from the Anathema Thus the Councell all of them with one voyce proclaming Pope Vigilius for a lewd dealer who commends and that even in his Apostolicall Constitution a false and forged writing for the true Epistle of S. Cyrill 24. It is true Vigilius is not the first Pope who hath blemished their See by such false and fraudulent dealing Zozimus and Bonifacius were long before this taxed and that justly bâ— the Africane Bishops for downe facing the Nicene Canons Vigilius was too too bold with Cyrill as now you see But if you descend to Pope Nicholas or to Gregory the seventh and their successors they were so shamelesse and audacious in this kinde that they scarce writ any decrees of importance but they stuffed them with such Fathers Even the basest and most abject fictions which were voyd not onely of truth but of braine were fittest for the Popes and their Pontificall determinations and were they never so base and bastardly yet the Popes like kind Godfathers could when they listed christen them with the names of S. Cyrill Cyprian or the like and then they must be called or esteemed for no others than holy and reverend Fathers 25. Proclus followeth In whose writings Vigilius found three testimonies to prove that Theodorus being dead was not to be condemned The first is out of his Epistle to Iohn Bishop of Antioch where these words are alleaged When did I write to you oportere aut Theodorum aut alios quosdam qui pridem defuncti sunt anathemate subdi that either Theodorus or others being dead ought to be anathematized The second is out of the same Epistle I rejected indeed those Chapters annexed to my Tome as being impious neque autem de Theodoro neque de alio quoquam qui jam defuncti sunt but I neither writ of Theodorus nor of any other who is dead that they should be anathematized or rejected The third is out of an Epistle of Proclus to Maximus I understand that the names of Theodorus of Mopsvestia and of some other is prefixed to the Chapters ad anathematizandum to bee anathematized together with the Chapters cum illi ad Deum jam migrarunt whereas they are now departed to God and it is needlesse to injure them being now dead quos nec vivos aliquando culpavimus whom being alive we did never reprove These are the Popes allegations out of S. Proclus in which I confesse it is clearely taught that neither any after their death may bee condemned and particularly that not Theodorus seeing he is gone to God and was never in his life time once reproved 26. It is a rule in law semel malus semper praesumitur esse malus He who is once convicted of any crime is presumed still to be faulty in that kinde Vigilius being lately convicted to commend forgeries for the writings of Fathers is in reason and equitie to bee thought to alleage such a S. Proclus as before hee did S. Cyrill Nay there needs no presuming in this matter there is evident proofe and witnesses above exception to manifest the same even the whole fift generall Councell who out of the true and undoubted writings of Proclus testifie that Proclus taught the quite contrary both that the dead might and particularly that Theodorus ought to be condemned and that hee was by Proclus himselfe condemned for in their very Synodall decree they thus write Because the disciples of Theodorus most evidently oppugning the truth thus sharply do they reprove Vigilius doe alleage certaine sayings of Cyrill and Proclus as written for Theodorus It doth appeare that those Fathers doe not free him from the Anathema but speake those things dispensativè by way of dispensation and in the very words of dispensation they declare of him quod oportet anathematizari Theodorum that Theodorus ought to be anathematized adding that they have demonstrated this even out of the words of Cyrill and Proclus which they writ ad condemnationeÌ„ ejus for the condemning of Theodorus Thus writ the Councell unto which the whole Catholike Church hath ever since subscribed Seeing then it is certaine that Proclus both taught that Theodorus ought to be condemned and did himselfe write to condemne him there can bee no doubt but that those Epistles to Iohn and Maximus which Vigilius citeth and wherein Proclus is made to avouch the quite contrary that neither himselfe did nor that any ought to condemne Theodorus are forged in the name of Proclus by such hands as had wrought the like feat in Cyrill And if either those Epistles were extant for in that of Proclus to Iohn recorded in the fift Councell there is no such thing at all or had this Constitution of Vigilius beene published and knowne to the Councell before they had fully examined and cleared this Chapter touching Theodorus it is not to bee doubted but the one of them if not both would have discovered this forgery also 27. Besides all which there are divers evident prints of a false and hereticall hand in those Epistles Is it injury as that forged Proclus affirmeth to condemne the dead Nay it is even hereticall and that by the judgement of the whole Catholike Church as before we have proved to say that the dead may not be condemned Had Proclus writ or said this he had condemned the Councels of Sardica of Constantinople of Ephesus as injurious unto the dead nor them onely but he had condemned himselfe who as we have now demonstrated both condemned the dead and taught that Theodorus though dead ought to bee condemned 28. Did Theodorus at his death goe as this forged Proclus affirmeth to the Lord a blasphemer an heretike equall by the judgement of Proclus himselfe to the Iewes and Pagans and of the same ranke with Arius Macedonius Eunomius and Nestorius such a blaspheming heretike goe unto the Lord why then did the Ephesine Councell why did Saint Cyrill why did Proclus himselfe adjudge him to bee anathematized that is separated from the Lord Heretikes and impious persons as living they goe not in the wayes of the Lord but in their owne wayes so dying they goe like Iudas to their owne place not to the Lord not to his habitation and place of rest the Saints and they onely goe that way To them onely he saiâ—h This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise 29. Was Theodorus not so much as blamed no not so much as once in his life as the forged Proclus saith It seemes Leontius borrowed his most partiall speech before mentioned out of this Proclus and was too credulous unto it But the true Proclus living so neare to the time of Theodorus could not bee ignorant nor would ever have uttered so foule an untruth for although the Church pronounced no publike censure by name against him yet was he reproved and blamed not onely by others complaining of his erroneous doctrine but even by Theophilus B. of Alexandria and Gregory Nissene This the fift Councell witnesseth
of those words Whatsoever ye binde or loose upon earth Pope Gelasius collecteth and Vigilius consenteth unto him that such as are not upon earth or among the living hos non humano sed suo Deus judicio reservavit God hath exempted them from humane and reserved them to his owne judgement nec audet Ecclesia nor dare the Church challenge to it selfe the judgement of such As the Pope so also the holy generall Councell tooke this for no other than a question of faith for they plainly professe even in their Synodall resolution that their decree concerning dead men that they may bee Noviter condemned is not onely an Ecclesiasticall tradition but an Apostolicall doctrine also warranted by the texts and testimonies of the holy Scriptures To which purpose alledging divers places of Scripture they adde these words It is many wayes manifest that they who affirme this that men after their death may not Noviter be condemned nullam curam Dei judicatorum faciunt nec Apostolicarum pronunciationum nec paternarum traditionum that such have no regard either to the word of God or the Apostles doctrine or the tradition of the Fathers So the whole Councell judging and decreeing Pope Vigilius to be guilty of all these 4. Now when both the Pope on the one side and the whole generall Councell on the other that is both the defenders and condemners of this Chapter professe it to be a doctrine taught in the Scripture and therefore undoubtedly to be a cause of faith what insolency was it in Baronius to contradict them both and against that truth wherein they both agree to deny this Chapter to be a cause of faith or seeing it is cleâ—re both by the Pope and Councell that the resolution of this question is set downe in Scripture what else can bee thought of Baronius denying either the one or the other part to bee a cause or assertion of faith but that with him the doctrines defined and set down in Scriptures are no doctrines or assertions of faith at least not of the Cardinals faith 5. Seeing now this is a cause of faith and in this cause of faith the Pope and generall Councell are at variance either of them challenge the Scripture as consonant to his and repugnant to the opposite assertion what equall and unpartiall umpire may be found to judge in this matter Audito Ecclesiae nomine hostis expalluit saith their vaine and vaunting Braggadochio Hast thou appealed to the Church to the Church and judgement thereof shalt thou goe at the name of which we are so farre from being daunted or appaled that with great confidence and assurance of victory we provoke unto it 6. But where may we heare the voyce and judgement of the Church out of doubt either in the writings of the Fathers or provinciall Synods or in generall Councels in which of these soever the Church speake her sentence is for us and our side Her voyce is but soft stil in the writings of single Fathers the Church whispereth rather then speaketh in them and yet even in them shee speaketh this truth very distinctly and audibly Heare Saint Austen who entreating of Caecilianus about an hundreth yeares after his death saith If as yet they could prove him to have beene guilty of those crimes which were by the Donatists objected unto him ipsum jam mortuum anathematizaremus I and all Catholikes would even now accurse him though dead though never condemned before nor in his life time Againe In this our communion if there have beene any Traditores or deliverers of the Bible to be burned in time of persecution when thou shalt demonstrate or prove them to have beene such corde carne mortuos detestabor Heare Pope 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 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 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 Iustinian Benignus Bishop of Heraclea and after them both the fift Councell testifieth In this very cause of Theodorus there was a Synod held in Armenia by Rambulas Bishop of Edessa Acatius and others wherein both themselves condemned Theodorus though dead and in their letters to Proclus exhort 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 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 Nicene and in the other under Hadrian which they account to be the seventh and eighth generall Councels In the Councell of Chalcedon Domnus 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 expresly testifieth The like to have beene done against Macedonius by the fift Councell at Constantinople Iustinian 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 vivi alij autem post mortem anathemizati 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
a forgery devised by some knave and therfore we say that Epistle which is recited under the name of Theodoret to Iohn of Antioch Omni ex parte convinci is every way convinced not to bee Theodorets Againe There is an Epistle set downe in the fift Synod under the name of Theodoret written unto Iohn rejoycing in the death of Cyrill and babbling very many things against him which you may more truly call a Satyre or infamous libell than an Epistle And we take it very indignely that it should goe under the name of Theodoret which is rather the figment of some Nestorian and againe it is figmentum impudentissimi cujusdam nebulonis a fiction of some most shameles varlet Thus much more Baronius The like doth Binius with no lesse confidence and virulency against these Acts affirme The maine ground on which they both relye is for that Iohn Bishop of Antioch to whom this Epistle is inscribed was dead before Cyrill How could Theodoret saith Baronius write to Iohn touching the death of Cyrill seeing Iohn was dead seven yeares before Cyrill which saith he exploratum habetur is sure and certaine both by Nicephorus and others who writ the succession of Bishops as also by an Epistle which Cyrill writ to Domnus the successour of Iohn both which proofes Binius also alledgeth 2. My first answer hereunto is that if this bee a demonstration of forgery because an Epistle is written to one that is dead themselves and not we shall be the greatest losers hereby There is a decretall Epistle written by Pope Clement to Iames Bishop of Ierusalem and brother of our Lord in that Epistle the Pope tels Iames how Peter being now ready to bee martyred tooke Clement ordained him Bishop gave him the keyes set him in his owne chayre and when hee was set therein sayd unto him Deprecor te O Clemens O Clement I beseech thee before all that are here present that thou write unto Iames the brother of our Lord how thou hast beene a companion with me of my journyes and of my actions ab initio usque ad finem from the beginning to the end and write also what thou hast heard mee preach in every City what order of words of actions I have used in my preaching and also what an end I make of my life in this City Neither feare that he will be sory for my death seeing he will not doubt but I dye for pieties sake yea it will be a great comfort unto him to heare that I doe not leave my charge to one that is ignorant or unlearned According to this request and command of Peter Clement writ an Epistle to Iames exhorting him that he command all that which Peter taught to be diligently observed This and much more writ Clement to Iames after the death and of the life and death of Peter Now Iames unto whom hee writ was dead sixe or seven yeares before Peter For Iames was slaine in the seventh and Peter in the thirteenth yeare of Nero as out of S. Ierome Eusebius Iosephus and others is evident and as Baronius and after him Binius not onely professe but clearly and rightly prove and because this is a decretall Epistle an Apostolicall writing sent from Clement being Pope which was not till the tenth yeare of Domitian and that is thirty yeares after the death of Iames it hence ensueth that it was writ to Iames thirty yeares after he was dead What shall now become of this decretall and Apostolicall Epistle Will they be content that by the Cardinals demonstration it bee rejected as the forgery of some leud varlet Fye By no meanes Binius cals it the Epistle of Pope Clement Baronius tels us that it is not only Pope Clements but that this and the other written to the same Iames the dead Bishop of Ierusalem are integrae illibatae intire and incorrupted writings of Clement In their Canon law and that corrected by the Pope it is stiled the epistle of Pope Clement to Iames and that which is there related must stand for the words and doctrine of S. Peter yea the authority of it as other decretall Epistles Conciliorū Canonibus pari jure exaequatur is every way equall to the Canons of Nice of Chalcedon of other holy Councels If that bee too little what Saint Austen sayth of the very sacred Canonicall Scriptures indited by the Spirit of God himselfe that doth Gratian wretchedly abusing Saint Austens words apply to this and the rest of the Popes decretall Epistles saying of them Inter Canonicas Scripturas decretales Epistolae connumerantur the decretall Epistles are to be reckoned among the Canonicall Scriptures Bellarmine not onely in generall defends this saying of Gratian telling us that the decretals may well be called Canonicall that is either such as are a rule and have force to binde or Canonicall in that sense as the seventh Synod calleth the Decrees of Councels Constitutions inspired from God but particularly also he defends by the authority of Ruffinus this to be the true Epistle of Pope Clement unto Iames and to omit others their Iesuite Turrian to whom Baronius Binius Gretzer and others refer us for the credit of these Epistles hath writ a whole booke in defence of them wherein he cals them and particularly he mentioneth and defendeth this of Clement to Iames sanctissimas verissimas c. most holy most true Epistles most worthy of their authors that is men Apostolike consecrated by the reverence of the whole word full of all gravity learning and sanctity confirmed by the testimony and use of all ages and which is most worthy remembring for our present purpose the Iesuite writes in defence of them thus What if in these Epistles sometimes there meet us some such matters as are not easie to all must wee therefore doubt of their authority by no meanes Therefore if any man doe not understand how the Epistle of Clement could bee written to Iames the brother of our Lord who was dead more than eight yeares before such an one if he be a learned modest and temperate man he will ask of others and in the meane space containe himselfe within his owne bounds that is as himselfe explaineth handling this Epistle he must so firmly hold it to be written by Pope Clement ut dubitare nefas existimet that he esteeme it a great sinne to doubt thereof Besides all this the Iesuite hath a large Chapter purposely to defend and shew this Epistle to be truly Clements though it was written to Iames long after he was dead Some there were whom Baronius Possevine and Binius follow who thought it was written indeed by Clement but not unto Iames who was then dead but unto his successor Simeon Against these their owne Turrian holds resolutely that it was writ not
Vigilius Dormitans ROMES SEER OVERSEENE OR A TREATISE OF THE FIFT Generall Councell held at Constantinople Anno 553. under Iustinian the Emperour in the time of Pope VIGILIVS The Occasion being those Tria Capitula which for many yeares troubled the whole Church WHEREIN IS PROVED THAT THE POPES Apostolicall Constitution and definitive sentence in matter of Faith was condemned as hereticall by the Synod And the exceeding frauds of Cardinall Baronius and Binius are clearely discovered BY RICH CRAKANTHORP Dr. in DIVINITIE And Chapleine in ordinary to his late Majestie KING IAMES Opus Posthumum PVBLISHED AND SET FORTH BY His Brother GEO CRAKANTHORP According to a perfect Copy found written under the Authors owne hand LONDON Printed by M. F. for ROBERT MYLBOVRNE in Pauls Churchyard at the signe of the Grey-hound M DC XXXI TO THE RIGHT HONOVRABLE EDVVARD LORD NEVVBVRGE Chancellour of the Duchie of Lancaster and one of the Lords of his Majesties most Honourable Privie Counsell RIGHT HONOVRABLE IN all duty and submission I here present unto your Lordship a Treatise concerning the fift generall Councell held at Constantinople the cause being the Controversie of the Three Chapters which for many yeares troubled the whole Church and was at length decided in this Councell held under Iustinian that religious Emperour This Treatise now printed was long agoe penned by one well known unto your Honour your sincere affection to the truth of God and Gods cause gives mee good assurance of your favourable acceptance hereof I confesse indeed that when I call to minde the manifold affaires wherein your Honour is daily imployed the very thought hereof had almost perswaded mee not to interrupt your more serious affaires by drawing your Honour to the reading or view of this Booke but when I call to minde those respects of love and duty in which the Author hereof stood bound unto your Lordship I was againe incouraged in his name to tender it to your Honour And although I my selfe can challenge no interest in your Lordships favour to offer this yet your Lordship may challenge some interest in the fruits of his labours who was so truely as I can truely speake devoted unto your Honour Among many other hee especially acknowledged two assured bonds of love and duty by which hee was obliged unto you and your friends the former arose from that unfained affection which you ever bare him from your first acquaintance in the Colledge that other by which he was further ingaged unto you and your friends was when in a loving respect had unto him in his absence without any meanes made by him or knowledge of his he was called by that much honoured Knight Sir Iohn Levison his Patron your Father in law unto the best meanes of livelihood he ever enjoyed in the Ministery where spending himselfe in his studies hee ended his dayes during which time your Honour made your affection further knowne unto him by speciall expressions of extraordinary favours In regard whereof I perswaded my selfe that I could no where better crave Patronage for this worke than of your Honour that it may bee a further testimony of his love againe who cannot now speake for himselfe And this I intreat leave to doe the rather because I doubt not but hee acquainted your Lordship with his paines and intent in this and other Tractates of the Councels for when after divers yeares study bestowed in this argument of Councels hee was desirous to make some use of his labours his intent was to reduce all those points into foure severall Bookes 1. That the right of calling generall Councels 2. That the right of highest Presidency in them 3. That the right of the last and supreme Confirmation of them is onely Imperiall and not Papall 4. That all the lawfull generall Councels which hitherto have beene held consent with ours and oppugne the doctrines of the present Church of Rome Some of these hee finished the fourth hee could not so much as hope to accomplish and therefore after the examining of some particulars therein he desisted and weaned himselfe from those studies And yet after some yeares discontinuance being by some of his learned friends sollicited to communicate to others at least some one Tract in that argument consenting to their earnest desire after long suspence he resolved on this Treatise as being for weighty and important matters most delightfull unto him That it was not then published let it not seeme strange unto your Honour for having long since finished the Tract of this whole Councell it was his purpose that it should have undergone the publike view and judgement of the Church but when he came as I can truely testifie unto them whose art and ayde is needfull in such a businesse and found an aversenesse in them for that it wholy consisted of controversall matters whereof they feared that this age had taken a satiety he rested in this answer as willing to bury it After this being upon a speciall command from his Majesty King Iames of blessed memory made known unto him by my Lord his Grace of Canterbury to addresse himselfe to another worke hee then desisted from his former intended purpose and in finishing of that last worke of his he ended his dayes Some few yeares after his death being desirous to take a view of some of his Papers I came to the view and handling of this boooke a booke fully perfected for the Presse in his life time the publishing whereof being long expected and of many earnestly desired it was my desire and theirs to whose most grave and judicious censure I willingly submitted it that it might be published for the benefit of Gods Church and the rather that it might give some light in the study of the Councels and animate some of the threescore valiant men that are about Salomons bed being of the expert and valiant men of Israel unto the attempting and undertaking of the like Now what his desire was in this and other of his labours surely none but the very enemies of God and Gods truth can take it to be any other than to testifie his unfained love unto God and Gods Church and to subdue the pride idolatries and impieties of that Man of sinne and to strive for the maintenance of the true faith Now what allowance so ever it may finde abroad among our adversaries it humbly craves your favourable acceptāce at home and as it is published with no other intent than to gaine glory to God and good to his Church so I doubt not but that God who causeth light to shine out of darknesse will effectually in time bring to passe that not onely their violent oppugning of the truth but their fraudulent dealing also against the same wil if not breed in themselves yet increase in al welwillers unto the truth a constant dislike nay detestation of their hereticall and Antichristian doctrines and for your selfe my earnest and continuall prayer to God shall bee
onely the faith decreed at Nice was corroborated and confirmed And the cause why the Sardican Councell is not reckoned in the order of generall Councels was not that which Bellarmine and Binius fancie because the Sardican and Nicene were held to be one and the same Councell for neither were they so indeed being called by different Emperours to different places at different times and upon different occasions neither were they ever by the ancient or any of sound judgement held for one Synod but the true reason thereof was this because the Sardicane though in dignity authority it was equall to the Nicene yet onely confirmed the Decree of faith formerly made at Nice and made no new or Introductive decree to condemne any heresie as did the other at Nice And truly for the selfe same reason the Church might if they had pleased have done the like to this fift Councell and not have accounted it no more than they did the Sardicane in a distinct number but onely esteemed it a Councell corroborative of the Councell at Chalcedon as that at Sardica was of the Nicene Councell which some Churches also did as by the 14. Councell at Toledo held a little after the sixt generall appeareth wherein this fift being for that cause omitted the sixt held under Constantinus Pogonatus is reckoned as the fift or next Councell to that at Chalcedō But for as much as this cause about the Three Chapters had bred so long and so exceeding great trouble in the Church and because the explanation of the faith made in this fift Councell upon occasion of those Chapters was so exact that it did in a manner equal any former decree of faith and benefit the whole Church as much as any had done it pleased the Church for these reasons with one consent declared first in the sixt Councell and then in the 2. Nicene and divers other after it to account this for the fift and ranke it as it well deserveth in the number of holy and golden generall Councels 22. It now I hope clearely appeareth how unjustly the Cardinall pretends the words of Pope Gregory as denying this to be at all any cause of faith whereas not onely by the Emperour by the fift Councell by the defenders as well as the condemners of these Chapters by succeding generall Councels by Popes even Pope Gregory among the rest by the Catholike Church and consent thereof untill their Laterane Synod but even by their owne writers Cardinall Bellarmine Sanders yea by Baronius himselfe it is evidently proved so nearely to concerne the faith that to defend these Chapters which Vigilius did is to enervate and overthrow and to condemne them which the Councell did is to uphold and confirme the Holy Catholike faith And although this alone if I should say no more were sufficient to oppose to this first Evasion of Baronius yet that both the truth hereof may more fully and further appeare and that the most vile and shamelesse dealing of Baronius in this cause such as I thinke few heretikes have ever parallel'd may be palpable unto all To that which hitherto we have spoken in generall concerning all these Three Chapters I purpose now to adde a particular consideration of each of them by it selfe whereby it will be evident that every one of these Chapters doth so directly concerne the faith that the defence of any one of them but especially of the two last is an oppugnation yea an abnegation of the whole Christian faith CAP. VI. That the first reason of Vigilius touching the first Chapter why Theodorus of Mopsvestia ought not to bee condemned because none after their death ought noviter to be condemned concernes the faith and is hereticall 1. IN the first Chapter wherein Vigilius defēdeth that Theodorus of Mopsvestia being long before dead ought not to bee condemned for an heretike the Popes sentence relyeth on three reasons the examination whereof wil both open the whole cause concerning this Chapter and manifest the foule errors of Vigilius as well doctrinall as personall as well concerning the faith as the fact 2. His first reason is drawne from a generall position which Vigilius taketh as a Maxime or doctrinall principle in divinitie Nulli licere noviter aliquid de mortuorum judicare personis It is lawfull to condemne none after their death who were not in their life time condemned and therefore not Theodorus That Theodorus in his life time was not condemned Vigilius proveth not but presupposeth nor doe I in that dissent from him for although that testimony of Leontius be exceeding partiall and untrue where he saith that Theodorus and Diodorus in pretio habiti mortem oppetiere died in honour neither did any while they lived reprove any of their sayings yet are there divers other inducements to perswade that Theodorus was not in his life time by any publike judgement of the Church either declared or condemned for an heretike for besides that neither Cyrill nor Proclus nor the fift generall Councell doe mention any such matter the words of Cyrill doe plainly import the contrary The Ephesine Synod saith he forbare in particular and by name to anathematize Theorus which they did dispensativè by a certaine dispensation indulgence or connivence because divers held him in great estimatiō or account what needed either any such dispensation or forbearance had he in his life time beene publikely condemned for heresie Againe the Church of Mopsvestia where hee was Bishop for divers yeares after his death retained his name in Diplicis that is in their Ecclesiasticall tables making a thankfull commemoration of him as of other Catholikes in their Liturgie which had he beene in his life time condemned for an heretike they would not have done Lastly what needed the defenders of the Three Chapters have beene so scrupulous to condemne him being dead had he in his life time beene before condemned Or how could this have given occasion of this controversie whether a dead man might Noviter be condemned if Theodorus had not beene noviter condemned when he was dead 3. Wherefore this particular being agreed upon that Theodorus was not before but after his death condemned the whole doubt now resteth in the Thesis whether a dead man may Noviter be cōdemned Now that this is no personall but meerly a dogmaticall cause and controversie of faith is so evident that it might be a wonder that Baronius or any other should so much as doubt thereof unlesse the Apostle had foretold that because men doe not receive the love of the truth therefore God doth send unto them strong delusions that they may beleeve lyes Certaine it is that Pope Vigilius held this for no other but a doctrine of faith for he sets it downe as a Definition or Constitution of his predecessors decreed by the Apostolike See particularly by Pope Leo and Gelasius and so decreed by them as warranted and taught by the Scriptures for out
part willing to thinke better and more favourably of Leo and Gelasius in this matter specially of Leo whose authority when some defenders of the three Chapters objected to Pope Pelagius as according with them Pelagius replyed not onely that hee could no where remember any such thing in the bookes of Leo but that Leo indeed taught the quite contrary as consenting wholly with Saint Austen who professed that he would anathematize Caecilianus after his death if it could appeare that he were guilty of those crimes Which testimony of Pelagius as it fully cleareth Leo of this heresie so doth it manifest how unjustly Vigilius pretendeth his consent with him in this cause yea and the words of Leo which hee citeth doe declare no lesse In that Epistle Leo intreating of those who by the just censure of the Church were excommunicated or who did not performe the acts required in repentance saith If any of them die before hee obtaine remission quod manens in corpore non receperit consequi exutus carne non poterit hee cannot obtaine that to wit remission of his fault being dead which before his death he had not received And upon these follow the words cited by Vigilius Neither is it needfull that we shold fift the merits or acts of them qui sic obierunt who so die seeing our Lord hath reserved to his justice what the priestly ministerie could not performe to wit the loosing of that band of censure or of sinne under which they dyed Thus Leo who denieth not that men after their death may be condemned but that any who in his life time is not may after his death bee pardoned Hee speakes not of such as have not beene in their life time condemned of which onely Vigilius entreateth but of such who being unpenitent or condemned by the Church die in their sin or under that just censure therefore in the state of condemnation So neither doe the words of Leo signifie any such thing as Vigilius by them intended to prove and Pope Pelagius assureth us that Leo taught the quite contrary to that which out of Leo Vigilius in vaine laboureth to prove 21. The very like construction is to bee given of the words of Gelasius in both the places cited out of him by Vigilius In the former entreating of Acatius he thus saith Let no man perswade you that Acatius is freed from the crime of his prevarication for after he had falne into that wickednesse and deserved to be excluded and that jure by right from the Apostolike communion in hac eâdem persistens damnatione defunctus est hee persisting in this condemnation dyed Absolution cannot bee now granted unto him being dead which he neither desired nor deserved while he lived for it was said to the Apostles Whatsoever yee binde on earth But of him these are the words cited by Vigilius who is now under Gods iudgement that is who is dead in this sort it is not lawfull for us to decree ought else but that in quo eum supremus dies invenit wherein hee was found at the time of his death So Gelasius In which words it is evident that hee speakes not as Vigiâ—lius doth of such as in their life time were not condemned nor denieth hee that such may after their death when their heresie is discovered be condemned but of such as being in their life time justly condemned dye impenitent in that estate and of such he denyeth that after their death they can be absolved A truth so cleare that Binius sets this marginall note upon it Qui impoenitens mortuus est excommunicatus post mortem non potest absolvi He who dieth impenitent under the censure of excommunication cannot after his death bee absolved And Gelasius himselfe often repeateth the same most clearly in his Commonitorium to Faustus We reade faith he that Christ raised up some from the dead but we never reade that he forgave or absolved any who were impenitent when they dyed and this power he gave to Peter Whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth on earth saith he namin hac ligatione defunctum nusquam dixit absolvi For Christ never said that any who dyed being so bound should be loosed 22. The same is his meaning also in the other place alleaged by Vigilius In it he intreateth of Vitalis and Misenus who being the Popes Legates had communicated with Acatius and other hereticall sectaries and were for that cause both of them excommunicated by Pope Felix the next predecessor of Gelasius Misenus repenting was received into the communion of the Church Vitalis remaining impenitent died under that just censure when some of Vitalis friends desired the like absolution for Vitalis being dead Gelasius utterly refused to grant it and calling a Romane Synode it was declared in it That Misenus ought in right to be loosed but not Vitalis whom as they professed they gladly would but by reason of his owne impenitency wherein he dyed they could not helpe nor absolve but must leave him which are the words on which Vigilius relyeth to the judgement of God it being impossible for them to absolve him being dead seeing it is said Whatsoever ye shall binde upon earth such then as are not upon earth God hath reserved them not to mans but to his owne judgement Nor dare the Church challenge this unto it So Gelasius and the whole Romane Synode who doe not herein generally deny that any without exception may bee judged being dead for then they should condemne besides many other the holy Councell of Chalcedon which absolved Flavianus and bound or condemned Domnus and both after their deaths but limiting their speach to the present matter which they handled they teach that none who are dead to wit in such state as Vitalis dyed excommunicated and impenitent no such can after their death be judged to wit in such sort as the favourers of Vitalis would have had him adjudged that is absolved or loosed after his death from that censure and that the words of our Saviour doe forcibly conclude seeing whatsoever is bound upon earth is also bound in heaven and seeing such as die in that just bond of the Church are indeed reserved to the onely judgement of God the Church can pronounce no other nor milder sentence then it hath already passed of them That none at all after their death may be condemned by the Church Gelasins saith not and that is the hereticall position which Vigilius should out of Gelasius but doth not prove That none who at their death are justly bound by the Church and dye impenitent therein can after their death be loosed by the Church is a catholike truth which Gelasius teacheth and we all professe this Vigilius firmly by Gelasius doth but should not prove 23. So willing am I to quit Pope Leo and Gelasius from that hereticall doctrine wherewith Vigilius by his Apostolicall decree hath not onely himselfe eternally blemished the Romane See but
death may bee condemned for an heretike is doctrinall yea an heresie in the doctrine of faith That Theodorus dyed in the peace of the Church is an errour personall but that Theodorus therefore dyed in the peace of the Church because he was not in his life time condemned by the expresse sentēce of the Church or that any dying in heresie as Theodorus did doe die in the peace of the Church are errours doctrinall That Theodorus was not by the former Fathers and Councels condēned is a personall error but that Theodorus by the judgement of the Fathers Councels ought not after his death to be condemned is doctrinall even a condemning of the Councels of Ephesus and Chalcedon as guilty of beleeving and teaching an heresie So many wayes is the Popes sentence in this first Chapter erronious in faith of which Baronius most vainely pretendeth that it is no cause of faith no such cause as doth concerne the faith 41. There now remaineth nothing of Vigilius decree concerning this first Chapter but his conclusion of the same And although that must needs of it selfe fall downe when all the reasons on which it relyeth and by which onely it is supported are ruinated or overthrowne yet if you please let us take a short view of it also rather to explane than refute the same His conclusion hath two branches the former is that in regard of the foresaid reasons nostrâ 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 head of the generall Councell Proclus a most holy Bishop whose Epistle as Liberatus saith the Councell of Chalcedon approved Rambulas the piller of the Church the religious Emperours Theodorus 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 Theodorus more than forty times an heretike a craftie impious madde prophane blasphemous execrable heretike onely Pope Vigilius hath not the heart nor courage hee onely with his sectators dare not call him nor cōdemne him for an heretike we dare not condemne him by our sentence 43. And yet when Vigilius saw good hee who durst not doe this durst doe a greater matter he durst doe that which not any of all the former nay which they all put together never durst doe Vigilius durst defend both an heresie and a condemned and anathematized heretike he durst commend forged and hereticall writings under the name of holy Fathers hee durst approve that Epistle wherein an heretike is called and honoured for a Saint he durst contrary to the Imperiall and godly Edict of Theodosius contrary to the judgements of the holy generall Councells defend Theodorus honor his memorie yea honor him as a teacher of truth while he lived as a Saint being dead These things none of all the former ever durst doe in these Vigilius is more bold and audacious then they are all 44. Whence thinke you proceeded this contrariety of passions in Vigilius that made him sometimes more bold then a Lyon and other times more timerous then an Hare Truely even from hence As Vigilius had no eyes to see ought but what favored Nestorianisme so hee had not the heart to doe ought which did not uphold Nestorianisme If a Catholike truth met him or the sweet influence thereof hapned to breath upon him Vigilius could not endure it the Popes heart fainted at the smell thereof but when the Nestorian heresie blew upon him when being full with Nestorius he might say agitante calescimus illo not Ajax not Poliphemus so bold nor full of courage as Pope Vigilius As the Scarobee or beetle 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 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 nec ab alio quopiam condemnari concedimus neither doe wee permit that any other shall condemne Theodorus Nay we decree 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 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 Iustinian yea even the whole catholike Church which hath approved those holy Councells all these out of those very impieties which Vigilius mentioneth have condemned Theodorus them all for wronging and condemning Theodorus for those impieties we doe anathematize and accurse saith Vigilius 47. Consider now seriously with your selves of what faith and religion they are who hold and so doe all the members of the present Romane Church this for a position or foundation of faith that whatsoever any Pope doth judicially and by his Apostolike authority define in such causes is true is infallible is with certainty of faith to bee beleeved and embraced Let
the whole City Not one word of all which is true seeing Eutychius was long before the time of Tiberius restored from banishment at the least 11. or 12. yeares even ever since the crowning of Iustinus who reigned 12. yeares alone before he assumed Tiberius into the society of the Empire This will be further evident by those words of Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople on which Baronius relieth Eutychius was recalled from banishment as the Cardinall teacheth and that rightly in the same yeare wherein Iohannes Scholasticus who was placed in his roome died Now Iohn was Bishop as Nicephorus witnesseth but two yeares and seven moneths Whereupon it certainly followeth that Eutychius was recalled within three yeares after his banishment that is in the very first yeare of Iustinus upon whom hee set the Crowne at the solemnity of his first Coronation as was shewed out of the Historia Miscella and this was full twelve yeares before Tiberius was made Emperour Which demonstrates not onely the untruth and manifold lyes of that Surian Eustathius but another handsome tricke of legerdemaine in Anastasius and Baronius For Anastasius seeing belike that it was needfull for saving the credit of some such like fabler as this Eustathius is that Iohn should bee Bishop twelve yeares he translating the Greeke Nicephorus in stead of two yeares seven moneths puts in twelve yeares and seven moneths and gives so many unto Iohn before Eutychius bee restored and Baronius finding this account in the Anastasian translation followeth it and saith Nicephorus ascribes twelve yeares to Iohn whereas not Nicephorus nor his Greek edition which hath onely two yeares and seven moneths but the Anaâ—asian falsified and corrupted Latine translation hath the other untrue and false accompt of twelve years and seven moneths This if nothing else might be sufficient to refute the whole fiction of that Surian Eustathius the untruths whereof Baronius could not defend but by applauding the untrue and falsified writings of his fellow Bibliothecarius 27. Perhaps you will demand why then did Iustinian banish Eutychius if not for refusing to consent to his opinion and heresie of the Aphthardokites as Eustathius saith which doubt seemes the greater because Nicephorus the Patriarch in his Chronology mentioneth the same cause saying thus Eutychius was cast out of his See by Iustinian eo quod non reciperet edictum ipsius de corpore Christi experte omnis labefactionis because Eutychius would not consent to his Edict that Christs body was incorruptible See here againe I pray you and detest for ever the vile and shamelesse dealing of Anastasius Nicephorus saith not so all that hee saith is that Eutychius was banished because hee would not receive or consent unto the Edict of Iustinian but that which followeth his Edict de corpore Christi incorruptibili wherein is contained the heresie slanderously objected to Iustinian of that Nicephorus hath not one word in his Greeke text that is wholy pacht to him in the Latine translation by the false hand of Anastasius the Arch-corrupter of all writings in his time as I have before more at large declared And yet so are they delighted with lyes corrupted writings this Latine translation thus vilely falsified by Anastasius is set in their Bibliotheca Sanctorum Patrum which much better deserves to bee called a Library of forged or corrupted Fathers and Writers 28. But for what other Edict if not for this of the Aphthardokites was Eutychius banished for that he was expelled from his See there is no doubt that being testified not onely by the Surian Eustathius Zonaras Glicas and others but by Victor who then lived and was at Constantinople when these things fell out to whom alone more credit herein is to bee given than to five hundredth of the Surian records Truly whatsoever was the cause why he was banished certaine it is that this heresie of Iustinian or any Edict made for it was not the cause thereof But there are two other matters the one or both of which may very well be thought to have incensed Iustinian against him The former was this Eutychius pretended a Propheticall skill whereby hee could foreshew who should succeed in the Empire and hee began to tamper and practice this Art about some three yeares before Iustinian dyed as that Eustathius delareth At that time hee privately called Iustinus unto him and told him that he should succeed in the Empire after the death of Iustinian for so said he God hath revealed unto mee The like good fortune hee foretold to Tiberius that ere long he should have the Empire alone Againe two yeares before the death of Tiberius hee prophesied of Mauritius that hee and none but hee should have the Empire after Tiberius idque juramento asseruit and hee confirmed this by an oath Now this Art of Divination and Mathematicall predictions especially when they prognosticate of Kings their deaths successours was never allowable in any wise State nor acceptable to any prudent Emperour It betokened no good to Caesar that they foretold him of those dismall Ides of March. Domitian was foretold not onely of the yeare but of the day and the very houre when hee should dye and when he had carefully looked to himselfe on that day enquiring the houre his owne men of purpose told him the sixt in stead of the fift hee then thinking all danger to bee past was by the Conspiratours who kept a better watch of the time than he did securely murdered What mischiefe ensued upon that prediction to Valence that one whose name did begin with Theod. should succeed unto him Socrates declareth Hee thereupon murdered most unjustly all whom he could finde to be called either Theodori or Theodoti or Theodosij or Theoduli or Theodosioli or beginning with those letters What hurt followed as wel in this kingdom upon that prophesie G. should succeed unto Edward the fourth as in the next when it was foretold the Earle of Athel that hee should bee crowned before hee dyed who thereupon never ceased to rebell against his Soveraigne till hee was crowned with an hot burning iron our owne Chronicles doe declare All kingdomes all Stories are full of like examples It was not without cause that in the Code both of Theodosius and Iustinian there are so many and so severe lawes aginst this kinde of Mathematicall diviners their Art being called damnabilis omnibus interdicta a damnable Art forbidden to all the punishment denounced against them being banishment yea death sâ—pplicio capitis ferietur hee shall bee put to death who practiseth the curiositie of divining Now Eutychius taking upoÌ„ him this Art of divining coÌ„trary to those severe and Imperiall Edicts ratified by Iustinian whether for this cause the Emperour who by the law might have deprived him of his life did not chuse rather to deprive him onely of his See and liberty I leave to the
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 counterpoized with those honourable and innumerable witnesses which as wee have shewed doe with a loud and consenting voyce proclame 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 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 Iustinian being a most valiant and most Christiā Prince Imperitū quasi mortuū resuscitavit did raise the Empire as it were from death to life and exceedingly repaired the Common-wealth being decayed Of Gotofrid 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 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 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 His integritie in faith did much please God exalt the Christian Common-wealth and againe 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 evē in that point according to the Cardinals doctrine 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 magnificēt 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 that the magnificence thereof amazed those who saw it but was incredible to those that saw it not the height of it mounted up into the heaven the splendor of it was such as if it received not light from the Sun but had it in it selfe the roofe deckt with Gold the pavement beset with Pearle the silver of the Quire onely contained foure Myriads that is forty thousand pounds in so much that it is said 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 his whole raigne to have beene imployed in building that alone At Constantinople he builded three 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 at Sebastia at Nicopolis at Theodosia at Tzani at Iustinianea
what a weight of eternity and glory shall that troope of vertues and traine of good workes obtaine at his hands who rewardeth indeed every man according to their workes but withall rewardeth them infinitely above all the dignity or condignity of their workes 45. If Iustinian and those who are beautified with so many vertues and glorious works be as the Card. Judgeth tormented in hell belike the Cardinall himselfe hoped by workes contrary unto these by workes of infidelity of impiety of maligning the Church of reviling the servants of GOD of oppugning the faith of Patronizing heresie yea that fundamental heresie which overthroweth the whole Catholike faith and brings in a totall Apostasie from the faith by these hee hoped to purchase and in condignity to merit the felicity of the Kingdome of Heaven This being the track and beaten path wherein they walke and by which they aspire to immortality what Constantine sayd once to Acesius the Novatian the same may be sayd to Baronius and his consorts Erigito tibi scalam Baroni ad caelum solus ascendito Keepe that Ladder unto your selves and by it doe you alone climbe up into heaven But well were it with them and thrice happy had the Cardinall beene if with a faithfull and upright heart towards God he could have said of Iustinian the words of Balaam Let me dye the death of the righteous and let my last end be like his His life being led in piety and abounding in good workes hee now enjoyeth the fruit thereof felicity and eternall rest in Abrahams bosome As for the Cardinall who hath so malignantly reviled him himselfe can now best tell whether he doth not cry and pray Father Abraham have mercy on me and send Iustinian that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and coole my tongue or sing that other note unto his fellowes concerning this Emperour Wee fooles thought his life to be madnesse and his end to bee without honour but now is he numbred among the children of God and his lot is among the Saints Therefore wee have erred from the way of truth and wearied our selves in the wayes of wickednesse and destruction we have gone through deserts where there lay no way but as for the way of the Lord wee have not knowne it CAP. XXI How Baronius revileth Theodora the Empresse and a refutation of the same 1. NExt the Emperour let us see how dutifully the Cardinall behaveth himselfe towards the Empresse Theodora A small matter it is with him in severall places to call her an impious an hereticall a sacrilegious a furious hereticall woman a patrone of heretikes and the like Heare and consider how he stormeth but in one place against her These so great mischiefes did that most wicked woman beginne she became to her husband another Eve obeying the serpent a new Dalila to Samson striving by her subtiltie to weaken his strength another Herodias thirsting after the blood of most holy men a wanton mayd of the High Priest perswading Peter to deny Christ. But this is not enough Sugillare ipsam with these termes to flout her who exceedeth all women in impiety let her have a name taken from Hell let her be called Alecto or Megera or Tisiphone a Citizen of hell a childe of Devills ravished with a satanicall spirit driven up and downe with a devillish gad bee an enemy of concord and peace purchased with the blood of Martyrs Thus the Cardinall who tells us afterwards how when Vigilius came to Constantinople she contented long with him for to have Anthimus restored in so much that Vigilius was forced to smite her as from heaven with the thunderbolt of Excommunication whereupon she shortly dyed Here is the tragicall end which the Cardinall hath made of her 2. Now I would not have any think that I intend wholly to excuse the Empresse she had her passions and errors as who hath not and as Liberatus and Evagrius shew she tooke part with the oppugners of the Councell of Chalcedon which was for some time true shee being as it seemes seduced by Anthimus whom for a while she laboured to have restored to the See of Constantinople though afterwards as Victor Tununensis testifieth she being better informed joyned with the Emperor in condemning the Three Chapters and so in truth in defending the Councell of Chalcedon though Victor thought the contrarie And of this minde in condemning the three Chapters shee was as by Victor is evident some yeares before Vigilius came to Constantinople Her former error seduction and labour for Anthimus I will not seeke to lessen or any way excuse But though she were worthy of blame was it fit for the Cardinall so basely to revile her and in such an unseemly and undutifull manner to disgorge the venome of his stomacke upon an Empresse tantae ne animis caelestibus irae who would have thought such rancour and poison to have rested in the brest of a Cardinall But there was you may be sure some great cause which drew from the Cardinall to many unseemly speeches against the Empresse and though hee would bee thought to doe all this onely out of zeale to the truth which Anthimus the heretike oppugned yet if the depth of the Cardinalls heart were founded it will appeare that his spite against her was for condemning the Three Chapters which Pope Vigilius in his Constitution defendeth Anthimus and his cause is but a pretence and colour the Apostolicall Constitution the heresies of the Nestorians decreed and defined therein that is the true marke at which the Cardinall aymeth neither Emperour nor Empresse nor Bishop nor Councell nor any may open their mouth against that Constitution which toucheth them in capite but they shall be sure to heare and beare away as harsh and hellish termes from Baronius as if they had condemned the Trent Councell it selfe Had Theodora defended the Three Chapters as Vigilius in his Constitution did the Cardinall would have honoured her as a Melpomene Clio or Vrania because she did not that she must be nothing but Alecto Megaera or Tisiphone and they are too good names for her 3. If one desired to set forth her praise there wants not testimonies of her dignity and honour Constantinus Manasses saith that she was Iisdem addicta cum marito studiis iisdem praedita moribus that she so well consorted to her husband that shee was addicted to the same studies indued with the same manners as he was That Iustinian himselfe calleth her reverendissimam conjugem his most reverend wife given unto him by God adding that he tooke her as a partner with him of his counsells in making his lawes and after her death he calleth her Augustam piae memoriae Empresse of holy memorie as doe also and very often the sixt general Councell an unfit title to be given to an heretike or a fury either by a holy generall Councell or by a
within their breasts or if they cannot observe that yet at least to learne to be so lowly and humble in heart as to revoke their impieties and blasphemies although to some blemish and disgrace of themselves yet to the great honour of Gods truth and the satisfaction and edification of the holy Church which they had scandalized If in ambition they will first oppugne the truth and then in a worse pride of heart not be reclamed to the truth nor shew their love unto it why should not the Church by her most charitable judgement shew her open detestation of their persons who in the insolency of their hearts will not shew any open detestation of their heresies That Vigilius writ a papall Constitution in defence of heresie it is apparent and undenyable that he at any time revoked that writing I wish it were but it is not yet evident The like may be sayd of Baronius of Pighius of Eccius of the Laterane Florentine and Trent conspirators of all who have whet their tongues against other truth and specially to uphold that fundamentall heresie of the Popes infallibility Their writings for heresie are evident that they ever reclamed those writings it is inevident and if ever they and their cause come to bee tryed in such a free lawfull and oecumenicall Councell as was this fift under Iustinian they may justly feare and certainly expect from the Church unlesse the disclaming of their writings may by certaine proofe be made knowne the very like sentence though a hundred yeares after theirs as passed upon Theodorus of Mopsvestia an hundred yeares after his death And because the houre-glasse for repentance in runne out to the former all that we can doe is which I seriously now doe from my heart to cry amaine unto others to admonish exhort yea even pray and entreat them by the mercies of God and by the love of their owne soules first that they keepe their tongues and pennes from once uttering any heresie or if they have not done that with the same hands to give the medicine wherewith they gave the wound and as openly nay much more openly to disclame than they have ever proclamed their impious and hereticall doctrines 53. You have now some view both of the life and death of Vigilius The exact pourtraiture of the Popes lives Baronius had beene able to set forth if he had listed but he addeth such fucos and so many sophisticall colours that indeed scarce you shall see any one of them in his Annals set out in his native and naturall habit If ought be amisse in this our description and not set forth according to the lively lineaments of Vigilius and his impieties the equall reader will not too rigorously censure the same I acknowledge that I can but dolare in this kinde to polish and set forth the lively image of their Popes I have not learned That is an Art which may not bee too vulgar lest their Romane policies be too farre divulged But by this it is easie to perceive what a silly excuse it is which Baronius useth in this cause blaming Vigilius for coming to Constantinople as if not the Popes owne hereticall minde but the ayre of Constantinople had wrought such effects as to produce that hereticall and yet as they count it Apostolicall Constitution in defence of the Three Chapters FINIS Laus Deo sine fine Errata haec corrigat benevolus Lector In Textu Pag. 48. lin 2. read Theodorus ibid. lin 9. diptisis p. 509. l. 14. eos p. 99. l. 3. Iohn B. p. 125. l. 38. Catholikes p. 141 l. 35. Binius he was p. 145. l. 39. Son of God p. 163. prope finem substances p. 164. l. 5. explanation p. 172. l. 20. of the Pope p. 182. l. 45. their present p. 199. prope finem Catholica p. 216. l. 17. it p. 224. l. 25. Popes p. 227. l. 5. yeeld p. 289. l. 35. the. p. 350. l. 30. aequiparare p. 425. l. 8. where is ibid. l. 27. Commana ibid. Marcellinus l. 42. inflamed p. 442. in fine Euphemia p. 462. l. 11. quarrels with Pope p. 465. l. 35. all this time p. 478. l. 23. it was written p. 495. l. 37. poysoner of p. 500. l. 35. right hand In Margine Pa. 9. lit c lege Marsorum p. 67. lit e Antiochenum p. 233. lit s emissam ibid. lit e corruptè p. 409. lit e commentitias supposititias p. 410. lit q Consilij 5. p. 437. lit l Concil 5. Coll. 5. AN ALPHABETICALL TABLE OF THE CHIEFE THINGS CONTAINED IN THIS TREATISE A. ACts in Councels not so intire but there may be faults from the exscriber pag. 433. Sect. 17 18. Acts of the fift Councell unjustly excepted against by Baronius pa. 379. sect 3 4. Agnoites and other sectaries called Acephali p. 3. sect 6. Agapetus lost nothing by the Emperours presence p. 464. sect 5. Antichrist the Pope first Antichrist nascent secondly crescent thirdly regnant fourthly in their Laterane Councell he was Antichrist triumphant pa. 186. sect 24. Anthimus a Catholike in shew and outward profession p. 157. sect 4. Anastasius narration not helped by Binius p. 458. sect 23. Anastasius a fabler p. 256. sect 23. and pa. 447. sect 12. c. The Author of that Apologicall Epistle published Anno 1601. a vaunting Braggadochio p. 205. sect 10. To Assent to the Popes or to their Cathedrall definitions in a cause of faith makes one an heretike pa. 172. sect 6. Author of the Edict was Iustinian himselfe p. 366. sect 6 7. B. BAronius nice in approving the Epistle of Ibas and why p. 128. sect 22. Baronius wittingly obstinate in maintaining the heresie of Nestorius by approving the later part of that epistle p. 129. sect 24 25. and p. 31. sect 28. Baronius sports himselfe with contradictions p. 131. sect 27. Baronius revileth the cause of the Three Chapt. p. 361. sect 1. Baronius Annals not altogether intire pag. 435. sect 19. Baronius by his own reasons proves his Annals to be untrue p. 436. sect 19. in fine sect 20. c. Baronius holds it dangerous for Vigilius to leave Rome to come to Constantinople p. 462 sect 1 2. Bellisarius most renowned save in the matter of Silverius p 470. sect 11. Bellarmine and Baronius at variance about the Epistle of Vigilius to Anthimus Severus and others p. 477. sect 19 20. Baronius first reason to disprove it is taken from the inscription p 477. in fine p. 478. sect 21 22 23. c. his second reason from the subscription pa. 482. sect 26. his last reason is because hee was not upbraided for it by the Emperour and others p. 483. sect 27. Bellarmines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to know when a Councell decreeth any doctrine tanquam de fide pa. 40. sect 9 c. Baronius vilifieth the fift generall Councell p. 266. sect 2. The Banishment of Vigilius after the fift Councell a fiction p. 250. sect 16. and p. 253. sect 19. When and for what