coll. 6. in initio of May i Oblatum fuisse Concilio Vigilij constitutum c. quibus non obscure significatur idem Constitutum in sexto illo Patrum confessu recitatum fuisse Bin. Not. ad Conc. 5. pa. 610. a. et Ex Actis Concilii non obscure colligitur ipsum Constitutum insexto Confessu Episcoporum recitatum fuisse idem pa 606. b. foure or five dayes after the date and publishing of it So uncertaine and unlikely is that of which the Cardinall sayth Cognoscitur it is knowne to belong to the fift Collation 3. But indeed as the Imperiall Edict was not so neither was this Papal Constitution publikely read either in the fift or sixt or any other Collation of this Synod much lesse was it ever any part of the Synodall Acts thereof The Emperour and so all the Bishops of the Synod laboured as much as they could to draw the whole Church to unity of faith with themselves especially Pope Vigilius whose consent might happily draw after it if not the whole yet a great part of the Westerne Church which were most earnest in defence of the Three Chapters They knew that in particular and by name to condemne Vigilius or his Constitution might not only have exasperated but even utterly alienated the minde of Vigilius and made him and with him his adherents more obstinate in their heresie They sought by silence to conceale and by charity to suppresse as much as they could that hereticall and disgracefull Constitution of his and by their lenity and faire meanes to gaine him and his consent to them yea even to the truth it selfe for this cause though they knew full well that Vigilius had set out that decree yea though they confuted all the substance thereof and condemned both it and him in generalities yet they forbare at all to name Vigilius or in particular to meÌtion this his decree that had beene to proclame hostility and have made an absolute breach betwixt them and Vigilius for ever 4. Besides this which was a very just reason not so much as to publish as they did not that Constitution in their Synod the Emperour had alwayes a purpose to have as in the seventh Collation was done the Epistles of Vigilius to Rusticus and Sebastianus to Valentinianus and others opeÌly read published in the Councel In them Vigilius by his Apostolicall authority decreeth the condemning of the three Chapters what a disgrace had this beene to Vigilius to publish first his Apostolicall Constitution in defence and shortly after his Apostolicall Constitution for condemning the same Three Chapters How justly might this have incensed Vigilius and for ever with-held him from consenting to them who had proclamed him in their Councell recorded him in their Synodall Acts to bee such a Proteus Nay this had extenuated and vilified for ever the authority of Pope Vigilius the holy Apostolike See to record two constitutions both proceeding ex Tripode fighting ex Diametro and by an unreconciliable contradiction opposed the one to the other Seeing then both the Emperour and the Councell meant by their so often expressing the consent of Vigilius to them and by their reciting his Apostolicall Constitution for condemning the Three Chapters in the seventh Collation seeing they meant hereby to draw
supremacy Againe it convinceth Leo of a very foule and unexcusable errour seeing Leo judged the Nicene Canons concerning matters of order policie and government of the Church such as these are about the extent of Sees or superiority of one Patriarke or Bishop above another to be unalterable and eternall no lesse than the decrees of faith The condition saith hee b Leo Epist 53. of the Nicene Canons in the margent hee points at the sixt and seventh both which concerne the limits of Sees being ordained by the Spirit of God is in no part soluble and whatsoever is diverse from their Constitution omni penitus authoritate vacuum est is utterly voide of all authority by whomsoever it bee decreed fewer or moe Againe c Epist eadem the Nicene fathers after they had condemned Arius made lawes of Ecclesiasticall Canons mansuras usque in finem mundi which are to stand in force untill the end of the world and if ought be any where presumed to bee done otherwise than they have decreed sine cunctatione cassatur it is presently made void Againe d Epist 54. the priviledges of Churches being instituted by the Canons of the holy Fathers and confirmed by the Nicene decrees nulla possunt improbitate convelli nulla novitate mutari they can bee infringed by no improbity they can by no novelty bee altered Againe e Epist 61. concerning Iuvenalis Bishop of Ierusalem who was now truly made a Patriarke for keeping the Statutes of the holy fathers which in the Nicene Synod are confirmed inviolabilibus decretis by inviolable decrees I admonish your sanctity that the lawes of the Churches remaine let no mans ambition covet that which is another mans let no man seeke by impairing another to advance himselfe for though they thinke to strengthen their desires by Councels infirmum atque irritum erit quicquid à praedicatorum patrum Canonibus discreparit whatsoever is diverse from these Nicene Canons shall bee void Lastly f Epist 62. to Maximus Bishop of Antioch let it suffice that I pronounce this in generall ad omnia for all matters concerning limits of Sees and the like that if any thing bee attempted by any man in any Synod against the Statutes of the Nicene Canons nihil praejudicij potest inviolabilibus inferre decretis it can bring no prejudice to these unalterable and inviolable decrees Thus Pope Leo erroniously judging the order set downe in the Nicene Canons for the bounds and preheminence of Bishops to be for ever or by any Councell whatsoever immutable 5. See now the wisedome of the Cardinall in alleaging Pope Leo. If the decree at Chalcedon was not of force because Leo contradicted it then neither can that other decree supposed to bee made in the fift Councell be of force because Leo contradicteth it also for by Leo his judgement at no time by no person by no Councell by no authority can the order set downe at Nice bee changed If that at Chalcedon was not in force to which the Popes Legates consented how can the Cardinall thinke thinke this of the fift Councell to bee of force to which neither Pope nor Legate consented nor was so much as present in the Councell If the judgment of Leo stand for good then neither is nor ever was either Constantinople or Ierusalem Patriarchall Sees then the decree of the eighth Councell g Haec sancta magna Synodus tam in seniori nova Roma quam in sede Alexandriae Antiochiae et Hierosolymorum priscam consuetudineÌ decernit in omnibus conservaâi ita ut eorum praesules universerum Metropolitanorum qui ab ipsis promoventur habeant potestatem ad convocaÌdum eos ad coârcendum et corrigendum Can. 17 Conc. 8. apud Bin. pa. 850. and the h Conc. Later 4. habitum sub Jnnoc 3. ca. 5. Laterane and I know not how many Councels must bee rejected as unlawfull and impious if the judgement of Leo be as by the eighth Councell and their Laterane it is adjudged erronious then was Ierusalem a Patriarchall See notwithstanding the contradiction of Leo to that decree In a word if Leo his judgement be of force it repeales the decreee of the fift eighth and all other generall Councels decreeing this if it be not of force it neither did nor could infringe the decree of Chalcedon So unadvised was the Cardinall in alleaging th the resistance of Leo to that decree 6. And to satisfie the Cardinall yet a little more fully it is an untruth which hee saith i Quo minus ea quae Chalcedone obtinuit Juvenalis executioni mandata essent Leo Rom. Pont. intercessit Nunc ergo primum in Concilio 5. Hierosolymorum Ecclesia Patriarchatu verè aucta cognoscitur Bar. an 553. nu 246. that the Decree of Chalcedon was not put in execution before the time of this fift Synod and this supposed decree therof for the Councell of Chalcedon k Act. 7. decreed that their sentence in advancing IerusaleÌ to a Patriarchall See should stand in force in omni tempore and therfore doubtlesse even then and from that very time it was truely a Patriarchall See the contradiction of Leo no more hindring it the very next or second yeare than it did two hundred or two thousand yeares after that decree made Againe as it is certaine for the See of Constantinople that it both before and after the Decree of Chalcedon which was not inotrductory but confirmative in that point exercised Patriarchall authority Iustinian also by his Imperiall law l Novel 131. ca. 1 et 2. made some twelve m Data est Novel Basilio Coss ut in sine ejus liquet is vero est annus Regni Justiniani 15. et Conc. 4. habitum an Iust 27. yeares before the fift Councell confirming the same and so it is not to bee doubted but the Church of Ierusalem did the very like in it owne Patriarchall Diocesse especially considering that the Imperiall law of Iustinian is as forcible n Saucimus vicem legum obtinere sanctas Ecclesiasticas regulas quae à sanctis 4. Concilijs expositae sunt aut firmatae Nov. eadem ca. 1. for the one as for the other So that for any one to have denyed or sought then to have infringed the Patriarchall authority confirmed to Constantinople conferred to Ierusalem by the Councell of Chalcedon had brought him into danger not onely of Ecclesiasticall censure but of civill punishments and of the Emperours high indignation o Act. 5. pa. 455. et seq Or if the Cardinall will not bee satisfied unlesse hee see the practice of that Patriarchall authority let him looke in the general Councell under Mennas and there hee shall see Iohn Bishop of Ierusalem hold a Provinciall Councell of the Bishops of the three Palestines qui sub eo sunt who were under him two of which as by their subscriptions appeare were the Metropolitane Bishops of Caesarea and Scythopolis with thirty moe so
3. ad tom 6. Act. Conc. Eph. p. 907 which Theodoret made to the Nestorians at Chalcedon during the time of that Ephesine Councell of which Peltanus sayth Theodoret is caryed insano impitu with a furious rage against Cyrill and the other Orthodoxall Bishops of the holy Councell comparing them to Serpents Basiliskes murderers and the like Neither doth he onely vomit out his choler against them but he plainly girded at the Emperour also Did he accuse none when he uttered all this Nay he d Theod. loc cit affirmes Catholikes which hold Christ God and man to be one person and so to be passible to be worse than Heathens The Heathens sayth he taught the Heaven the Sun and the Starres to be impassible and shall wee beleeve the onely begotten Son of God to be passible and such as may dye Absit Salvator ne sic simus Apostatae farre be this from us O Saviour let us not be such Apostates as to teach this let us not suspect that our Saviour could suffer Let any man now judge whether it be not a shamelesse untruth which those Epistles avouch that Theodoret was not reproved for this doctrine no not lightly reproved in all those 26. yeares whereas both then and ever since the whole Catholike Church hath accursed his impiety and heresie which he so insolently then preached And omitting infinite like proofes of the falshood of that Epistle the next yeare after the Ephesine Councell there was a Synod e Tom. 5. Act. Eph. Conc. ca. 5. pa. 831. pa. 927. held at Antioch where Iohn and divers other Bishops concluded the full union with Cyrill wherein they all condemne anathematize the heresies of Nestorius which their profession of faith and this condemning of the Nestorian heresie Iohn sent both to Cyrill to Pope Sixtus and to Maximianus Bishop of Constantinople Now seeing Theodoret not onely in former time had beene so violent and furious in defence of that doctrine but then and long after continued in the same minde was not his doctrine reproved nay was it not accursed and anathematized by Iohn Patriarch of Antioch and many other Bishops subject to his Patriarchship What a most vile and shameless untruth then is it which the Impostor makes Theodoret to utter that in the whole space of 25. or 26. yeares he neither accused any nor was accused nor reproved no not lightly reproved either by Iohn or any other but that all and every one of his writings contained the true doctrine of the Church But enough of those Epistles which to be forged and false this which is already sayd may for this time suffice 11. Having now declared how untrue that is which Baronius affirmeth that Theodoret after the union did never embrace the heresies of Nestorius and withall seene how weake and unsound his proofe is in this point I will yet adde one consideration which will further manifest and even demonstrate the same That is taken from the history of Theodoret. Certaine it is that when Theodoret writ that history he was earnestly addicted to Nestorianisme whereof in the very last Chapter f Lib. 5. ca. 40. he gives an eminent proofe commending Theodorus Bishop of Mopsvestia for a worthy teacher of the whole Church and for an oppugner of all heresies adding that whereas he was a Bishop thirty six yeares he never ceased optimam herbam sanctis Christi ovibus suppeditare to feed the flocke of Christ with the best herbes None can doubt but hee who so much extolleth so detestable an heretike and approveth those most damnable heresies which from him Nestorius suckt for the best herbes or doctrines but he must needs be confessed to bee as deepe in Nestorianisme as Nestorius himselfe If now it may appeare that this history was writ by him after the union there can no doubt remaine but that after the union Theodoret favoured Nestorius and all his heresies 12. Baronius knowing this inevitably to follow to decline the whole force of this tels g an 427. nu 28 us that Theodoret writ his history not onely before the union but before the jarre also yea before the time of the holy Councell at Ephesus whereof having given some sleight conjectures in the end he concludes Dicendum est It must be sayd that Theodoret writ this history in the space of those three yeares which were next precedent to the holy Ephesine Councell So he Shall I say the Cardinall was deceived and overseene herein No I will not suspect that such an evident error could creepe into the minde of so exact an Annalist I rather thinke his intent was wilfully and wittingly to deceive others and that therefore hee sayd this to smother that truth touching Theodorets continuance in Nestorianisme which he elsewhere so often denieth Theodoret h Lib. 5. hist Eccl. ca. 36. mentioneth in that his history the translation of the body or reliques of Chrysostome and bringing them to Constantinople The Cardinall was so far from being ignorant hereof that himselfe citeth i Bar. an 438. nu 6. Theodoret with a memorandum He ante omnes above them all mentioneth this translation but in few words That translation as Socrates k Lib. 7. ca. 44. and Marcellinus l In suo Chron. witnesse was when Theodosius was the sixteenth time Consull that is as the Cardinall also accounteth in the yeare 438. Now seeing the union betweene Iohn and Cyrill was made in the yeare 432. it unavoydably followeth that either Theodoret writ not his History till seven yeares at least after the union and how much more I know not whether 8. 10. or 16. after it for it is uncertaine or if hee writ it as the Cardinall divineth before the Ephesine Synod that he writ it prophetically writing those Acts which happened not till eight or nine yeares after his history was written The truth is an orderly and historicall continuation of things done he doth not write but onely to the death of Theodorus Bishop of Mopsvestia where his history for any such continuation of succeeding matters doth end but to shew and testifie that he writ his history after the yeare 438. hee purposely mentioneth some of those acts which fell out in that yeare and hereof further there may be a presumption because Theodoret as Baronius tels m Ecquid mirum si quod dixerat Sozomenus à Theodoreto repetitum inveniatur Bar. in Martyr Rom. Decemb. 23. us followed Sozomen in his commending of Theodorus of Mopsvestia now Sozomens history was continued unto the 17. Consulship of Theodosius as himselfe witnesseth So that if Theodoret as the Cardinall tels us tooke it out of Sózomen and his booke was not published till the yeare 439. sure the Cardinall of all men had reason to think that Theodoret could not before that time otherwise than prophetically in this point write his history It remaineth now seeing Theodoret was an earnest defender of Nestorius at the time when he writ this
heart I pray you when looked your Cardinalship into the heart of Vigilius how know you that he was not an heretike in heart when he was so hereticall in profession or how know you of S. Hildebrand of Boniface 8. or of any of all the Popes that lived since their times that they were not heretikes and plaine Infidels in heart when their words were Catholike I would gladly for my learning be informed how Bellarmine or the most acute Lynceus of them all do or can know otherwise than by their outward professions what any of all the Popes beleeved and thought in their heart What Innocent the third when he decreed the doctrine of Transubstantiation what Leo the tenth when he condemned Luther or what Paul Iulius and Pius the fourth when they confirmed their Trent Councell How know you that in their hearts they beleeved those doctrines or that they did not dissemble and faine as you say Vigilius did What can you say for Pius the fourth which may not be sayd for Vigilius also Doth Pius say he did before and now doth thinke as the Trent masters doe Pope Vigilius sayth the like and most plainly Eam fidem quam tenetis that faith which you Anthimus Severus and Theodosius doe hold I signifie unto you that I have held and that I doe now hold the same Doth Pius call the Trent Fathers his beloved brethren in Christ so doth Vigilius call those hereticall Bishops his beloved brethren in Christ nay in Liberatus he calls them even Christs Doth Pope Pius professe an unity betwixt himselfe and them all making one body of the Church Pope Vigilius doth the like and he doth it more significantly We sayth he preach this same doctrine that you doe Vt anima una sit cor unum in Deo so that there is in you and mee but one soule and one heart in God How can any speech be cordiall if this testifying himselfe to be one soule and one heart with them doe not come à fibris but onely à labris Doth Pope Pius approve the doctrine of the Trent conspirators So doth Pope Vigilius the doctrine of those Eutychean heretikes Doth Pius condemne and anathematize Lutherans Calvinists and all who thinke or teach otherwise than himselfe and his Trent Conventicle taught or beleeved so doth Pope Vigilius condemne and anathematize all who deny two natures in Christ all who beleeve otherwise than himselfe and his Eutychean fellow heretikes did In all these there is as much to be sayd for Pope Vigilius as for Pope Pius and if you please to adde that one other agreement also as of Vigilius it is sayd that they knew crudelitatem fidei so may it in like manner bee truly sayd of Pope Pius that this did manifest unto all men crudelitatem fidei the cruelty of his and his Trent Councels faith If by these outward acts the Cardinall can know Pius the fourth to have ex animo condemned their Trent heresies why can he not by the like outward acts know Vigilius to have ex animo condemned the Catholike faith If Vigilius for all these outward acts and so many testimonies and evidences of a willing minde did dissemble and thinke in his heart otherwise than he writ how will or can the Cardinall prove unto us that Pius the 4. and the whole Councell of Trent did not dissemble and both write and speake otherwise than they thought in heart Hath the Cardinall some windowes to pry into the secrets of the heart of Pius the fourth and the Trent Councell which are dammed up that he cannot see into the brest of Vigilius If Pope Pius upon his word and writing be to be credited much more is Pope Vigilius seeing he did not only by words and writing teach this hereticall doctrine but which Pius did not he bound himselfe by a sacred oath that hee would teach the same And which is yet a farre greater evidence Vigilius after this did teach the like hereticall doctrine to overthrow the same Councell of Chalcedon in the cause of the Three Chapters which hee did so unfainedly and so cordially that for teaching the same he incurred the just indignation of the Emperour the curse of the holy generall Councell the publike hatred of all Catholikes and if wee may beleeve Baronius even exile and persecution also Why might not the same Vigilius from his heart teach Eutycheanisme as well as Nestorianisme The faces of those two heresies looke contrary wayes indeed but their tayles like Sampsons Foxes are joyned together to undermine the Catholike faith and the holy Councell of Chalcedon Hee who once is proved to be treacherous in this sort and to doe this once from his heart semper praesumitur is alwayes to bee presumed treacherous in the same kinde Hee who did this in the Three Chapters would have done it in Eutycheanisme his heart his desire his purpose at both times was the same the odds was accidental in the oportunity which served better in the one than in the other what need they excuse his teaching Eutycheanisme to have been only labiall when it is cleare his teaching of Nestorianisme was cordiall If they cannot excuse Pope Vigilius for teaching Nestorianisme from his heart which cannot possibly be done what need they be so nice in denying his teaching of Eutycheanisme to have come from the same heart his fault in them both being alike one answer will alike serve for them both 44. But what thinke you meant the Cardinall so to busie himselfe and bee so curious about the heart and secret minde of Vigilius what though hee did not in heart yet exteriori professione by his hereticall writing by his outward confession by that Vigilius condemned the Catholike faith as the Cardinall d Dico Vigilium scripsisse illam Epistolam et damnasse Catholicam fidem saltem exteriori professione Bell. lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 10. §. Respondeo multi acknowledgeth it is the Popes outward profession not his inward cogitation by which wee prove his Chayre to bee fallible what have wee nay what hath the Cardinall or any of them all to doe with Vigilius intent or inward thoughts leave those to his Tribunall who onely e Reg. 8.39 knoweth and seeth the hearts of all the sonnes of men let men who cannot see the heart looke to his words to his writings to that profession by which hee teacheth others If that be hereticall what boots it them though his heart bee orthodoxall Confirma fratres pasce oves are outward acts they looke abroad and outwardly not to the inward and hidden man in the Popes breast If he think as Simon Peter and teach as SimoÌ Magus as Arius Nestorius or Eutyches did is he not an hereticall teacher an hereticall Pope a confirmer of his brethreÌ in heresie a feeder nay a very prisoner of the sheepe with worse weeds than the Socraticall Cicuta If the Pope onely thinke and beleeve heresie why thought is free to wit from
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 PoÌtifical 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 Å¿ 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 the whole Church The learned Author then of this ensuing Tractate foyling the Pope consequently foyleth the whole Romane Church though he take onely Vigilius to taske yet in overturning his Chaire hee overthroweth as hath beene shewed all the Romane religion which is fundamentally in the Popes Decree and the whole Romane Church which is vertually as they teach in his person For if Pope Vigilius not as a private man but as Pope in Cathedra not sitting alone but with his Synod may erre not onely in matter of fact but in matter of faith judicially and doctrinally determining heresie and commanding it to bee received for Catholike truth and if this decision and determination of his bee reversed condemned and accursed in a lawfully called sacred and Oecumenicall Synod approved by the Christian world all which are in the following Treatise punctually and uncontroulably proved against all cavils of moderne Papists Ecquis posthac Paparum numen adoret Will any man hereafter not wholly given over to be infatuated with strong delusions adore the Popes Chaire or kisse his foote or pawne his salvation upon his Cathedrall determination By all this discourse thou maist see Christian Reader the maine scope of the Author I shall not need to inlarge upon other questions of lesser moment though now more in vogue which upon the by and occasionally this learned Writer accutely handleth both in this worke and others especially in that imposed upon him by our late Soveraigne of blessed memory in defence of our Church Chap. 35 36 37 38 78. Wherfore sith the Composer of this Treatise is most orthodoxall the argument of great importance the manner of handling very exact and accurate I doubt not but thou wilt give it such entertainment as that thereby others may bee incouraged to tread in his steps and to guide thee in the right way What though the worke be of some bulke and waight who ever found fault with gold for that it was too massie and heavy When Tully d Plut. in vit Cicer. was asked which Oration of Demosthenes he liked best hee answered the longest and questionlesse in bookes of this nature caeteris paribus the largest which meete with all possible or at least probable objections and solidly refutes them give the best satisfaction Is it not a shame to see in many mens studies idle Poems Astreas Guzmans and play-books in folio but divinity books in decimo sexto or slender paÌphlets stitcht up in blew coats without any cognizaÌce glancing at Church or State or treÌching upon Controversies better buried alive than to bee revived after they are dead which are cryed up by the common adversary of purpose to foment discords betweene the professors of the Gospell that whilst Pastores odia exercent Lupus intret Ovile the shepheards are at strife the Wolfe may make havocke of the flocke which I speake not for a justitium to any errour or that I wish any way should bee given to those plausible tenents to corrupt reason which one of late fitly compared to flat bottom'd Boates sent from our neighbouring Countries to land Popery in England But first my desire is that all that agree in the love of the same truth may seeke that truth in love and continually e Psal 122. pray for the peace of Ierusalem next I pray that f Phil. 1.9 our love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and in all judgment that wee may discerne things that differ and so seeke by all good and lawfull meanes to destroy the wrigling tayle of the Adder whose head was smitten off 1200. yeares agoe in a Synod at Palestine that yet our principall care bee to drive out the Romish Basiliske or rather the g Apoc. 9.11 King of the Locusts against whose poyson I commend the ensuing Discourse as a soveraigne antidote Lambeth April 26. Anno Dom. 1631. Thine in the Lord Iesus DANIEL FEATLEY THE CONTENTS OF THE SEVERALL CHAPTERS CONTAINED IN THIS ENSVING TREATISE Cap. 1. THat Iustinian assembled the fift generall Councell at Constantinople to define the doubt of faith which arose about the Three Chapters Pag. 1. Cap. 2. That the fift Generall Councell when Pope Vigilius wilfully refused to come unto it was held without the Popes presence therin either by himselfe or by his Legates pag. 4. Cap. 3. That Pope Vigilius during the time of the fift Councell published his Apostolicall Constitution in defence of the Three Chapters p. 7. Cap. 4. That the holy Generall Councell in their Synodall judgement contradicted the Popes Apostolicall Constitution and definitive sentence in that cause of faith made knowne before unto them Pag. 14. Cap. 5. The first Exception of Baronius pretending that the cause of the Three Chapters was no cause of faith refuted Pag. 36. Cap. 6. That the first reason of Vigil touching the First Chapter why Theodorus of Mopsvestia ought not to be condemned Because none after their death ought Noviter to bee condemned concernes the faith and is hereticall Pag. 47. Cap. 7. That the second reason of Vigilius touching the First Chapter why Theodorus of Mopsvestia ought not to bee condemned because hee dyed in the peace and Communion of the Church is erronious and untrue Pag. 58. Cap. 8. That the third and last reason of Vigilius touching the First Chapter why Theodorus of Mopsvestia ought not to bee condemned because he was not condemned by former Fathers and Councels is erronious and untrue Pag. 67. Cap. 9. That Vigilius besides divers personall held a doctrinall errour in faith in his defence of the Second Chapter which concernes the writings of Theodorus against Cyril Pag. 91. Cap. 10. That Vigilius and Baronius erre in divers personall points or matters of fact concerning the Third Chapter which was the Epistle of Ibas unto Maris Pag. 107. Cap. 11. That Vigilius and Baronius in their former reason for defence of the Epistle of Ibas drawne from the union with Cyrill mentioned in the later part of that Epistle doe defend all the heresies of the Nestorians Pag. 112. Cap. 12. That Vigilius and Baronius in their later reason for defence of the Epistle of Ibas taken from the words of Ibas wherein he confesseth Two natures and One Person to be in Christ doe maintaine all the heresies of the Nestorians Pag. 138. Cap. 13. Two assertions of Baronius about the defenders of the Three Chapters refuted and two other against them confirmed the one That to dissent from the Pope in a cause of faith makes one neither an heretike nor a Schismatike the other That to assent in faith to the Pope or present Church of Rome makes one both an Heretike and a Schismatike Pag. 170. Cap. 14. The second Exception of Baronius excusing Vigilius from heresie For that hee often professeth to hold the Councell of Chalcedon and the faith thereof refuted Pag. 199. Cap. 15. The third Exception of Baronius in excuse of Vigilius taken from his confirming of the fift Councell answered and
such a milde and mercifull disposition that though they dislike and condemne those assertions of the Popes supremacy of authoritie and infallibility of judgement yet are they so charitably affected to the Defenders of those assertions that they dare not themselves nor can indure that others should call them heretickes or accursed Durus est hic sermo this is too harsh and hard See here the fervour and zeale of this holy Councill They first say Cursed be the defenders of this Epistle or any part thereof As much in effect as if they had said Cursed be Vigilius Baronius Bellarmine and all who defend the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is all that are members of the present Church of Rome Cursed be they all And not contenting themselves herewith they adde Cursed be he who doth not accurse the defenders of that Epistle or of any part thereof As much in effect as if they had said Cursed be every one who doth not accurse Vigilius Baronius Bellarmine and all that defend the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is all that are members of the present Romane Church Cursed be he who doth not accurse them all The holy Council no doubt had an eye k Nos timenâes maledictionem quae imminet his qui negligenter opera Domini faciunt Col. 8. pa. 584. a. to the words of the Prophet Ieremy l Ier. 48.10 Cursed be he that doth the worke of the Lord negligently Cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood To spare when God commands and whom he commands to curse or kill is neither pitty nor piety but meere rebellion against the Lord and pulls downe that judgement which God himselfe threatned m 1 King 20.42 to Ahab Because thou hast let goe out of thine hand a man whom I appointed to dye thy life shall goe for his life 23. What then is there no meanes no hope of such that they may be saved God forbid Far be it from my heart once to thinke or my tongue to utter so hard a sentence There is a meanes and that after the Scripture the Councill expresly and often sets downe even were they denounce all those Anathemaes for thus they say n Col. 8. saept They who defend Theodorus the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill the impious Epistle of Ibas or the defenders of them et in his vsque ad mortem permanent and continue in this defence untill they dye let such be accursed Renounce the defence of these Chapters and of the Defenders of them that is forsake and renounce that position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in defining causes of faith renounce the defence of all that defend it that is of the whole present Romane Church Come o Apoc. 18.2.3.4 out of Babylon the habitation of devils the hold of all vncleane spirits which hath made all nations drunke with the wine of her fornication which themselves p Iohannes in Apocalypsi passim Roma vocal Babylonem Bell lib. 2. de poât Rom. cap. 2. § Praterea Babylon quae casura âradicitur Roma quidem est Râber in cae 14. in Apoc. pa. 377. Et. Roma qualis in fine saeculi futura est ib. pa. 378. Iohannes loquitur de Roma qualo sub fineÌ mundi futura est Gretz Def. ca. 13. lib. 3. de Rom. pont pa. 927. Babylon quam esse Romam ait lib 7. pa. 228. sedes et civitas antichristi est Sand. lib. 8. de visib Monar ca. 48. cannot but acknowledge to be meant of Rome This doe and then Come q Isa 55.7 unto the Lord and he will have mercy and to our God for he is very ready to forgive All your former impieties heresies and blasphemies shall not be mentioned unto you but in the righteousnes and Catholike truths which ye then embrace you shall live If this they will not doe we accuse them not we accurse them not they have one who doth both accuse and accurse them even this holy general Council whose just Anathemaes shal as firmely binde them before God in heaven as they were truly denounced by the Synod here on earth for he hath sealed theirs and all like censures with his owne signet who r Matth. 18.18 said Whatsoever ye binde upon earth shall be bound in heaven 24. After all these just Anathemaes denounced as well in generall as in particular by the Councill against the defenders of these Three Chapters or any one of them the holy Synod sets downe in the last place one other point as memorable as any of the former And that is by what authority they decreed all these things of which they thus say s Col. 8. pa. 588. a. we have rightly confessed these things quae tradita sunt nobis tam à divinis scripturis which are delivered unto us both in the divine scriptures and in the doctrines of the holy Fathers and in the definitions of faith made by the foure former Councils So the holy Councill Whence it doth evidently ensue that to teach and affirme that the Pope in his judiciall and cathedrall sentence of faith may erre and define heresie and that Vigilius in his constitution de facto did so is a truth consonant to Scriptures fathers and the foure first general Councils But on the other side to maintaine or affirme as do all who are members of the present Romane Church that the Popes cathedrall sentence in causes of faith is infallible is an hereticall position repugnant to Scriptures Fathers and the 4. first Councils and condemned by them all So at once the Holy Councill judicially defineth both our faith to be truly ancient Apostolical the selfe same which the Holy Fathers generall Councills and the Catholike Church professed for 600 yeares and the doctrine of the present Romane Church even that fundamentall position on which all the rest doe relye to be not onely new but hereticall such as none can maintaine but even thereby he oppugneth and contradicteth both the Scriptures Fathers the foure first general Councils and the Catholike Church for 600 yeares after Christ 25. Further yet because one part of their sentence is the accursing of all who defend the Three Chapters either expresly as did Vigilius or implicitè and by consequent as do all who maintaine the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is al who are members of the present Romane Church and so die it cleerely ensueth from that last clause of the Councill that to condemne and accusse as heretikes all these yea all which doe not accurse these is by the judgement of this whole generall Council warranted by Scriptures by Fathers by the foure first generall Councils and by the Caholike Church for 600 yeares after Christ The judgement of this fifth Council being consonant to them all and warranted by them all 26. Neither is their Decree consonant onely to precedent Fathers and Councils but approved and
f Herm. an 547. CoÌtractus Gotofridus g Gotof. an 527. Viterbiensis Otho Frisingensis h Otho an 528. Palmerius i Palm in Chr. an 557. their owne Genebrard k Geneb an 537. Stapleton l Stapl. Counterbl ca. 15. and many others These following Anastasius relate the cause of his banishmeÌt to have bin the not restoring of Anthimus the time before the death of the Empresse Theodora Nor I can finde so much as one either ancient or later writer who saith with Baronius that hee was banished after the fift Councell and for refusing to consent unto it what a rare Poeticall conceit hath the Cardinall who can make such a noble discourse of that fictitious banishment and commend it as an historicall narration for the warrant of which he had not so much as one writer and one is a small number ancient or late upon whose credit and authoritie he might report it and for that one witnesse Anastasius whom he nameth he is so farre from testifying it that he doth clearely testifie the quite contrary yea Baronius himselfe was not ignorant hereof but knew right well Anastasius to referre m Hoc plane tempore accidisse noscuntur quae Anastasius jungit imo confundit cum prioribus quae acciderunt vivente adhuc Theodora Bar. an 552. nu 8. the beating of Vigilius his flight to Chalcedon the other indigne usage set downe by him and his exile to the time while Theodora lived and therefore hee taxeth Anastasius for confounding those things and referring them to that time whereas himselfe placeth them after the death n Caetera quae sequuntur in Anastasio post obitum Theodorae contingerunt Bar. an 547. nu 27. Jnter illa caetera est Vigilij exilium of Theodora And yet for all this though he knew Anastasius to teach the quite contrary yet was not the Cardinall afraid nor ashamed to alleage Anastasius for a witnesse that Vigilius was cast into banishment after the fift Councell and for refusing to consent unto it and to say of this banishment Liquet ex Anastasio it is clearly knowne out of Anastasius whereas not that but the quite contrarie Liquet ex Anastasio 17. From hence now there issueth another consequent to bee remembred It is agreed by all who mention any banishment of Vigilius and it is confessed also by Baronius that Vigilius was but once banished and from that one freed by the intreaty of Narses Now that one cannot bee the Baronian banishment for of it there is no proofe at all to bee found no one author to witnesse it but the Cardinall and his owne ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which in matters of fact done some thousand and more yeares before the Cardinall was borne is of no worth at all nor can be esteemed ought but one of his owne dreames and figments Againe that one cannot bee the Anastasian banishment which is said to happen before the death of Theodora more than foure yeares before the fift Councell for it is certaine by the Acts of the fift Synod o Conc. 5. Coll. 1 2 3 et 8. that Vigilius at that time was at Constantinople yea that untill then he lived and dwelt p Contigit Vigilium in hac regia urbe degentem omnibus interesse c. Coll. â pa. 584. a. at Constantinople Seeing then Vigilius was neither banished before the Councell as Anastasius saith nor banished after the Councell as Baronius saith it followeth which indeed is very truth that Vigilius was not at all banished but all which is reported of his banishment and all that depends thereon is fictitious and Poeticall devised by two Bibliothecarij to his Holinesse the former and precedent to the Councell is an Anastasian the other following the Councell is a Barbarian Poeme but both Poems both fabulous and Aesopicall narrations 18. And truly might wee be allowed to imitate the Cardinals Arte in disputing this matter would easily be made plaine There is one Topicke place of arguing à testimonio negativè which is very familiar to Baronius in his Annals q Vid Bar. an 774. nu 10.11 and it is defended by Gretzer in his Apology r Respondissemus hanc argumentandi rationem ab authoritate negativè in eis praesertim quae ad historiam spectant non esse prorsus infirmam et elum bem Gretz Apol pro Bar. ca. 1 § Peritius for Baronius let us take but one example and that also in this our present cause concerning Vigilius There is in Anastasius Å¿ Anast in vit Vigil a narration how Vigilius was violently puld away from Rome by Anthemius Scribonius sent thither for that purpose by the Empresse how he was apprehended in the Church thrust into the shippe how the Romanes followed reviling t Populus caepit jactare post cum lapides fustes et cacabos et dicere Fames tua tecum male invenias ubi vadis c. him cursing him and casting stones and dung at him praying that a mischiefe might goe with him Thus it is historified by Anastasius The like is mentioned by many others who borrowed it out of Anastasius by Aimonius * Aim lib. 2. de gest Franc. ca. 32 by the Historia Miscella u Hist misc lib. 16. going under the name of Paulus Diaconus though it be not his by Marianus x Mar. an 553. Scotus by Hermanus y Her an 547. Contractus by Sigebert z Sig. an 543. by Luitprandus a Luitp in vita Vigil de vitis Pontificum as the booke is called by Albo b Alb. in vita Vig. Floriacensis by Platina c Plat. in vita Vig. by Conrade d Conr. Ab. Vrsper an 527. by Nauclerus e Nauc an 540. by Martinus f Mart. in vita Vig. Polonus by Blondus g Blond Dec. 1. lib. 6. by Krantzius h Krant Met. lib. 2. by Sigonius i Sigeb lib. 19. de Occ. Imp. an 545. others Heare now the Cardinals censure of this narration of Anastasius and the rest who followed him Aperti mendacij k Bar. an 546. nu 54. redarguitur Anastasius Anastasius is convicted of a manifest lye herein and how prove you that my Baronius res adeo ignominiosa so ignominious a matter as this is could not have beene unknowne to the Authors who writ most accurately the Acts of their times and those were Facundus and Procopius the Cardinall names no moe from the silence and omission of this matter in them two he concludes Anastasius to be a lyar and his narration seconded by many moe to be a lye 19. Let now but the like liberty of disputing à Testimonio negativè be allowed unto us and the Baronian banishment to begin with that must be rejected banished and set in the same ranke with that lye of Anastasius for thus wee may argue This banishment of Vigilius after the end of the fift Councell and for refusing
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 giveÌ 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