the time of this Pope The Epistle attributed to Lucius is full of Citations out of the Vulgar Latin and of several Passages taken out of the First Council of Arles the Third of Carthage that of Milevis St. Leo Gregory Agatho Adrian and Sixtus the Pythagorean Besides it is dated Six Months before the Election of Lucius The two Epistles attributed to Stephanus are filled with Citations out of Modern Authors and Statutes that don't all agree with the time of this Pope and consequently are Spurious For the same Reasons we must pass the same Judgment of the two Letters of Sixtus the Second the two of Pope Dionysius the three of St. Felix the First the two of Eutychianus that of Carus the two of Marcellinus those of Marcellus the three of Eusebius the Letter and Decree of Miltiades and the rest of the Letters of the Popes collected by Isidore that are full of several Passages taken out of the Fathers Popes and Councils more Modern than the very Popes by whom they are pretended to be written and in which many things are to be found that don't in the least agree with the true History of those times and were purposely said to favour the Court of Rome and establish her Pretensions against the Rights of Bishops and the Liberties of Churches But it would take up too much time to show the gross falsity of these Monuments that are now rejected by a common Consent and even by those Authors that are most favourable to the Court of Rome who are obliged to abandon the Patronage of these Epistles though they have done a great deal of Service in establishing the greatness of the Court of Rome and ruining the ancient Discipline of the Church especially in relation to Ecclesiastical Decisions and Rights of Bishops An Abridgment of the Doctrine Discipline and Morality of the Three First Ages of the Church AFter having given a Summary of what is contained in the Works of the Ecclesiastical Authors for the Three first Ages of the Church I supposed it would not be amiss to present the An Abridgment of Doctrine c. Reader with an Abridgment also of the Theology of the Primitive Christians This Design besides the relation it had to the Work it self seem'd in my Opinion to be the principal Fruit and Advantage that could be gathered from it For the ultimate Scope and End which a Man ought to propose to himself in reading the Ecclesiastical Authors and their History is not to gratifie a vain foolish Curiosity but to learn Religion thereby We must not study these Matters only to make a Pompous Ostentation of our Knowledge but to become better Christians to become more certain of the Doctrine of the Church more respectful to its Discipline and better instructed in its Holy Morality For all Theology reduces it self to these Three Points Doctrine Discipline and Morality Doctrine concerns the Articles of Faith that our Religion teaches us Discipline concerns the Government of the Church and Morality teaches us what things we are to do and what we are to forbear Hereticks overthrow the Doctrine of the Church by their Errours Schismaticks destroy its Discipline by violating the Orders and Rules of the Church And lastly The vitious Christian discards and lays aside the Laws of its Morality by living after an irregular manner For the better avoiding these Rocks and Precipices it is exceeding requisite for all Christians to draw out of the Tradition of the ancient Church that is to say out of the Books of the Primitive Fathers who are the unquestionable Witnesses of the Opinion of the Church in their own times to draw I say from thence the Doctrine which they are obliged to believe to examine the Ecclesiastical Discipline which they are to revere and obey and lastly from thence to learn the most Holy Rules of the Christian Morality An Abridgment of the Doctrine THE Doctrine of the Church was always the same and will be ever so till the end An Abridgment of Doctrine of the World For 't is utterly impossible that the true Church should cease to be or that the true Church should not teach the Doctrine of Jesus Christ because whether she should teach a Doctrine different from that of Jesus Christ or whether she should not teach the Doctrine of our Blessed Saviour in both these Cases she would cease to be the true Church Jesus Christ as St. Irenaeus Tertullian and all the rest of the Ancients have observed taught his Apostles all the Truths of Faith The Apostles published them throughout all the Earth and opened them to all the Churches in the World whose Doctrine is found to be conformable each to other in Articles of Faith This Doctrine was always preserved in the Church which is the Pillar and Foundation of Truth 'T is indeed very true that they did not always make use of the same terms and that before the Birth of Heresies they did not observe that precaution in speaking of Mysteries which they did afterwards when they were attack'd by the Hereticks But still the Foundation of Doctrine was always the same as to the principal Articles of our Faith We must likewise acknowledge that there were some Errours very frequent in the First Ages of the Church that have been rejected since but then they don't concern the principal Articles of our Faith and besides were never looked upon to be the received Doctrine of the Church but only the most common Opinions These previous Observations will be confirmed by an Abridgment of the Doctrine of the Church as it is delivered by the Authors of the Three first Centuries which we are going to represent in as few words as possibly we can They taught That the Grounds and Principles of Faith were the Holy Scriptures and Tradition that we ought to believe Mysteries though we were not able to comprehend them they spoke of the Nature of God and of his Attributes after a most excellent manner they believed him to be Invisible Eternal Incorruptible c. they have frequently discoursed of his Providence his Power his Bounty his Mercy and his Goodness they wrote very sharply against the false Divinities of the Pagans and the Errours of Hereticks who imagined that there cou'd be above one Soveraign and Independant Being they proved that God Created all Things and even Matter it self which was not Eternal they acknowledged the Trinity of the Three Persons in one only God the Divinity and Eternity of the Word and of the Holy Ghost they maintain'd that the Word was from all Eternity in God as a Person distinct from the Father that the Father created the World by him and that he governs it and that it was the Person of the Word that appear'd to the ancient Patriarchs under different Figures and who was at last Incarnate that Jesus Christ was the Word made Man God and Man all together composed of two intire and different Natures that he had a Soul and Body like
understand what they answer to the Priest Lastly They reject all the Exorcisms and all the Benedictions of that Sacrament They Likewise reject the Sacrament of Confirmation and wonder that only Bishops are allow'd to Administer it Concerning the Sacrament of the Eucharist they say That the Priests who are in any Mortal Sin cannot Consecrate and that Transubstantiation was not effected in the Hands of him who Consecrated Unworthily but in the Mouth of him who received the Eucharist Worthily and that one might consecrate on a common Table according to what the Prophet Malachy says They shall offer in all Places a pure Offering in my Name They likewise condemn'd the Custom of Christians who Communicated only once a Year because themselves Communicated daily They said That Transubstantiation ought to be made with Words in the Vulgar Tongue That the Mass was nothing because the Apostles never said it and they only said it for their own Interest They receiv'd not the Canon of the Mass but only made use of the Words of Jesus Christ in the Vulgar Tongue They call'd the Chanting of the Church an Infernal Crime They rejected the Canonical Hours They maintain That the Offering made to the Priest at Mass signifies nothing and disapprov'd of kissing the Pyx and the Altar About the Sacrament of Pennance they said That no body could be absolv'd by a Wicked Priest and on the contrary a good Laick has that Power That they remit Sins and confer the Holy Ghost by the Imposition of Hands That it was better to confess one's self to a good Laick than to a bad Priest That they ought not to impose large Pennances but to follow the Example of Jesus Christ who said to the Adulteress Go and sin no more They reject the Publick Pennances and the Annual general Confessions They likewise cast a blemish on the Sacrament of Marriage by maintaining That it was a Mortal Sin for a Man to have to do with his Wife when she was past Child-bearing They did not acknowledge the Spiritual Alliance nor the Impediments of Affinity and Consanguinity appointed by the Church no more than those of Publick Order and Decency They hold That Women have no need of Benediction after their Lying in That the Church was in the wrong in prohibiting the Clergy from Marrying and that they who live continently do not Sin by Kisses and Embraces They do not approve of the Sacrament of Extreme Unction because it was only given to the Rich and ought to be administred by a great many Priests That all the Laicks are as so many Priests That the Prayers of Wicked Priests signify nothing They laugh'd at the Clerical Tonsure They say That the Laicks ought not to pray in Latin that all the Laicks even the Women may Preach That whatever is not in the Scriptures is Fabulous They Celebrate and Administer the Sacraments in the Vulgar Tongue They learn by heart all the Text of the Scriptures and reject the Decisions and Expositions of the Fathers They despise Excommunication and have little or no regard to Absolution They laugh at Indulgences and Dispensations They do not allow of any Irregularity They believe no other Saints but the Apostles and invocate no Saints but God alone They despise the Canonizations Translations and Vigils of the Saints They laugh at the Laicks who make choice of Saints in the Lots which they draw upon the Altar They never say any Litanies They do not believe the Legends They ridicule the Miracles and have no esteem for Relicks They look upon Crosses as Common Wood. They Teach that the Doctrine of Jesus Christ and the Apostles is sufficient to Salvation without being oblig'd to observe the Laws of the Church and that the Tradition of the Church is the Tradition of the Pharisees They do not allow of any Mystical meaning in the Scriptures nor in the Practices or Ceremonies of the Church In the Third place these are the Errors which they held concerning the Usages of the Church They despis'd all the approv'd Customs which are not to be met with in the Gospel such as the Festivals of Candlemass and Palm-Sunday the Reconciling of Penitents the Adoration of the Cross the Festival of Easter with those of Jesus Christ and the Saints They say That all Days are equal and work on Holy-days as well as on other Days They do not observe the Fasts of the Church They despise the Dedications the Benedictions and the Consecrations of Wax-Tapers Boughs Chrism Fire the Paschal Lamb Lying-in-Women Pilgrims Holy Places Sacred Persons Ornaments Salt and Water They would have no Wall'd Church and disapprove of the Dedication of Churches and Altars and their Ornaments the Sacerdotal Habits the Chalices and the Corporals They would not have any lighted Tapers nor any Incense offer'd nor any Holy Water us'd They condemn Images the Chanting of the Church Processions on Festivals or Rogation-Days They find fault That a Priest is allow'd to Say many Masses on one Day They make Merry during the time of Interdiction They go not to Churches and perform the Duties of Christians only in appearance and Hypocritically They Condemn the Ecclesiastical Burial the Ceremonies of Interrments the Masses and Prayers for the Dead and the Confraternities They deny Purgatory and maintain That there are only Two States after Death one for the Good and Elect in Heaven and the other for the Reprobate and Damn'd in Hell They Teach That all Sin is in its own Nature Mortal and that there is no such thing as a Venial Sin They pretend that it is Unlawful to Swear whereupon those that are perfect among them chuse rather to Die than to Swear Those who are not so perfect Swear but do not think themselves oblig'd to keep their Oath and look upon those who exact it of them as more guilty than Homicides They Condemn all Princes and Judges being perswaded That 't is not Lawful to Punish Malefactors Lastly They Condemn the Ecclesiastical Judgments Pelicdorfius who Wrote about an Hundred Years after Rainerius against the Vaudois relates the Original of them after the same manner and observes That at first they only oppugn'd the Discipline and the Ceremonies of the Church without reflecting on the Sacraments but that afterwards they thought âit to hear Confessions to impose Pennances and to grant Absolution and that within a while after some among them intruded to Consecrate the Body of Jesus Christ and to Communicate to others but that several of their Sect had disapprov'd of that Conduct The Errors of the Vaudois which Pelicdorfius refutes in his Work are 1. That the Sacerdotal Order was sunk ever since the time of St. Sylvester and that the True Faith was obscur'd and only a few Elect in the World 2. That the Priests and the other Clergy of the Church of Rome being Fornicators Usurers Drunkards c. have not the Holy Ghost cannot Confer it and are not to be Obey'd 3. That the Blessed Virgin and the Glorify'd
1273. until the year 1422. and the other more large from the Conquest of England by the Normans i. e. from the year 1066. to the 6th year of Henry V. being the 1417th of Jesus Christ. These have been Printed in the Collection of the Historians of England at London in 1574. and at Frankfort in 1602. he has also continued the Polychronicon of Ranulph Higden * Whereof Dr. Wharton saw one Manuscript Copy in the Library of Gonvil and Caius which reaches no further than the Year 1398. tho' the History was continued from 1342 to 1417. Whart Hist. Lit. App P. 120. Nicholas of Inkelspuel of Suabia Rector of the University of Vienna Flourish'd at the beginning Nicolaus Dinkelpulius Rector of the University of Vienna of this Century and was present in the Councils of Constance and Basil. He wrote a Commentary upon the Four Books of Sentences and some Quesâions upon the same Books but these Treatises are lost there remains now only of his some Diâcourses of Piety Printed at Strasburg in 1516. viz. Eleven Sermons and Discourses upon the Precepts of the Decalogue the Lord's-Prayer upon the Three parts of Penance upon the Eight Beatitudes upon the Seven Mortal Sins and the Tribunal of a Confessor Trithemius also mentions a Treatise of the Seven Gifts of the Holy Spirit a Treatise of Charity a Treatise of the Sins of the Tongue and of the Eight Capital Vices and many Sermons which Aeneas Sylvius says were much sought after in his time The Treatise of the Seven Gifts is to be found in Manuscript in the Library of Ausburg together with a Treatise of Gratitude and Ingratitude and a Treatise of Sacramental Communion At the same time Flourish'd Theodoric of Ingelhuse a German Canon of Hildesheim who wrote Theodoricus Ingelhusius Canon of Hildesheim Herman Petri of Stutdorp a Carthusian Thomas Waldensis or of Walden a Carmelite the Chronicon of Chronicons or an Universal Chronicon from the beginning of the World to the year 1420. Publish'd by Macerus and Printed at Helmstadt in the year 1671. Hermani Petri of Stutdorp a German Carthusian of the Monastery of St. Anne near Bruges died in the year 1428. wrote a Treatise of the Government of Nuns and many Sermons whereof Fifty upon the Lord's-Prayer have been Printed at Lovain in 1484. Thomas Waldensis or of Walden a Village in the County of Essex in England the Son of John Netter and Matthilda Studied at Oxford and after he had taken the Degree of Doctor he entred into the Order of Carmelites He was present at the Councils of Pisa and Constance and was chosen for Confessor to Henry V. King of England whom he waited upon in his Journey to France where he died at Roan November the 3d 1430. He stoutly oppos'd the Errors of Wiclef and confuted them and establish'd the Truth of the Doctrine of the Church he wrote a great Book Entituled A Doctrinale of the Antiquities of the Faith of the Catholick Church against the Wiclefites and Hussites divided into three Tomes and Printed at Paris in 1532. at Salamanca in 1556. and at Venice in 1571. This Work is Dedicated to Martin V. and approv'd by this Pope In it the Author proposes to himself to relate the Doctrin of Jesus Christ of the Apostles and the Fathers against the Errors of the Wiclefites and joyns Tradition and the Testimony of the Universal Church and of the Councils with the Holy Scripture which are the Principles he lays down for his Foundation in refuting the false Maxims of Wiclef who following the foot-steps of the Ancient Hereticks rejected the Tradition and Authority of the Church pretending that we ought to found our Doctrins upon the Scripture only The First Tome of this Work contains Four Books against the Errors of Wicklef In the 1st he Refutes the Errors of Wicklif concerning the Divinity the Human Nature and the Incarnation of Jesus Christ. In the 2d he Treats of the Preheminence of St. Peter among the Apostles of the Church of the Primacy and Privileges of the Pope and of the Roman Church of the Authority Rights and Prerogatives of Bishops and other Pastors as well in Matters of Faith as for the Government of the Church In the 3d. he defends the profession of the Regulars and in the last he justifies particularly the Orders of the Regulars Mendicants of those who live by the Labour of their Hands and of those who have Revenues and shews against Wicklef that the Ecclesiasticks may possess Temporal Revenues In the Second Tome he lays down the Doctrin of the Church about the Sacraments and shows against Wicklef 1st that the Consecration and Administration of the Sacraments by Ministers is valid tho' they be Sinners After this he Treats of the Eucharist and having prov'd the Real Presence and Transubâtantiation he shews that the Communion under both kinds is not necessary As to Baptism he establishes the absolute necessity of it to Salvation and proves that Infants who die without Baptism are Damn'd and that this Sacrament imprints a Character As to Confirmation he insists chiefly upon discovering the effects of it and shews that the Bishops only can Administer it As to the Sacrament of Orders he makes it evident that the Distinction between Bishops and Priests was Establish'd from the beginning of the Church that the Priests ought to be Ordain'd by the imposition of the hands of the Bishops that the Reprobate may Consecrate as well as others and that the Celibacy of Priests is according to the Spirit and Genius of Holy Scripture and agreeable to the practice of the Ancient Church As to Marriage he shews That this Sacrament may subsist between Persons who preserve Continence That it Thomas Waldensis or of Walden a Carmelite ought to be contracted according to the Forms prescrib'd by the Church and with the Benediction of the Priest and distinguishes between Marriages which are Lawful and which Unlawful In the Treatise of Penance he defends the necessity of Confession the Vertue of Absolution and the Practices of the Church against the Accusations and Errors of Wicklef There he Establishes the difference between Sins Mortal and Venial against Wicklef who made no distinction between them but with respect to the predestination of God and who admitted no other Mortal Sin but final Impenitence He shews also that the Predestinate may lose Charity against the Opinion of the same Heretick Lastly he shews that the Sacrament of Extream Unction was Founded by Jesus Christ and his Apostles and that the Sacrament produces its effect by its own Vertue and not only by the Merits of the Prayers of those who Administer or Receive it In the Third Tome he Treats of those things which are call'd Sacramentals and first of the Effects and the Necessity of Prayer in general 2. Of Singing Prayers in the Church 3. Of the Service of the Church 4. Of the Mass and its parts 5. Of the Ceremonies of the Sacraments of Baptism
endeavour to demonstrate by many Arguments that the Doctrine contained in the Creed is that of the Apostles but they do not affirm that it was compiled by them and yet there could not have been a stronger or more convincing proof brought against those Hereticks than to have said thus to them You impugn the Doctrine of the Creed and yet it is certain that the Apostles were the Authors thereof therefore you impugn the Doctrine of the Apostles However they did not argue after this manner On the contrary they prove by Tradition and the Consent of the Apostolical Churches that the Doctrine comprised in the Creed is that of the Apostles Thirdly if the Apostles had made a Creed it would have been every where the same throughout all Churches and in all Ages all Christians would have learnt it by heart all Churches would have repeated it after the very same manner in fine all Authors would have expressed it in the same terms Now the contrary is evident for it is certain that not only in the second and third Centuries but also in the fourth there were many Creeds and all though the same as to the Doctrine yet differed in the Expression In the second and third Ages of the Church we find as many Creeds as Authors f As many Creeds as Authors St. Irenaeus exhibits a Creed l. 1. c. 2. and another in lib. 2. c. 1. Tertullian made use of three different Creeds in three several places In praescript lib. contra Praxeam de Virginibus velandis See Origen lib. 1. Peri Arch. in Dialog contra Marc. Optat. lib. 1. All which Creeds are different from the Vulgar and the same Author sets the Creed down after a different manner in several places of his Works which plainly shews that there was not then any Creed that was reputed to be the Apostles nor even any regulated and established Form of Faith Ruffinus in the fourth Century compares three ancient Creeds of the Churches of Aquileia Rome and the East and we may observe in these three Creeds none of which perfectly agrees with the common one very considerable differences in the terms as appears from the Table that is subjoyned at the end of this Article St. Cyril of Jerusalem in his Catechetick Lectures produceth a particular Creed that was used by the Church of Jerusalem when this Father wrote The Authors that have written Commentaries on the Creed as St. Augustine in his 119th Sermon St. Maximus Petrus Chrysologus Fortunatus and others omit divers Expressions that are inserted in our Apostolical Creed among others this at the end The Life Everlasting and St. Jerome observes in his Epistle to Pammachius that the Creed concludes with these words The Resurrection of the Body It is evident from these Reflections that although the Creed be the Apostles as to the Doctrine which it contains nevertheless it is not theirs as to all the terms and that they did not draw up any one form of Faith comprehended in a set number of words which they were all obliged to use But that having learn'd the same Faith from Jesus Christ they likewise taught it to all those that were converted to the Christian Religion and instructed them all in the same Mysteries That they that were thus trained up in this Faith had it so deeply imprinted on their mind as St. Justin and St. Irenaeus observe that they were always ready to give an account thereof and as often as they should be required to do it without making use of any one particular form and from thence proceeds the difference of the Creeds that are set down by the Fathers And lastly that for the assistance of the Memory certain forms of these Articles of Faith were afterwards compiled which were found to be different according to the diversity of the Churches wherein they were used For I doubt not in the least that besides the above-cited Creeds there were many others of which we have no knowledge from whence it must be inferred that Jesus Christ is the Author of the Doctrine contained in the Creed and that the Apostles preached and published it throughout the whole World but that it cannot be determined by whom these Forms were collected wherein this Doctrine is comprised It may be objected that St. Irenaeus Tertullian Lucifer Calaritanus and St. Jerome affirm that the Creed is the Rule of Faith which the Church hath received from the Apostles That St. Ambrose The Epistle of St. Barnabas says that the Church of Rome hath preserved the Apostolical Creed in its purity without Alteration That St. Augustine Ruffinus Leo Maximus Taurinensis Fortunatus Petrus Chrysologus and a great many others g And a great number of other Authors S. Irenaeus lib. 1. cap. 2. Tertullian de Prascript c. 37. 13. de vel Virg. c. 1. Lucifer lib. 2. contra Const. Hier. Ep. ad Pammach St. Ambrose Ep. 7. lib. 1. As also Ruffinus in Expos. Symboli Aug. Serm. 115. Maximus St. Leo Fortunatus c. have taken it for granted as a thing beyond Controversie that the Creed was composed in an Assembly of the Apostles that this Opinion is Authorised by the Church and that it seems to be a rash Presumption to doubt of it And lastly that all Catholicks are agreed in this Judgment and that none but Hereticks or at least Persons that are suspected of Heresie durst presume to call it in question To these Objections I answer first that the Testimonies of St. Irenaeus Tertullian and Lucifer rather overthrow the vulgar Opinion than establish it for these Fathers do not assert that we have received the form of Faith from the Apostles but only the Faith and Doctrine that was communicated to them by Jesus Christ therefore if there were any force in the Objection it must be conluded that our Saviour is the Author of the Creed Moreover it is further to be observed that by the Phrase Rule of Faith used by Tertullian a set Form of Faith is not to be understood but the Faith it self which he declares to have been founded by Jesus Christ and Lucifer Calaritanus doth not discourse of the Creed but only of the Faith of the Church as it relates to our Saviour's Divinity Lastly when St. Jerome says that the Faith of the Creed which is an Apostolical Tradition was not written on Paper or with Ink but was engraved on the Fleshly Tables of the Heart he gives us to understand that he meant nothing else but that the Faith and Doctrine comprehended in the Creed proceeds from the Apostles who have taught it to all the Faithful After the same manner when St. Ambrose assures us that the Creed was preserved in its purity by the Church of Rome he doth not speak of the form of the Creed but of the Doctrine therein contained As for the other Authorities that are alledged they are of little moment Ruffinus is the first and the only Person among the Authors of the Fifth Century
not Canonical and in this sense the Epistles of S. Ignatius may be reckoned under this Denomination as the Book of the Pastor which is styled Apocryphal by those that do not receive it as Canonical tho' it is very ancient and was certainly written by him whose Name it bears Secondly This Author doth not mention the Epistles of S. Ignatius or S. Polycarp and there is no probability that he intended to do it because his design is to make a Catalogue of the Sacred Writings both Genuine and Apocryphal now what Analogy is there between this and the Epistles of S. Ignatius which being written a long time after the Death of the Apostles could not be comprized amongst the Books of the Holy Scripture And indeed if the Epistles of S. Ignatius and S. Polycarp ought to be rejected as fictitious because this Author hath inserted their Names among the Apocryphal Books of the New Testament we must likewise reject the Epistle of S. Clement whose Name is found immediately before therefore it must necessarily be inferred that he intended to reject some other Books that were ascribed to S. Clement to S. Ignatius and to S. Polycarp and that the Word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ought to be understood with relation to these three last for after having said ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã The Doctrine of the Apostles he adds without specifying any thing else of Clement Ignatius and Polycarp that is to say the Books in like manner Entituled The Doctrine of Clement The Doctrine of Ignatius and The Doctrine of Polycarp this is the plain sense of that Passage Thirdly Altho' it were granted that this Author had rejected the Epistles of S. Ignatius which is not true of what weight could his Testimony be against the Tradition that we have even now alledged Object 2. It is said that these Epistles were unknown to S. Justin to S. Clement of Alexandriae and to all the ancient Writers before Eusebius Ans. Tho' this were true yet there are many Books whose Truth is not called in question that are mentioned by Eusebius alone and by no other ancient Author but besides we have already shewn that these Epistles are cited by S. Polycarp S. Irenaeus and Origen and that the Passages which they produce are found in those Letters that we have Object 3. The style say they of the Epistles attributed to S. Ignatius is very different from that of this Father it is full of lofty Expressions and affected Epithets which is very far from the simplicity of the Apostolical Times They say moreover that the Inscriptions of these Letters are long and full of pompous Epithets Ans. The Objections taken from the Style are of little moment for who hath informed these modern Criticks how S. Ignatius writ However it is not true that the Style of these Epistles is far from the simplicity of the ancient Christians on the contrary it is very simple and extremely natural It must be confessed indeed that there are some Epithets and compound Words but this agrees with the Asiatick style which is generally more florid than that of other Nations It might also be added that we find the like Epithets in the Epistle of S. Clement and in other ancient Authors The inscriptions are not longer than S. Paul's Epistles and in the Editions of Usher and Vossius they are not so large nor so magnificent as in the Vulgar as well as in that of the Epistle to the Romans recited by Metaphrastes Object 4. This Objection is the first of those that are taken from the Contents of the Epistles themselves It is said that the Author writes against the Opinion of Saturninus who believed that Jesus Christ suffered only in Appearance and of Theodotus who imagined that our Saviour was a mere Man Now these two Hereticks are later than S. Ignatius Ans. The fast of these Errors was maintained by Simon Magus and Menarder the other was asserted by Cerâaâus and Eâton Hereticks who lived in S. Ignatius's time Object 5. This is the principle or the only Objection that hath any difficulty it is taken from an Expression in the Epistle to the Magnesians That the Eternal Word proceeded not from Silence ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which seems to be said purposely against the Errors of the Valentinians who first used the word Silence as a Term of Art Ans. If there were no Answer to be given to this Objection I should rather chuse to affirm that this Passage is added than merely on this account to reject the Epistles that are acknowledged as Authentick by all the Ancients There are many Books wherein some Editions have been made which make them appear later than they really are and we find some of this sort in the Bible in Homer and in almost all the Ecclesiastical and Prophane Authors But there is no necessity to make use of this answer since we have several others that are sufficient to afford reasonable Satisfaction to the Impartial and Judicious Reader For 1. It is not true that S. Ignatius here speaks of the Silence of the Valentinians or of any other Notion of the Hereticks that is like it he only declares that the Word of God is not like unto that of Men which comes from or follows after Silence These are his Words There is but one God who hath made himself manifest by his Son Jesus Christ who is the Eternal Word of God that doth not proceed from Silence and that is in all things like unto him that sent him The main design of S. Ignatius in this place is to Establish our Saviour's Divinity against the Ebionites He shews that he is God because he is the Word or the Speech of God which being Eternal is not preceded by Silence as that of Men. This Explication is natural and liable to no difficulty though M. Daillé hath thought fit to censure it as Impertinent however there is none that reads this Passage but will readily grant that this Sense is most proper and very conformable to the Intention of the ancient Writers who endeavoured to demonstrate the Difference that there is between the Word of God and that of Men. S. Augustin in his Homily concerning the Nativity of Jesus Christ makes use of the very same Comparison without having any regard to the Valentinians Quod est says he hoc Verbum Quod dicturus antea non silebat quo dicto non siluit qui dicebat And S. Fulgentius Lib. 3. ad Trasim cap. 28. Idem Verbum nullo potuit coerceri silentio quia ipse Patris est sempiterna locutio That which is affirmed by M. Daillé that the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã was used by the Valentinians may be true but they oftener used the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã neither is the word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã peculiar to the Valentinians it is commonly applied in Greek to signifie To go or come forth Besides S. Ignatius says not ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã but ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã
Victor such as Justin Martyr Miltiades Tatianus Clemens and several others that maintain in their Discourses the Divinity of Jesus Christ. For who can be ignorant of the Writings of Irenaeus and Melito who have taught that Jesus Christ was God and Man at the same time And even those Hymns and Psalms written by the Faithful since the beginning of Christianity extol the Word of God attributing Divinity thereto So that since the Doctrine of the Church has been Preached for so many years how can they say that till Victor's time the whole Church was of their Opinion Are they not-ashamed to invent this Calumny against Victor who knew very well that Theodotus the Currier who was the first Author of the Sect of those that deny the Divinity of Jesus Christ was turned out of the Church by Victor himself For if this Bishop had been of the same mind with Theodotus how comes it to pass that he Excommunicated him upon the account of his Doctrine And what probability is there that Zephirinus who succeeded Victor and continued in the See of Rome for ten years should make an alteration in the Doctrine of the Church And thus it is that this Author confutes the General Principle of all Hereticks that ever were or ever shall be giving us an infallible Rule to convince them which has been and shall always be the Custom in the Church of God For there was never any Age wherein the Hereticks did not say that the Church had changed its Doctrine nor was there ever any time wherein they were not confuted first by Scripture and secondly by Tradition that is to say by the Testimony of Authors who lived before the Rise of those Heresies Eusebius adds another Fragment from the same Author where he speaks of the Penance of a Confessor called Natalis who suffering himself to be abused by Asclepiodotus and Theodotus the Goldsmith the Disciple of Theodotus the Currier was Tormented for several Nights as a Punishment for his Fault and afterwards did publick Penance for the same in the Pontificate of Zephirinus and so was Reconciled to the Church To conclude in this last Passage he describes the Character of these Hereticks and he says that they have corrupted the Scriptures and overthrown the Rule of Faith that when we object to them any Passages of Scripture they try whether they can make thereof any Compound or Disjunctive Syllogisms that they study Geometry and Logick and that they pervert the simplicity of the Faith taught in the Holy Scriptures by their false Subtilties which is the Common Character of all Hereticks We do not know who this Author is nor what was the Title of his Book e We do not know who this Author is nor what was the Title of his Book Nicephorus calls it the Labyrinth and Theodoret Lib. 2. Haeret. Fabul confirms this Title Photius Cod. 48. attributes the Book of the Labyrinth to Caius and others ascribed it to Origen But this Fragment set down by Eusebius plainly discovers that he was a Learned Man and well skilled in the Controversie and understood how to Reason closely against the Hereticks and to give admirable Rules for their Conviction TERTULLIAN TErtullian a Tertullian He was called Q. Septimius Florens Tertullianus which distinguishes him from the Consul Tertullus and Tertullian the Martyr was a Native of Africa of the City of Carthage b And of the City of Carthage He testifies as much himself in his Book De Pallio c. 2. and in his Apology c. 9. Witness says he the Troops of our Country speaking of the Troops under the Proconsul of Carthage S. Jerom confirms the same in his Chronicon and in his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers His Father was a Centurion Tertullian in the Troops which served under the Proconsul of Africa c And says that his Father was a Centurion of these Troops which was no very considerable Employment Eusebius seems to say that Tertullian was a Roman and a Person of Quality Hist. l. 2. c. 2. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã What he says of Tertullian's being well skilled in the Roman Laws has made some believe that he was a Lawyer and indeed there is a Lawyer of the same Name But it is certain that he is a different Person from our Tertullian and Eusebius does not say that he was a Lawyer but that he was well versed in the Roman Laws What Eusebius adds of his Country and his Extraction is by no means to be maintained if we do not understand it of the Roman Writers and that the Sense must be that Tertullian was one of the most Excellent of all the Latin Authors Ruffinus has given this Sense to this Passage of Eusebius by translating it Inter nostros Scriptores admodum clarus Pamelius says that Tertullian was a Lawyer but he brings no good Argument for it relying only upon the Authority of Trithemius who is a modern Author And there is no doubt to be made but that he was at first a Heathen d But that he was at first a Heathen He himself says speaking to the Heathens in his Apology We have been likewise of your Party Men are not born Christians but they become so And in his Book De Spectaculis and in that concerning the Resurrection of the Flesh chap. 19. and 59. he says That he had assisted at those Sights and Spectacles and that he had spent part of his Life in Lewdness but it is not known when nor upon what occasion he was entred into the Church e But it is not known when nor upon what occasion he was converted to the Church Pamelius says that he was converted by the Answer of an Oracle and Father George of Amiens affirms that it was by a Vision but neither of these are to be credited He flourished chiefly under the Reigns of the Emperors Severus and Antoninus Caracalla f And Antoninus Caracalla S. Jerom affirms that he flourished under these Emperors and this appears by his Writings some have said that he flourished about the year 160 but they are mistaken from about the year of our Lord 194 till towards the year 216. And it is very probable that he lived several years after since S. Jerom relates that it was reported in his time that he lived to an extream old Age g To an extream old Age. S. Jerom in his Book of Ecclesiastical Writers says Usque ad Decrepitam aetatem vixisse fertur But we do not exactly know the time of his Death The Books that he wrote to his Wife sufficiently shew that he was a Married Man but we cannot gather from thence when he was Married The Learned are divided as to this matter some pretending that he married his Wife before he was a Christian and that he left her after he embraced Christianity others believing that he was not Married till after he was Baptized Which has been the occasion that some have found a difficulty in
Christ. Which he evidently makes out from the Prophets who foretold the time of his Coming and the circumstances of his Life and Death He observes that the Original of the Jews mistake arose from their confounding his last Coming wherein he will appear in great Power and Glory with his first Coming wherein he was seen in great Humility and took upon him the mean Condition of other Men. Although the Book of Praescriptions against the Hereticks is not in the order of Time the first that Tertullian has written against them yet it is so as to the Order of the Matters which it contains because it is designed against all Heresies in general whereas the others are only against some particular Heresie This Book is entituled Of Praescriptions or rather Of Praescription against the Hereticks because herein he shews that their Doctrine is not to be admitted by reason of its Novelty Before he enters upon the Matter he endeavours to obviate the Scandal of those who admire how there could be any Heresies in the World how they could have been so great and so powerful and how it comes to pass that so many considerable Persons in the Church have been seduced to embrace them by shewing that Heresies have been foretold that they are necessary Evils for the Tryal of our Faith and that we must not judge of Faith by Persons but of Persons by their Faith Ex personis probamus fidem an ex fide personas After having given this necessary Caution he lays down the first Principle of Prescription We are not allowed says he to introduce any thing that is new in Religion nor to chuse by our selves what another has invented We have the Apostles of our Lord for Founders who were not themselves the Inventors and Authors of what they have left us but they have faithfully taught the World the Doctrine which they received from Jesus Christ. Heresies have risen from Philosophy and humane Wisdom which is quite different from the Spirit of Christianity We are not allowed to entertain our Curiosity nor to enquire after any thing that is beyond what we have been taught by Jesus Christ and his Gospel Nobis curiositate opus non est post Christum Jesum nec inquisitione post Evangelium And when we have once believed we are to give credit to nothing any farther than as we have already believed And here it is that he Answers the Objection of the Hereticks who urged this Passage of Scripture Seek and you shall find by telling us that it is not permitted to seek when we have once found that it would be a Labour to no purpose to seek for Truth among all the Heresies and lastly that if it be permitted to seek it is after having admitted the Rule that is to say the principal Articles of Faith which are contained in the Creed But as the Hereticks did often alledge the Holy Scripture in Defence of themselves he proves that the Church was not obliged to enter into a Discussion of those Passages which they quoted that this way of confuting them is very tedious and difficult because they do not acknowledge all the Books of the Scriptures or else they corrupt them or put a false Interpretation upon them which renders the Victory that is to be obtained over them uncertain and difficult He says then that it is to better purpose to understand perfectly who it is that is in Possession of the Faith of Jesus Christ who those Persons are to whom the Scriptures were committed in Trust and who are the first Authors who have given an Account of our Religion He goes back even to Jesus Christ who is the Source and Original of this Religion and to the Apostles who received it from him He shews that it is impossible that the Apostles should preach any other Doctrine than that of Jesus Christ and that all the Apostolical Churches should embrace any other Faith than that which the Apostles had delivered to them from whence he concludes that it must of necessity follow that that Doctrine which is Conformable to that which is found to be the Faith of all the Churches must be that which was taught by Jesus Christ and that on the contrary that that which is opposite thereto must be a Novel Doctrine He farther confounds the Hereticks by the Novelty of their Opinions It is evident says he that the most ancient Doctrine is that of Jesus Christ and by consequence that alone is true and that that on the contrary which had not any Date till after his Ascension must be false and supposititious Having laid down this infallible Rule he proves the Doctrine of the Hereticks to be of a later Date than that of the Church because the Authors of the Heresies were after the Establishment of the Church from which they have separated themselves That the several Sects of the Hereticks cannot reckon their Original from the time of the Apostles nor shew a Succession of Bishops from their Times as the Apostolical Churches can with whom they do not communicate That though they could pretend to such a Succession yet the Novelty of their Doctrine condemned by the Apostles and the Apostolical Churches would convince them of being Cheats and Impostors and that what they have added taken away or changed in the Books of the Holy Scripture does farther discover that they invented their Doctrine after these Books were composed That lastly their Discipline and Conduct which is absolutely Humane and Earthly without Order and without Rule renders them every way contemptible I have exactly set down the Reasonings of Tertullian in this Work because as he himself observes they are not ânly proper to confute the Heresies that were in his Time but also to disprove all those that sprang âp afterwards or that should arise hereafter even to the end of the Church I shall not enlarge so much upon the Works which were written against those Heresies which âre now extinct The most considerable is that which he composed against Marcion which is disided into Five Books This Heretick maintained that there were two Principles or two Gods the âe Good and the other Evil The one Perfect and the other Imperfect that this last is the God whom the Jews worship who created the World and delivered the Law to Moses whereas the first ãâã the Father of Jesus Christ whom he sent to destroy the Works of the Evil One that is to say âe Law and the Prophets which Marcion rejected He affirmed likewise that Jesus Christ was not âloathed with true Flesh. And by consequence that he did not suffer really but only in appearance âhese are the Errors which Tertullian confutes in this Work In the First Book he shews that the unânown God of Marcion is only a Fantastical and Imaginary Being In the Second he proves that ââ¦at God the Creator of the World whom the Jews worshipped is the Only true God and the Auââor of all Good After having demonstrated this
of the Arians who had relaps'd into their former Error and proves that the Son of God was from all Eternity He Justifies the Terms which are us'd by the Nicene Council in their Creed and says The word Consubstantial has a very good sence and that there is none more proper to express a formal Condemnation of the Error of the Arians And he adds moreover that this word is not new since Theognostus Denys of Alexandria Denys of Rome and Origen have us'd it long before the Council of Nice that this Synod had not establish'd any new Doctrine but confirm'd that which was approv'd by Scripture and Tradition He observes that in Matters of Faith its Decisions did not run in the same manner as those that were made about the Celebration of Easter when this Phrase was us'd It pleases us we will have it so for now they only say This is the Catholick Faith Ita credit Catholica Ecclesia The Second Book of this Nature is a Letter to the Bishops of Egypt which is improperly called The First Discourse against the Arians There he describes the Outrages which the Arians committed against the Catholicks and exhorts his Brethren to shun their Snares He warns them by no means to Subscribe their Confession of Faith how Catholick soever it may appear to them but to adhere to that of the Council of Nice in which the Impiety of Arius was condemn'd Then he recites the principal Heads of his Errour and refutes them by the Testimonies of Holy Scripture He describes the miserable End of this Heretick and concludes with an Exhortation to the Catholicks to maintain the Faith unto Death representing unto them that he is not only a Martyr who suffers Death for refusing to offer unto Idols but also he that dies rather than betray the Truth The Letter to all the Orthodox Bishops was written about the same Time and upon the same Subject There he gives an Account of the violent manner of introducing George into the Church of Alexandria and describes the Fury of the Arians and the Damage the Church has suffer'd by them very particularly In the two Letters to Lucifer he describes the Persecutions which the Arians set on foot against the Catholicks and represents the lamentable State of the Church In the Letter to Serapion concerning the Death of Arius he relates the Unhappy End of this Heretick who perish'd in a Jakes the very Night before he was to be received into the Church St. Athanasius says That he learn'd this Story from the Relation of Macarius a Presbyter The Letter written by St. Athanasius concerning the Opinion of Dionysius of Alexandria concerning the Trinity may be numbred amongst his Historical Books because it teaches us a very considerable Point of Ecclesiastical History which we should not have known if St. Athanasius had not reported it there namely That Denys of Alexandria wrote against the Sabellians of Pentapolis and that in Disputing against them he made use of such Expressions as would make one believe that he favour'd the contrary Error That he was accus'd of this in a Synod held at Rome That he wrote a Treatise to the Pope entituled A Refutation and Apology wherein he defends himself and confutes his Adversaries and that he taught in this Book a Doctrine perfectly contrary to that of the Arians All which St. Athanasius proves in this Treatise by citing several Passages out of the Book of Denys of Alexandria The Letter of the Council of Alexandria to those of Antioch concerns the State of the Church of Antioch after the Death of Constantius St. Athanasius and the other Bishops of this Council advise the Church of Antioch to receive the Arians who expresly condemn their Error to joyn themselves to Paulinus and those of his Party to admit into their Communion those that held their Assemblies in the Old City that is to say those of Meletius's Party without requiring any other Profession of Faith but that of the Council of Nice They give them notice That there was no Creed made in the true Council of Sardica they advise them to have no Disputes among themselves about the Hypostases since those who acknowledg'd Three in the Trinity and those who own'd but One were both of the same Judgment and only differ'd in the manner of Expression St. Athanasius speaks after the same manner of the Reception of the Arians in a Letter to Ruffinian where he mentions the Decision of this Synod In a Letter to the Emperour Jovian St. Athanasius and the other Bishops of Egypt propose to him the Nicene Creed as the only true one They say That this contains the Faith which was maintain'd by many holy Martyrs who are now with Jesus Christ that it had never had any Adversaries if the Malice of the Hereticks had not endeavour'd to corrupt it but that Arius and his Followers intending to introduce a New Doctrine contrary to the Truth the Council of Nice condemn'd it and made a Confession of Faith to establish the Truth and extinguish the Flame that was kindled by his Partizans That this Creed was prais'd and sincerely believ'd in all the Churches of Christ till some Bishops having a mind to revive the Error of the Arians began to despise it and yet they did not openly declare themselves against it but only in their Explications of it they reflected obliquely upon the Consubstantiality and spoke Blasphemies against the Holy Spirit After they have thus explain'd the Nicene Creed they set it down and tell the Emperour That this is the only Creed to which we must adhere I say nothing of the Conferences of the Arians and St. Athanasius because they contain little remarkable The Catholick Epistle to the Bishops of Egypt Arabia Syria Cilicia and Phoenicia was written as well as the preceeding Letters in the Name of the Synod of Egyptian Bishops in which St. Athanasius presided They Exhort the Bishops to whom they write to separate themselves from the Arians to act unanimously in the Defence of the Faith and not to dissemble the Truth for Fear or Ambition and to acknowledge the Divinity of the Holy Spirit and at last they propose to them as a Badge and Test of the true Faith these words The Consubstantial Trinity The Letter to the Africans was written upon the same Subject in the Name of St. Athanasius and 82 Egyptian Bishops wherein they recommend the Faith of the Nicene Council establish'd by 318 Bishops publish'd and receiv'd by all the World because this Synod had follow'd the Doctrine and manner of Expression us'd by the Holy Scriptures and the Fathers In the Letter to John and Antiochus Presbyters St. Athanasius rejoyces because he understood by their Letters written from Jerusalem that a great number of Brethren were re-united in one and the same Communion he reproves those that would trouble the Church by their Disputes about words and wonders that any should dare to reprehend the Doctrine of St. Basil. In the following
He adds That whatever Power the Bishop has he receiv'd it from the Apostles That the right of administring Unction and Baptism of Forgiving Sins of Consecrating the Body of Jesus Christ was devolv'd upon him because he is Successor to the Apostles He concludes this Letter with saying I know very well my dear Brother that the Pardon of sins is not to be granted indifferently to all Sinners and that they are not to be loos'd before there be some Signs of the Will of God that it should be done That Absolution is not to be given but with much precaution and discretion after Sinners have sighed and wept long and when the whole Church has pray'd for them that so no Man may prevent the Judgment of Jesus Christ. If you would write your Thoughts more clearly to me my dear Brother I would Instruct you more fully Sempronianus having answered this Letter St. Pacianus confirm'd the Two Parts of his Letter by Two other Answers In the First he proves what he had said concerning the Name of the Catholick Church and as to what Sempronianus had objected that the People of St. Cyprian had been treated as Apostates as Sectaries c. He shews that they did not commonly carry these Names but on the contrary were always call'd Catholicks whereas Sempronianus cannot deny but the Sect whereof he was did bear the Name of Novatian He answers afterwards to the Accusation of Sempronianus founded upon his making use of a Verse of Virgil in his Letter and shows that a Bishop is allow'd to know humane Learning and to make a profitable use of it He answers also another Accusation against the Catholicks concerning the Persecution which he pretends the Novatians had suffer'd from them He says That the Novatians must not attribute to the Catholicks the severity of some Princes who would not tolerate them That this was not done upon the Complaint and at the desire of Catholicks but by the proper Motion of Christian Princes who espous'd the Interests of the Church That the Powers had reason to Protect the Innocent and to make use of their Authority for the publick Good The rest of this Letter respects some particular Debates between them concerning the Persons of Novatian St. Cyprian and Cornelius St. Pacianus defends and praises these two last and accuses the first of Pride and Schism In the last Letter to Sempronianus he treats of Penance against Novatian He says That all the Doctrine of the Novatians explain'd by Sempronianus is contain'd in this Proposition That Penance is not allow'd after Baptism because the Church cannot forgive Mortal Sin and in short That she destroys her self by receiving Sinners Who is it says he that proposes this Doctrine Is it Moses Is it St. Paul Is it Jesus Christ No it is Novatian And who is this Novatian Is he a Man pure and blameless who has never forsaken the Church who was lawfully Ordain'd Bishop and by the common Methods succeeded in the room of a Bishop deceas'd What do you mean you will tell me It suffices that he has taught this Doctrine But still when was it taught Was it immediately after the Passion of Jesus Christ Not at all It was after the Reign of Decius 300 Years after Christ. But did this Man follow the Prophets Was he a Prophet Did he raise the Dead Did he work Miracles Did he speak all sorts of Languages For at least he ought to have these signs for establishing a new Gospel and though he had yet the Apostle assures us That though an Angel should descend from Heaven to teach us a new Gospel he should be accurs'd Was there never any Person since the coming of Christ till Novatian that understood the Doctrine of Jesus Christ and since the Reign of Decius Is there none but Novatian in the way of Salvation But you will tell me We do not acquiesce in Authority we make use of Reason But as to me who hitherto have been settled in my Religion upon the Authority and Tradition of the Church and am satisfied with the Communion of this Ancient Society I will not now dissent from it I will not seek after Disputes and you who have separated from this Body and divided from your Mother search in Books for every thing that is most secret that you may disturb those that are at rest 'T is not we but you that have raised this Dispute But still let us hear what you say let us examine your Reasons You say That the Church is a Body of Men regenerate by Water and the Holy Spirit who have not deny'd the Name of Christ which is the Temple and House of God the Pillar and Ground of Truth we say the same also But who has taken away from us this Living Water Have we it not we who draw from its Fountain But you who are separated from it how can you be regenerate by Baptism How can the Holy Spirit who has not deserted the Church come upon you who are faln off from it How can your People receive the Holy Spirit since they are not Confirm'd by Bishops who have receiv'd the Sacerdotal Unction Have not we had some Confessors and Martyrs Yes you will say you have had but they are now lost by receiving of Apostates I will not tell you that Novatian while he was yet in the Church wrote a Book to prove that we ought to receive them but how do you prove that the whole Church is perish'd by receiving Penitent Sinners If some Churches have shown too great Indulgence must others who have not approv'd them but have follow'd the old way and preserv'd Peace lose upon that account the Name of Christians He proves afterwards by many Reasons That the Church by receiving Penitent Sinners did not cease to be the Church and that the Schism of Novatian made his Disciples lose the Title of the Sons of the Church He strongly urges the Testimony of Novatian who approv'd before his Separation the Conduct of those that receiv'd the laps'd that were Penitent He describes afterwards the Origin of the Sect of Novatians and says That Novatus an African Priest being convicted in his own Country of many Crimes came to Rome to avoid the Condemnation which he had deserv'd and that being arriv'd there he perswaded Novatian who was vex'd that Cornelius was Ordain'd Bishop of Rome he perswaded him I say to procure himself to be Ordain'd Bishop and advis'd him for gaining his design to object against Cornelius the ill Conduct he observ'd in receiving Penitent Sinners St. Pacianus enters upon this Matter and justifies against the Novatians the Conduct of Cornelius by showing that we ought to receive Sinners to Penance and that God has given his Church the Power of forgiving Sins But at the same time he takes Notice That there is not the same reason of Penance as of Baptism for the former ought to be accompanied with much Labour with Tears and Sighs He confutes the Objections of
Books of Compunction of heart to Stelechius Ed. Eton v. 6. p. 151. P. v. 4. p. 121. Three Books of Divine Providence to Stagirius Ed. Eng. v. 6. p. 84. P. v. 4. p. 1. 7. A Treatise of Virginity Ed. Eng. v. 6. p. 244. P. v. 4. p. 275. Two Discourses against Womens dwelling with Clergymen Ed. Eng. v. 6. p. 214. and 230. P. v. 4. p. 225. and 247. Another Discourse shewing That a Clergyman ought not to use jesting Ed. Eng. v. 6. p. 963. P. v. 6. p. 594. Two Discourses to a Young Widow Ed. Eng. v. 6. p. 296. and 304. P. v. 4. p. 456. and 469. A Treatise to shew that no man can be offended but by himself Edit Eng. v. 7. p. 36. P. v. 4. p. 498. Two Letters to Pope Innocent Ed. P. v. 4. p. 593. and 599. A Letter concerning his Persecution to the Priests and Bishops cast into Prison Edit P. p. 600. Two hundred forty two Letters to Olympias and others Ed. Eng. v. 7. p. 51. to p. 205. P. v. 4. p. 603 c. to p. 834. A Letter to Caesarius a Monk Printed by it self Spurious Book Liturgy Edition Eton v. 6. p. 983. P. v. 4. p. 522. Edit Eng. and Eton signifies Sir Henry Savile's Edition in Greek P. is Paris Edition in Greek and Latin L. is the Lions Edition only in Latin ANTIOCHUS Genuine Books A Fragment produced by Theodoret in his Second Dialogue Other Fragments produced by Gelasius in the Book of the two Natures Books Lost. A Discourse against Covetousness A Sermon upon the Parable of the Man that was Born Blind and several other Homilies SEVERIANUS Genuine Books A Sermon on the Seals another upon the brazen Serpent several others which are found among St. Chrysostom's Six Sermons of the Creation of the World Two Fragments produced by Gelasius and some others drawn from the Catenae upon the Scripture Books Lost. A Commentary upon the Epistle to the Galatians A Treatise upon the Feast of the Baptism and Epiphany of Jesus Christ. A Discourse against Novatus and several Sermons ASTERIUS Genuine Books Eleven Sermons on different Subjects Extracts of several others related by Photius Three Homilies upon the Psalms published by Cotelerius if they are really his Books Lost. Several other Sermons ANASTASIUS Genuine Book A Letter to John of Jerusalem Books Lost. A Synodical Letter against Origen A Letter to Rufinus A Letter to Venerius A Treatise of the Incarnation Supposititious Books Two Letters one to the Bishops of Germany and Burgundy and the other to Nectarius CHROMACIUS Genuine Book A Discourse upon the Beatitudes Books Lost. Commentaries upon the whole Gospel of St. Matthew Several Sermons Supposititious Book Letter of Chromacius to St. Jerom upon the Martyrology GAUDENTIUS Genuine Books Nineteen Sermons Four small Treatises The Life of St. Philastrius JOHN of Jerusalem Book Lost. An Apologetick against his Enemies Supposititious Book Treatise to Caprasius of the Institution of Monks THEOPHILUS of Alexandria Genuine Books Three Paschal Letters among the Works of St. Jerom. Three other Letters ibid. Some Greek Fragments of other Paschal Letters related by Theodoret and the Councils of Ephesus and Chalcedon Another Fragment of his Treatise against Origen and two Fragments of a Treatise addressed to the Monks of Scitha Five Canonical Letters Books Lost. A Treatise against Origen A Treatise against the Anthropomorphites A Cycle of the Feast of Easter A Treatise to the Monks of Scitha written against St. John Chrysostom Two first Paschal Letters and the Sixth THEODORUS of Mopsuestia * Vide the Catalogue of his Works in his Life PALLADIUS Genuine Books Historia Lausiaca Life of St. John Chrysostom written perhaps by another Palladius INNOCENT I. Genuine Works Thirty four Letters whereof the Thirtieth is Supposititious St. JEROM Genuine Books still Extant Forty nine Letters of Exhortation Instruction or Commendation with the Lives of St. Paul the Hermit St. Hilarion and Malchus contained in the first Tome of his Works A Treatise against Helvidius Two Books against Jovinian An Apology for those Books addressed to Pammachius An Apologetical Letter to Domnion and Pammachius A Letter and Treatise against Vigilantius A Letter to Marcella against Montanus A Letter to Riparius against Vigilantius A Letter to Apronius against the Origenists Two Letters to Damasus upon the Hypostases A Dialogue against the Luciferians A Letter to Avitus concerning the Errours of Origen A Translation of the Letter of St. Epiphanius to John of Jerusalem A Letter to Pammachius against the Errours of John of Jerusalem A Letter to Theophilus against the same A Letter to Rufinus Three Books of Apology against Rufinus A Letter to Ctesiphon and Three Books of Dialogues against the Pelagians Three Letters to Theophilus A Letter against Vigilantius Some other Letters on divers Subjects of Doctrine particularly to St. Augustin A Treatise of the best manner of Transâating Fifty Critical Letters or thereabouts upon the Holy Scriptures A Book of the Names of Countries and Cities mentioned in the Bible An Explication of the Proper Names of the Hebrews An Explication of the Hebrew Alphabet and Jewish Traditions Letters to Minerius and Paulinus A Treatise of Illustrious Men or of Ecclesiastical Writers A Latin Version of the Text of the Bible from the Septuagint A New Version from the Hebrew Text. Eighteen Books of Commentaries upon Isaiah Six Books upon Jeremiah Fourteen Books upon Ezekiel One Book upon Daniel A Commentary upon Ecclâsiasâes and upon the Twelve minor Prophets A Harmony of the Four Gospels Four Books of Notes upon the Gospel of St. Matthew Commentaries upon the Epistles of St. Paul to the Galatians to the Ephâsians to Titus and to Philemon A Translation of the Book of Diâymus concerning the Holy Ghost A Translation of some Homilies of Origer A Translation of Eusebius's Chronicon Books Lost. Annotations upon the Psalms A Commentary upon the Tenth Psalm and upon the Six following A Treatise upon the Book of Job A Treatise of Heresies A Treatise of the Resurrection A Letter to Antius Annotations upon the Prophets Supposititious Books Questions upon the Chronicles and upon the Books of Kings An Explication of the Names of Countries and Cities spoken of in the Acts of the Apostles A Commentary upon the Lamentations of Jeremiah A Book of Annotations upon St. Mark A Commentary upon the Psalms A Commentary upon the Epistles of St. Paul A Letter to Demetrias Letters and Treatises in the last Tome upon which there is a Censure past at the end of the Account of St. Jerom's Works in this Volume RUFINUS Genuine Books Translations of the Works of several Authors of which there is a Catalogue in Rufinus's Life Two Books of Ecclesiastical History A Discourse concerning the Falsification of the Books of Origen A Book of Invectives against St. Jerom. An Apology to Pope Anastasius An Explication of the Creed An Explication of the Benedictions of Jacob. A Commentary upon the Prophets Hosea Joel and Amos. Books Lost. Several Letters
hath been lawfully and judicially condemned by the Holy See His principal Reason is this That the Bishop of Rome hath done nothing but executed the Decree of the Council of Chalcedon which principally belongs to the Holy See That there was no need of a new Synod since the Matter having been already determined Acacius hath condemned himself by joyning himself to Persons condemned In the next place he relates the business of Acacius after what manner the Holy See having discovered that he favoured Petrus Mongus had admonished him several times of it but he had never given any satisfaction to it That having been accused by John Bishop of Alexandria Bishop of the second See and cited before the first See of the World he would neither appear himself nor send any other Person to appear for him How he had likewise corrupted the Legats of the Holy See and persisted to communicate with Hereticks That having written to the Holy See against John he would not condescend to accuse him judicially there That he who was Bishop of a small See had refused to do that which he saw the Bishop of the second See to do That after this refusal the Holy See by executing the Council of Chalcodon had condemned him That Timotheus Aelurus and Petrus Mongus had been condemned in the same manner by the Judgment of the Holy See only That the Holy Church of Rome hath right to judge all others since the Canons allow Appeals to his Judgment from all parts of the World That after this Judgment he neither had nor could be absolved by any Synod That the Holy See can absolve such Persons as have been condemned by the Synods as it absolved heretofore St. Athanasius and St. John Chrysostom and lately Flavian That on the contrary it had condemned Dioscorus and rejected his Synod That there are good and bad Councils That an unlawful Council is that which doth any thing contrary to Holy Scripture the Doctrine of the Fathers and the Decrees of the Church and which the whole Church and chiefly the Holy See doth not approve And a lawful Synod is that which judgeth according to Scripture the Tradition of the Fathers and the Ecclesiastical Laws which all the Church receiveth and the Holy See approveth That a Synod of this sort cannot be found fault with And such was the Council of Chalcedon which condemneth Eutyches and his Followers That all those that approve the Doctrine of this Heretick or communicate with those that approve him although they be Bishops assembled in a Synod are involved in the same Condemnation That there is no need of another Synod to condemn them 't is enough to put the Council of Chalcedon in Execution which is all the Holy See hath done in this Affair That Acacius had done well in other Matters but had thrust out John the Orthodox Bishop of Alexandria and put into his place which he had made void by his own Authority Petrus Mongus an Heretick whom he himself had condemned that he also deprived Calendion Bishop of the third See to put in his place Petrus Fullo a notorious Heretick That he had not called a Synod to do these things nor to remove such Orthodox Bishops That he had arrogated to himself such Prerogatives as did not belong to him That he could not say That he was forced by the Emperor to do these things since he had stoutly resisted the Emperors Basiliscus and Zeno upon other occasions That this last did boast that he did nothing in all this Affair without the Council of Acacius That it was certain that Acacius did not endeavour to hinder the Emperor from troubling the Orthodox as he was obliged That he ought not to exalt himself the more because he was Bishop of the Royal City because that doth not give a Sovereign Title since there were several other Cities which were Imperial Seats as Ravenna * Mâdiolanum Milan Sermium which had not for all that any such Prerogatives That the Church of Constantinople was not to compare with those of Alexandria and Antioch because not only it was not a Patriarchal See but because it had not the Dignity of a Metropolis That the presence of the Emperor and the Prae-eminency of the City ought not to impart any Ecclesiastical Dignity to him That the Emperor Marcian who had done his utmost to procure him such Prerogatives as were not due to him had himself acknowledged that St. Leo had reason to oppose it That Anatolius who endeavoured to enlarge his Rights was forced to abandon them That although it were the Emperor who had deprived John of Alexandria and Calendion Acacius ought to have opposed ãâã and not stir him up against them That although it were true that the first had blotted out the Name of the Emperor and the other had told him a Lye yet he ought not to deprive them before they were convicted and condemned by a Synod These are some of the Reasons which Gelasius propounds in this Manifesto The 14th Letter is a Fragment of another Memoir containing the Acts which might serve to justifie the Condemnation of Acacius We have still a Letter of Simplicius to Acacius wherein this Pope advises him not to suffer P. Mongus to be received into Communion before he hath done Penance and then to admit him only into the rank of Lay-men As also a Fragment of a Letter of Pope Foelix to the Emperor Zeno against the same Mongus a Letter of Acacius against Tim. Aeâârus and P. Mongus with some Reflexions of Gelasius upon this Last piece The 15th is a Manifesto to the Eastern Bishops which contains almost the same things with the 13th Letter The Letters taken out of the Collection of Canons of Cardinal Deus-dedit are Commissions about different Affairs The First for the Ordination of a Priest in a New Parish The Second for the Ordination of a Deacon The Third is about the affair of those Clergy-men of Nola who were disobedient to their Bishop who had been sent to the Pope by Theodoricus The Fourth is for the Restauration of the Worship of God in a Church where it had been discontinued because there were no Revenues The Fifth is a Commission to inspect the ill Management of a Bishop who was accused of converting the Goods of the Church to his own use The ãâã is to enquire into the Murther of a Christian Slave and into an Insolence offered to a Bishop The Seventh is an Order to seperate such Persons from Communion as have wronged the Church The Eighth is an Injunction to a Bishop to restore a Chalice which his Predecessor ãâã taken from another Church The Ninth iâ against those Bishops which encroach upon the Jurisdiction of their Brethren This imports that the Metropolitan shall ordain all the Bishops of his Province and that the Bishops of the Province shall ordain the Metropolitan The Last contains an Abrictgment of some of the Rules laid down in the 13th To these Letters may
Scripture and Tradition begun to be cultivated by the most able Divines who applied themselves to useful Questions about Doctrin and Morality and handled them after a clear and solid manner without entangling them with Philosophical terms and the thorny Questions of Metaphysicks Peter of Ailly John Gerson and Nicholas Clemangis led the way and shew'd an Example clear'd their Writings of that Barbarism and Obscurity which reign'd before them in the Sums and the ordinary Commentaries of Theologues and without insisting upon Questions purely Scholastical handled divers Matters of Doctrin of Morality and Discipline In the Disputes which the Latin Church had against the Greeks and against the Wiclefites and Hussites they had recourse to Scripture and the Tradition of the Church for opposing them which occasion'd the Writers of Controversie to study the Greek and Latin Fathers in their Originals There were also able Men in the Hebrew and Greek Tongues such as Paul of Burges Jerome of St. Faith and Anthony Lebrixa who applied themselves to explain the Literal Sense of Holy Scripture and to resolve the chief Difficulties that might be rais'd about those Passages that were more obscure Great pains also was taken for reforming the Manners and Diâcipline of the Church and many Authors signaliz'd themselves by publishing excellent Works upon this Subject wherein they did freely expose the Abuses and shew'd the Remedies that might be applied unto them The Doctors of the Canon-Law did no longer slavishly tie themselves to the Decrees and Decretals but begun to look higher to the Original Canons and to inform themselves of the Ancient Discipline Devotion was advanc'd to the highest degree and by some even to those Excesses which are not tolerable In those times indeed there was no perfect Historian but there were many moderately good whose Style was tolerable The Casuists had their Rise almost about that time and from their first beginning they introduc'd some loose Opinions and debated useless Questions besides That the meanness of their Style renders them contemptible Yet there were some Authors who wrote upon these Subjects with all the Elegance and Sublimity of Style that was possible But the Eloquence of the Pulpit had not the good fortune to be so easily restor'd all that can be said in honour of the Preachers of this Age is this That among many whose Sermons were mean childish and unworthy of bearing the Name of the Word of God there were some that deliver'd sound Morality and useful Instructions but without Eloquence and Loftiness of Style The Study of Greek Latin Poetry and Polite Learning flourish'd towards the end of this Century which has furnish'd us with most valuable Writers of this kind This is in general the Idea which may be form'd of the Writers in the Fifteenth Century We shall now say something of each in particular and insist upon the Works of those who deserve to have Extracts taken out of them passing slightly over the rest of them We shall begin with three famous Theologues of the University of Paris The first is Peter of Ailly born at Compiegne in the Year 1350. of a very obscure Family Peter of Ailly Petrus de Alliaco Cardinal who rose by his Merits to the Dignity of Cardinal He owes this Advancement to the College of Navar which receiv'd him into the number of its Bursars about the Year 1372. From that time he begun to make himself known by his Writings of Philosophy wherein he follows the Principles of the Nominals Afterwards in the same place he explain'd the Master of the Sentences towards the Year 1375. His Reputation procur'd him to be chosen to assist at a Synod in Amiens where he made a Discourse to the Priests of that Diocess tho' he himself was yet but Sub-deacon He receiv'd the Doctor 's Bonnet at Paris the 11th of April 1380 and the next Year made a Discourse before the Duke of Anjou in the name of the University wherein he prov'd that it was necessary to Call a General Council to put an end to the Schism The same Year he was made Canon of Noyon and stay'd there till the Year 1384. when he was call'd back to Paris to be the Superior of the College of Navar he discharg'd the Duty of the Place with Honour and deserv'd Commendation for his Lessons and Sermons Out of his School came John Gerson Nicholas Clemangis and Giles of Champs the most celebrated Theologues of this Time The University of Paris could find no Person more fit than this Doctor to maintain their Cause against John Monteson at the Tribunal of Pope Clement VII whom therefore they deputed to the Court of Avignon where he pleaded himself the Cause of the University against Monteson with so much Vigor That the Pope and Cardinals confirm'd the Judgment of the University Being return'd from this Deputation in the Year 1389. he was honoured with three considerable Dignities viz. of Chancellor of the University Almoner and Confessor to King Charles VI. In the Year 1394 he was appointed Treasurer of the Holy Chappel and sent by the King to Benedict XIII to labour for the Peace of the Church After this he was chosen successively to two Bishopricks in the Year 1395. to that of Puy in Velay and in the Year 1396. to that of Cambray he took Possession of the latter and laid down his Office of Chancellor of the University in favour of John Gerson He took great pains afterwards to extirpate the Schism and assisted at the Council of Pisa. In fine John XXIII made him Cardinal by the Title of St. Chrysogone in the Year 1411 and in this Quality he was present at the General Council of Constance and was one of those that had a great Hand in all that was done there There he compos'd some Treatises and made many Sermons about the Matters which were handled in the Council and afterwards he return'd to Cambray where he died in the Year 1425. There are many Works of Peter of Ailly Printed and in Manuscript The Printed are as follows Short Commentaries upon the four Books of the Sentences Printed a-part in the Year 1500 and at Stratsburgh in 1490 together with the following Treatises Questions or Principles upon the four Books of the Sentences a Recommendation of the Holy Scripture Principles upon the Course of the Bible and chiefly upon the Gospel of St. Mark Quaestio Vesperiarum Whether the Church of Jesus Christ is govern'd by the Law The Question de Resumpta Whether the Church of St. Peter is govern'd by a King regulated by a Law confirm'd by the Faith and has a Right to Dominion In the same year and at the same place there were also Printed many Treatises of Piety by the same Author which have been also Re-printed at Douay in 1634 viz. the Mirror of Consideration which contains twelve Chapters A Compend of Contemplation divided into three Treatises whereof the 1st consists of 12 Chapters of the 2d of the 2d of St. Thomas
the Processes made against Peter de Luna in the Council to shew that he is Perjur'd Schismatical one that gives Scandal to the Church of God and is suspected of Heresie and that as such he ought to be depos'd In the last Piece he examins this Proposition Whether the Sentence of a Pastor tho' it be unjust ought to be observ'd and he maintains That it is false erroneous suspected in Matter of Faith He explains also this other Proposition Unjust Sentences are to be fear'd that is that they may sometimes be the occasion of fear with respect to timerous Consciences but not that they are in themselves formidable The Treatise of the Incarnation which follows consists of two Parts in the first he treats of the Natural Incarnation of Jesus Christ and in the second of the Eucharist In the former he speaks of the immaculate Conception of the Virgin of the Perfections and Graces which she receiv'd from Jesus Christ who gave her all those which he in his Wisdom thought convenient but not all those which he could have given her As for instance he gave her not the perfect use of her Reason immediately after her Conception or Birth which would be a rash Assertion In the second Part he treats of the actual Reception of the Body of Jesus Christ in the Eucharist he examines what we ought to think of the Spiritual Sentiments of Love and the Tenderness which some of the Faithful feel and shews that they are not necessary that often times they are Illusions that when one gives himself up to them he is liable to fall into Extravagances and Errors John Rusbroek had fallen into this Excess in the third part of his Book about the Ornament of the Spiritual Marriage where he advances many Propositions about the Union of the Contemplative Soul with God Gerson refutes him in the Letter which he wrote to a Carthusian wherein he shews how dangerous it was to make use of new Terms to express the more sublime Truths of Divinity and that those who have not studied the Doctrins of Religion how contemplative soever they may be ought not to meddle with Teaching or talking of speculative Truths because they are liable to fall into dangerous Errors or at least to advance many Propositions that are false and ill-express'd which give occasion to the common People to fall into Error John Schonhow wrote a Piece to defend the Treatise of Rusbroek to which Gerson answer'd in a second Letter wherein he shews that these Novelties cannot be excus'd nor maintain'd This Piece of John Schonhow and the Answer of Gerson follow the first Letter whereof we now speak The two Lectures upon St. Mark are Discourses wherein he handles divers Questions of Morality and Discipline as about the Validity of Confessions made to Friars Mendicants the Reiteration of Confession the literal Sense of the Scripture the Causes of Errors c. He shews in a Piece about the Communion of the Laity under both kinds that though the Scripture is the Rule of Faith yet it may admit some Interpretations and that it belongs to the Church to explain it In the second Part of this Piece he opposes the Error of those who maintain'd That it was necessary to Salvation for the Laity to communicate under both kinds and relates the Reasons for justifying the taking away the Cup from them The two next Treatises are very useful for establishing such genuine Principles whereby we may distinguish true Doctrin from that which is false The former is entitled The Tryal of Spirits and the latter The Examination of Doctrins In the former he gives Rules for distinguishing false Revelations from true in the latter he lays down the Maxims by which we may know to whom it belongs to examine a Doctrin and what Rules they are to follow in this Examination A General Council is the Sovereign Judge of Doctrins of Faith after it the Pope whose Authority nevertheless is not infallible and each Bishop in his own Diocess whose Decision is different from that of the Pope so that the Authority of the first extends to the whole Church whereas the two last can oblige only those that are subject to their Jurisdiction The Doctors also have an Authentick Judgment in Matters of Doctrin and each Person instructed in Scripture and Tradition may also give his Judgment and teach even the Pope and Prelats those Truths which he knows The same is to be said of those who have the Spirit of Discretion and Understanding The Rules which we are to follow in judging of a Doctrin whether it be sound or no are these First That it be agreeable to Scripture and Tradition Secondly That he who Teaches have Authority to do it and be worthy of Credit upon which account the Visions and Revelations of Women are commonly suspected because they may be easily seduc'd Thirdly That we ought to examine the Design of him that publishes a Doctrin whether he be acted by Pride Interest or Pleasure In the end of this Treatise he relates the Example of a Woman in a Town of Bresse who persuaded many Persons that she had deliver'd Souls out of Hell by feigning Extasies and wonderful Things and by using extraordinary Abstinence and who being taken confess'd that she seign'd all these things to get a Livelihood He adds afterwards other Rules very useful to preserve us from these ways of Seducing He makes an Encomium of St. Bonaventure in a Letter written 1426 to a Frair Minor at Lyons and in another Letter written 1424. to Oswald a Carthusian In the Letter address'd to the Students of the College of Navar he gives his Opinion about the Studies a Divine ought to follow As to the Schoolmen he advises them to read William Auxerres St. Bonaventure Durand Henry of Gandavo and St. Thomas chiefly in his 2d of the 2d He blames these Authors and the like only for one thing That they have handled Questions purely Physical Metaphysical or even Logical in Theological terms As to Morality he advises them to read Matters of History the Dialogues of St. Gregory the Conferences and Lives of the Fathers the Confessions of St. Austin and the Legends of the Saints As to Preaching the Mystical Expositions of the Fathers such as the Morals and Pastoral care of St. Gregory the Commentary of St. Bernard upon the Canticles and some Works of Richard of St. Victor and of William of Paris As to the Works of Prophane Authors he would not have a Christian give his Mind wholly to them but only look into them and curiously run them over like a Traveller to pick up their moral Sentences to form a Style and to render himself moderately skill'd in History and Poetry In a Letter written to the same he gives them Instructions and exhorts them not to oppose the Re-establishment of the French Preachers in the University of Paris but to favour it Gerson being consulted by a Carthusian if he might quit his Convent or
weaker for why might not the Hebrew Copy of this Epistle be lost as well as the Original Hebrew of the Gospel of St. Matthew r But of St. James the Brother of the Apostle St. Jude and Coâsin of our Blessed Saviour This âames is he that is called in the Gospel the Son of Alpheus for there were but two in all He is called the Brother of our Lord either because he was the Son of Joseph by another Wife or because he was very nearly related to him s It was written from Babylon Eusebius l. 2. c. 5. of his History says that it is Rome that St. Peter calls Babylon in this place Some have thought that Papias and St. Clement cited by Eusebius were of this opinion but he does not cite them upon this Subject St. Jerome received this opinion from Eusebius and carried it farther with strong Reasons Tho after all this Interpretation is false and it is more natural to say that he wrote this Epistle from Babylon t St. Peter discovers himself so plainly there that we cannot with the least colour attribute it to any other Author The Author of this Epistle tells us that he was with Jesus Christ upon the Mountain he calls St. Paul his Brother and makes himself Author of a former Epistle written to the same Persons Now all this agrees very well to St. Peter and it is visible that he who composed it was no Impostor The Character of this Epistle is perfectly Apostolical and the Style is not sensibly different from that of the first SECT VI. Of the Canon of the Books of the New Testament and particularly of those Books that were formerly doubted of THE first Canon of the Holy Books of the New Testament was not composed by any Assembly or by any one Person in particular but by the Unanimous Consent of all the Churches that were agreed upon the Authority of certain Books and considered them as Sacred and Divine 'T was this Consent of all the Churches that in the Primitive Times served for a Rule to distinguish the Canonical Books from those that were Doubtful and Supposititious 'T is in pursuance of this Rule that Eusebius who is the first Man that made an exact Enquiry into these Matters distinguishes three sorts of Books that belong in some manner to the New Testament The first Class comprehends those that have been always received by the Unanimous Agreement of all Churches such as the four Gospels the fourteen Epistles of St. Paul if we except that of the Hebrews which some Authors did not number amongst the rest because they supposed it was not St. Paul's and the first Epistles of St. Peter and St. John The second Class comprehends those that having not been received by the whole Catholick Church yet nevertheless were looked upon by some as Canonical Books and cited as Books of Scripture by Ecclesiastical Authors But this Class does yet branch it self into two Divisions for some of these Books have been since received by all the Churches and acknowledged for Genuine such as the Epistle of St. James the Epistle of St. Jude the second Epistle of St. Peter the second and third Epistle of St. John The other on the contrary have been universally rejected either as Spurious or unworthy to be placed in the number of Canonical Books though they might otherwise be useful enough such as the Book of the Pastor the Epistle of St. Barnabas the Gospel according to the Aegyptians another according to the Hebrews the Acts of St. Paul the Revelation of St. Peter In short the last Class contains those Books that were devised by the Hereticks and were always disowned by the Church such as the Gospels of St. Thomas and of St. Peter c. As for what concerns the Apocalypse of which we have not as yet discoursed Eusebius observes that some Persons place it in the first Class that is to say in the number of those Books that are unquestionably Canonical and that others reckon it amongst the Books of the second Class This observation of Eusebius which is confirmed by the Testimonies of the Ancients whom he cites in several places of his History shews that the Canon of the Books of the New Testament was almost the very same in all Times For although there were some of the Epistles of the Apostles that at first were not received by an Unanimous Consent of all Churches yet they were always considered as Books of great Authority and soon after they received the same Authority with the rest This is confirmed by the ancient Catalogues of the Holy Books of the New Testament where the Books which we receive at present are comprised You will find all of them except the Revelation in the Canon of the Council of Laodicea which St. Cyril of Jerusalem follows They are all received by St. Athanasius St. Jerome St. Gregory Nazianzen by Amphilochius the Council of Carthage the Council at Rome by Pope Innocent and all the other Greek and Latin Authors since Eusebius They are all cited as Holy Books by those Authors that lived nearest the time of the Apostles In short 't is beyond Controversie as we have already demonstrated above that these Books were written by those Persons whose Names they bear The Epistles themselves that were formerly questioned contain nothing disagreeable to the Faith and Doctrine contained in the other Books that have been received and acknowledged by all the Churches from the beginning The Epistle to the Hebrews has been received as Canonical with the Consent of almost all Churches They were only a few Latines that question'd its Authority because they did not believe it to be written by St. Paul But although it was not composed by him which is not probable as we have already shewn yet it ought nevertheless to pass for Canonical it being a constantly received Tradition that it was written by one of his Disciples and that it was owned by almost all the Chuches of the World as soon as it appeared in publick It is cited by Clemens Romanus in his Epistle to the Corinthians by Clemens Alexandrinus by Tertullian and Origen by St. Cyprian and all those that came after as a Writing undoubtedly Canonical We cannot find out the particular Author that questioned the Epistle of St. James as doubtful it is cited by all the Ancients and placed in the number of Canonical Books in all the Catalogues that we have The same Observation may be made upon the second Epistle of St. Peter which was certainly written by that Author as we have elsewhere shewn It is cited by St. Austin by Origen and by many other ancient Writers The Epistle of St. Jude was rejected by some not because they had any lawful Grounds to doubt that St. Jude was the Author of it but only because there is a Citation out of the Book of Enoch to be found there And yet notwithstanding that it was set down in the ancient Catalogues of the Books of the New
the Gospels of Thaddeus Barnabas and Andrew and those that were ââ¦ted by Hesychius together with a Book concerning the Inââncy of Jesus Christ and another relating to the Genealogy of the Virgin Mary attributed to St. Matthew and reckon'd by Gelasââs in the number of Apocryphal Writings that were forg'd by Hereticks Of the counterfeit Acts of the Apostles and of the false Revelations FOrasmuch as the Acts of St. Luke contain only a very small part of the Transactions of some of the Apostles since he gives no account of the proceedings of all neither doth he describe Counterfeit Acts of the Apostles and false Revelations at large even all the Actions of those that are mentioned by him They that applied themselves to the counterfeiting of these Records were furnished with great variety of matter wherein they might exercise their deoeitful Arts. The first that practised this Artifice was a certain Priest and a Disciple of St. Paul who being inflamed with a false Zeal for his Master forged under the name of St. Luke the Acts of Paul and Thecla and was convicted of this Imposture by St. John as we are assured by Tertullian and after him by St. Jerome However the simplicity of this ancient Priest might be more easily excused in regard that he had no ill design but we cannot but be seized with horror when we reflect on the enormous practices of the Hereticks who have presumed to write the Acts of divers Apostles at their pleasure wherein they have obtruded their detestible Errors Such were the Acts of St. Peter and St. Paul devised by the Manichees and mentioned by Philastrius in which the Apostles were introduced affââming that the Souls of Men and of Beasts were of the saine nature and working Miracles to cause Dogs and Sheep to speak The Acts of St. Andrew of St. John and of the Apostles in general substituted by the same Hereticks according to the Testimony of St. Epiphanius Philastrius and St. Augustin a PHilastr Haeres 48. Epiph. 47. and St. Aug. Lib. de fide contra Manich. The Acts of the Apostles counterfeited by the Ebionites and cited by St. Epiphanius in his description of their Heresie The Doctrine Preaching Voyages and Disputes of St. Peter falsely attributed to St. Clement containing the Errors of the Ebionites and the b In Greek ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã This might admit divers significations but St. Epiphanius determines it to signifie an Account of St. Paul's being lifted up to Heaven It contained abstruse Matters and seemed to be the same with the Secrets or Revelation of St. Paul St. Augustin quotes this Book in Joan. Tract 98. History of St. Paul's being snatched up into Heaven being a Work compiled by the Gajanites whereof the Gnosticks likewise made use and St. Epiphanius assures us Haeres 8. The Acts of St. Philip and of St. Thomas received among the Encratites and the Apostolicks as is also observed by the same St. Epiphanius in Haeres 47 and 61. The Memoirs of the Apostles invented by the Priscillianists The Itinerary of the Apostles rejected in the second Council of Nice Act. 5. to which may be added several false Relations as that of the Lots of the Apostles rejected in the Decretal The Writings of the Apostles compiled by Dictinius and disallowed in the Synod of Braga chap. 17. A Book of the Priesthood of Jesus Christ cited by Suidas the Author whereof pretended to prove that our Saviour was descended from the Tribe of Levi and that he was reckoned by the Jews among the Priests A Tract Intituled Liber Apostolicus which was a Rhapsody devised by Marcion and whereof St. Epiphanius makes mention And a Book concerning the Death and Assumption of the Virgin Mary ascribed to St. John as also the Interrogations of the Blessed Virgin composed by the Gnosticks together with another Book concerning her Genealogy published by the same Authors Lastly there are several counterfeit Apocalypses or Revelations as the Revelations of the great Apostle forged by Cerinthus The Apocalypse of St. Peter which Eusebius in Book 3. chap. 25. of his History reckons in the number of those spurious Books that are not Heretical and which as Sozomen affirms was read every year about the time of Easter in the Churches of Palestine And the Revelation or the Secerts of St. Paul which was heretofore very much esteemed by the Monks The Egyptians according to the Testimony of Sozomen boasted that they had it in their possession and it is inserted in the Catalogue of Apocryphal Books by Gelasius together with the Revelations of St. Thomas and St. Stephen None of these Books are now extant neither ought we to be troubled for their loss Of the Epistle to the Laodiceans and some others attributed to St. Paul BEsides the fourteen Epistles of St. Paul some of the ancient Writers have likewise cited one directed to the Laodiceans and indeed we have at present an Epistle mentioned by St. Anselm St. Paul's Letter to the Laodiceans Sâxtus Senensis and Stapulensis which is inserted in some German Bibles a INserted in some German Bibles It was published in Latin by Pistorus and afterwards annexed to the German Bibles printed at Ausburg Worines and Amsterdam Particularly in those Bibles which Eliâs Hutterus set out in Hebrew Greek Latin and German in Quarto and is written in St. Paul's Name to the Laodiceans It is not certain whether this be the same with that which was used when St. Jerome lived b Whether this be the same as that which was used when St. Jerome lived That which gives occasion to doubt whether this Epistle be the same with that which was published heretofore is that Philastrius affirms in chap. 88. That that which was extant in his time contained several Errors and there are none in that which we now have Moreover that which is cited by St. Epiphanius was composed out of several Sentences of the Epistle to the Ephesians however it is evident that that which we now have in our possession doth not appertain to St. Paul c That which we now have in our possession doth not appertain to St. Paul It is not conformable to the Style of St. Paul it is extremely concise even shorter than that to Philemon neither hath it any one particular Subject and that that which was extant in St. Jerome's time was generally rejected as he declares in his Catalogue ab omnibus exploditur That which gave occasion to the forging of this Letter as is observed by Theodoret is that St. Paul at the end of his Epistle to the Colossians exhorts them to cause the Epistle that he had sent to them to be read by the Laodiceans and to read among themselves that from Laodicea this hath induced some to believe that there was an Epistle written to the Laodiceans at the same time with that to the Colossians and this also gave Marcion the opportunity of altering the Title of the Epistle to the
term that was not inserted in the Divine Offices till a long time after St. James even according to the Confession of Bellarmin 5. In this Liturgy there is mention made of Churches Incense Altars c. can it be imagined that these things were used in St. James's time 6. We find therein very many Citations of the Epistles of St. Paul the greatest part whereof were written after St. James's death neither ought we to object with the Cardinals Bona and Bellarmin that these things were afterwards inserted because it is not probable that they should be added in so many places besides the Connexion and the Ceremonies of this whole Liturgy do not argee with the time of the Apostles I shall not here speak of other Liturgies cited by some Authors such are those of the Twelve Apostles mentioned by Abraham Ecchellensis and that of St. Barnabas quoted by a certain Monk because they are unknown to me neither shall I examine that which is comprised in the Constitutions of St. Clement nor that which is extant in the Writings that are attributed to St. Dionysius the Areopagite in regard that these Books being forged as I shall hereafter shew in another place it is not to be doubted but that the Liturgies which they contain are in like manner fictitious Of the Apostles Creed HAving already Discoursed of the Works of every one of the Apostles in particular it remains that we should now give some account of those that are reputed to be composed by Of the Apostles Creed them in general The most Authentick among these is the Apostles Creed which is generally believed to have been made by all the Apostles But Authors are not agreed about the time wherein it was written by them nor concerning the manner how it was compil'd nor the design they had in making it Some are of Opinion with Ruffinus a RUffinus In Exposit. Symboli Isidore lib. 2. de Off. c. 22. that they compil'd it in the very same year that Jesus Christ died a little after the descent of the Holy Ghost whereas Baronius and others conjecture that they did not finish it till the Second year of the Reign of the Emperor Claudius a little before they were separated As to the manner of their drawing it up some have imagined that every one of the Apostles pronounced b Every one of the Apostles pronounc'd his Article This is the opinion of the Author of the 115th Sermon De Tempore apud Aug. Of St. Leo Ep. 13. now 27. Of Venant Foretunat in Exegesi Symb. Apost his Article and that for this reason it is called a Symbol as consistng of divers Sentences Others believeâ that it was compiled by them after they had conferred all together and there are some also who assert that all the Disciples had a share therein Lastly as to their design in composing it some determine that it was that they might be all found unanimously to agree in one and the same Doctrine c Some determine that it was that they might be all sound unanimously to agree in one and the same Doctrine The former opinion is maintained by Ruffinus and the later by the modern Authors and others that it was for the benefit of the People that they might be able to propound to them an Abridgment of the Christian Faith which should be easie to be understood and to be retained in their Memory The Etymology of the word Symbol is yet more uncertain d The Etymology of the Word Symbol is yet more uncertain The Greek Word ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã properly signifies a Note Sign or Mark therefore the Mystical Signs and Notes of Pythagoras were called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Herodian uses the Word to denote a Military Signal Other Authors as Dion Cassius and Suetonius apply it to signifie Signs or Marks and certain Tickets that were given to those that were to be admitted to publick Shews and for the distribution of Largesses Some say that the Word Symbolum among the Latins signifies an Entertainment where every one pays his Club or even the Club it self But this does not belong to the Neuter Symbolum but to the Feminine Symbola and in Greek ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã as may be seen in Aristophanes's Scholiast in Athenaeus and Plutarch therefore it ought to be read in Terence's Andria Symbolam dedit and not Symbolum Aulus Gellius lib. 6. c. 1. makes use of the Word Symbola to signifie one Man's share in a Reckoning and declares that this Term was also attributed to those Questions that were Expounded by Taurus the Philosopher in the Presence of divers Persons St. Cyprian is the first that applied the Word Symbol to denote an Epitome or Abridgment of the Christian Faith Ep. 45. Optatus calls the Hereticks The Deserters of the true Symbol alluding to a Military Signal And and to the same effect St. Chrysologus in Hom. 62. declares That the Symbol is the Covenant that we make with God in Baptism for some affirm that the Creed is so called because it is as it were the distinguishing Mark and Character of Christians e The distinguishing Mark and Character of Christians This Etymology is produced by Maximus Taurinensis and Venantius Fortunatus It hath been likewise observed by Ruffinus Isidorus Hispalensis lib. 2. de Off. c. 22. and Durandus de Mende lib. 4. Rationalis c. 25. But the second and third Etymology are more common and the last is maintained by Ruffinus S. Aug. Serm. 181. de Tempore Isidore lib. 2. div Off. c. 22. Rabanus Maurus lib. 2. Init. Clerical cap. 56. Durandus supra Eucherius Homil. de Symb. and Innocent III. lib. 2. De Sacris Missae Mysteriis c. 49. The first however is the most probable others because it was composed of the Sentences of several Persons and lastly others on the account of its being made in a general Conference However although it is an Opinion established on very good grounds that this Creed was made by the Apostles and it cannot be denied that they all preached and taught the Articles therein contained after one and the same manner as the main Points of the Doctrine of Jesus Christ in which it was necessary that all Christians should be instructed yet it may be justly doubted without incurring the imputation of rashness whether they were assembled together to compose this Creed and whether they wrote it word for word as it is now received in the Church of Rome nay there are very weighty Reasons whereby it appears that this Opinion though commonly received is nevertheless very improbable For first neither St. Luke in the Acts nor any Ecclesiastical Author before the Fifth Century hath made any mention of this Assembly of the Apostles and none ever affirmed that they composed the Creed of the Church of Rome either by conferring together or by pronouncing every one a particular Article Secondly the Fathers of the Three first Ages disputing against the Hereticks
or Acts of S. Peter This Work tho fictitious is ancient being cited by Origen f Being cited by Origen Tom. ãâã Comment in Genes in Philocal chap. 22. and in Matth. ch 26. Euseb. lib. 3. Hist. chap. 3 and chap. 38. Athanas. in Synops. Epiph. Hâres 30. chap. 25. Hieron in Catalog and Lib. 1. in Jovin chap. 14. and Comment in Ep. ad Gâlat Lib. 1. chap. 18. Ruffinus de Adulterat Lib. Orig. Autor op imp in Matth. chap. 10. vers 15 16 24 and 42 Photius Cod. 112 and 113. Eusebius S. Athanasius S. Epiphanius S. Jerom and the Author of The Commentaries on S. Matthew ascribed to S. Chrysostom Ruffinus hath made a Translation thereof which is still extant Gelasius hath inserted it in the Catalogue of Apocryphal Books and Photius observes that there are Absurdities and Errors to be found in it And indeed it is a Writing full of Fables Tales Conferences and ridiculous Disputes feigned at pleasure and pretended to be holden between S. Peter and Simon Magus concerning certain Events and Occurrences that are related after a childish manner But that which is more dangerous is that we may easily discover in several Passages thereof the Opinions of the Ebionites tho much palliated together with many other Errors In short this Book is of no use if we reflect on the Style and Method in which it is written or on the Things that are comprised therein I shall not pass the same censure upon the Apostolical Constitutions that are likewise falsly imputed to S. Clement and which tho' written by a later Author g Tho' written by a later Author The Author of the Recognitions is not the same with the Author of the Constitutions tho' some have been of this Opinion for their style is different the later is well versed in the Principles of the Christian Religion and in the Rites of the Church but the other is ignorant of these matters moreover they maintain a contrary Doctrine The Author of the Constitutions in lib. 8. c. 46. reckons the Sun Moon and Stars in the number of inanimate Creatures whereas the Author of the Recognitions imagineth that they have a Soul in lib. 5. chap. 16. Lastly the Author of the Constitutions was not an Ebionite but he that writ the Recognitions was yet contain many things very useful to the Discipline of the Church ât is not known by whom nor when they were composed h It is not known by whom âr when they were composed It is certain that they do not belong to the Apostles as we have already evidently demonstrated All that can be certainly affirmed is that they are cited by S. Epiphanius i They are cited by S. Epiphanius In Haeres 45. this Father produceth a passage that is found in the beginning of the Constitutions and in Haeres 80. he cites another which we read in Lib. 1. Constitut. chap. 3. concerning the Beards of Priests In Hâres 25. he quotes a passage taken from Lib. 5. chap. 14 and 17. relating to the Fasts enjoyned on Wednesday and Friday as also on the Days before Easter In Hâres 70. he observes that the Audians made use of certain Constitutions which tho dubious ought not altogether to be rejected as containing nothing contrary to the Faith or Discipline of the Church This may induce us to believe that the Constitutions which are now extant have been corrupted since the time of Epiphanius because the same thing could not be âssâmed of those Add to this that in the same place Epiphanius cites a passage concerning Easter wherein the Christians are admonished to celebrate that Feast together with the Jews and the contrary is expresly declared in Constitut. Lib. 5. chap. 1â Moreover in the same place he produces other Testimonies out of the Constitutions that are not found therein Perhaps S. Epiphanius had not sufficiently examined this Work or perhaps he cited it without Book or on the Report of another However it be he acknowledgeth it to be dubious and the Author of The Commentary on S. Matthew falsly attributed to St. Chrysostom but the passages which are produced by them not perfectly agreeing with those that are found in the Constitutions which are extant at this day we may be induced to conjecture that they have been since corrupted and so much the rather because they are infected with the Arian Heresie k Because they are infected with the Arian Heresie In Lib. 6. chap. 25. the Author reckons in the number of Hereticks those that believe that JESUS is the same with the God of the Universe but this might have been said in opposition to the Sabellians and so much the rather since he adds and do not distinguish the Son and the Holy Ghost Many other Passages are likewise alledged wherein he affirms that the Son and the Word is the Servant and Minister of God the Father These are the Phrases used by the ancient Ecclesiastical Writers but they have been suspected ever since the Council of Nice and several other Errors This is the Judgment that was given concerning them by the Greek Bishops in the Synod that was conven'd in the Imperial Palace of Constantinople after the fifth General Council However I admire that the Learned Photius l That the Learned Photius He censures them on Three several Accounts in âod 112. First ex malafictione from which as he says they may be vindicated Secondly by reason of some Expressions used by the Author which are Contradictory to the Book of Deuteronomy and for these he might likewise be excused and Lastly he chargeth him with Arianism from which he cannot be cleared without offering him some violence hath not made this Observation and that he hath imputed the Errors of this Book to its Primitive Author It remains only to enquire whether this Book be the same as that which is mentioned by Eusebius m Mentioned by Eusebius Euseb. Lib. 3. chap. 25. Athan. in Ep. Fest. Synopsi and S. Athanasius Entituled The Doctrine or the Precepts of the Apostles ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã or ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã This is the Opinion of Nicephorus n Of Nicephorus Niceph. in Stichometria Zonaras in Ep. Ath. Mat. Blastâres in a Collection of Canons that is not Printed Zonaras and Matthaeus Blastares but it seems to me to be most probable that The Constitutions of the Apostles and the Book called their Doctrine were two different Works which the likeness of their Titles hath caused to be confounded o Which the likeness of their Titles hath caused to be confounded There are many Reasons to prove that these are two different Books for first S. Athanasius reckons the Book of the Doctrine of the Apostles among those that were usually read to the Catechumens whereas the Constitutions were Composed rather for the use of Bishops and we find it prohibited in the last Canon to publish them or to discover the Contents thereof to all sorts of
The Doctrine of S. Polycarp as well as one called The Doctrine of S. Clement since it is cited by Maximus Bede Ado Usuardus Metaphrastes Pachyââ¦eres Honorius and Nicephorus Calistus M. Daillé perceiving thâ weakness of his objection against the Epistle of S. Polycarp is obliged to assert that tho the first part is genuine yet the second wherein he mentions those of S. Ignatius iâ supposititious And to prove this he shews that the Epistle was concluded with the Invocation of Jesus Christ and that which follows ought to be esteemed as an addition made afterwards being of no authority But M. Daillé cannot maintain this Hypothesis without rejecting the Testimony of Eusebius and Photius who cite this second part and more especially that which relates to the Letters of S. Ignatius neither doth it signifie any thing to urge that the Epistle was concluded before because it is evident that the Invocation of Jesus Christ is frequently inserted in the middle of an Epistle which is nevertheless continued after this sort of conclusion this is very often to be found in S. Paul's Epistles particularly in the Fifteenth Chapter of his Epistle to the Romans The only objection alledged by M. Daillé that hath any manner of probability is this It is manifest says he that the Author who wrote that part wherein S. Ignatius is mentioned supposeth him to be yet living since he requires the Philippians to inform him concerning the transactions of S. Ignatius and of those that were with him De ipso Ignatio de iis qui cum eo sunt g Qui cum eo sunt It is expressed in the Greek ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã that is to say they that had been with him and who followed him when he passed through Philippi quod certius agnoveritis significate But if we observe these words it will appear that they might as well be written after the death of S. Ignatius as when he was alive and that S. Polycarp only desired an account of the particular Circumstances of the Life and Martyrdom of that eminent Bishop which were not unknown to the Christians of Philippi through which City he had passed in his Journey to Rome This Epistle being full of admirable Counsels Precepts and Exhortations taken from the Holy Scriptures is written with a great deal of elegancy and simplicity as Photius has observed already It was Printed in Latin together with the Epistles of S. Clement and S. Ignatius in the years 1498 1502 1520 1536 and 1550 at Basil in 1579 at Colen in 1530 at Paris in 1569 with the Works of S. Ireneus at Ingolstadt in 1546 at Paris in 1562 and at several other times it is likewise inserted in the Bibliotheca Patrum set forth by La Bigne Besides it was Printed at Colen in 1557 of the Translation of Perionius with the Works of Dionysius the Areopagite and in 1585 with them and the Epistles of S. Ignatius Halloixius first published part thereof in Greek from a Manuscript which Sirmondus had transcribed from a Copy written by Turrianus Usher hath Printed it in Greek and Latin afterwards with the Epistles of S. Ignatius in the year 1644. Cotelerius put it into his Collection of the ancient Records of the Fathers Moderus hath likewise procured it to be reprinted at Helmstadt and lastly it was Printed in Holland in 1687 with a Dissertation concerning the Life and Writings of S. Polycarp in a Collection of Treatises entituled Varia Sacra set forth by M. Le Moine There are several other Works attributed to this ancient Bishop as an Epistle to S. Dionysius the Areopagite quoted by Suides and a Treatise concerning the Union of S. John which is pretended to be kept in the Abby of Fleury some Passages or Notes on the Gospels are likewise produced for his which are taken from the Catena of Feuardentius under the name of Victor Capuensis But it is very probable that these Tracts are fictitious S. Jerome in his 28th Epistle to Baeticus declares that it was commonly reported in his time that the Authentick Works of Josephus Polycarp and Papias were brought to him but that it was a false rumour PAPIAS PApias Bishop of Hierapolis a Hierapolis There are several Cities of that Namâ but this lies between Phrygia and Lydia near Laodiceâ being famous for Springs of hot Water a City of Asia was a Disciple either of S. John the Evangelist b A Disciple of S. John the Evangelist S. Irenaeus Lib. 5. cap. 33. Hac Papias Joannis auditor Polycarpi contubernalis S. Jerom Ep. 29. Ad Theodorum Refert Irenaeus vir Apostolicorum temporum Papiae auditoris Evangelistae Joannis Discipulus In the Martyrologies of Beda Usuardus and Ado as also in the Roman in the Works of Trithemius and Andreas Casariâ⦠in Anastas Sinait Lib. 7. in Hexamer Oecumen in Act. cap. 2. he is called The Disciple of S. John the Evangelist Eusebius on the contrary reciting a Passage of Papias in Hist. Lib. 3. cap. ult wherein he speaks of two Johns observes that the Master of Papias was not John the Evangelist but the other John called the Elder His Reason or rather Conjecture is that this Author in the beginning of his Books doth not assure us that he was the Disciple of the Apostles or that he had learn'd any thing from them but only that he had received that which he declares from those that were familiar with the Apostles and who knew them However in the Passage alledged by Eusebius to prove his Assertion Papias only affirms that he interrogated the ancient Men who had seen the Apostles demanding of them What says Andrew What says Philip What says S. John What says John the Elder Therefore if it may be inferred from thence that he was not the Disciple of S. John the Evangelist because he informs us that he enquired of those that had seen him what were the Opinions of this Apostle it may as well be inferred that he was not the Disciple of John the Elder However the words of Papias may be interpreted after such a manner as to signifie nothing else but that he was carefull whensoever he happened to meet with any one that had familiarly conversed with the Apostles to desire of them a particular account of their Doctrine or Judgment Which makes me believe that he was the Disciple of the Evangelist and this is confirmed by the Authority of S. Irenaeus who certainly means S. John the Evangelist for S. Polycarp was his Disciple and he asserts that Papias was the Companion of Polycarp Polycarpi contubernalis or of some other Person who bore the same name He wrote five Books entituled The Explications of our Lords Discourses which were extant even in the time of Trithemius Papias but at present we have only some few fragments in the Writings of the ancient and modern Authors He was the first that promoted the famous Opinion or rather Dotage of Antiquity c The
famous Opinion or rather Dotage of Antiquity This was the opinion of S. Justin Athenagoras S. Irenaeas S. Clement Tertullian Lactantius and many other ancient Writers concerning the Temporal Beign of Jesus Christ which they fansied should happen on Earth a thousand years before the day of Judgment when the Elect should be gathered together after the Resurrection in the City of Jerusalem and should enjoy there all the Delights imaginable during these thousand years S. Irenaeus produceth a fragment taken from the fourth Book of Papias wherein he endeavours to prove this Opinion by a passage of the Prophet Isaiah And Eusebius having cited a Paragraph of his Preface to these Books in which he shews the great care that he took to be informed of the Doctrine of the Apostles by interrogating their Disciples adds That this Author hath set down many things which he pretended to have learnt by an unwritten Tradition of which sort there are several new Parables and Instructions of our Saviour Jesus Christ that are not contained in the Gospels together with other fabulous Histories among which we may reckon the Reign of Jesus Christ on Earth during the space of a thousand years after the Resurrection of the Body That which led him into this Error continueth Eusebius is that he understood the Discourses and Instructions of the Apostles too literally not understanding that a mystical sense ought to be given to this sort of Expressions and that the Apostles only made use of them as Illustrations for âe was a Man of a very mean capacity as appears from his Books who nevertheless gave occasion to many of the ancient Fathers and among others to Irenaeus to follow this Error which they maintained by the authority of Papias Eusebius in the same place relates two Miracles the account whereof Papias declares that he had received from the Daughter of Philip the Deacon who resided at Hierapolis That a dead Man was raised at that time and that Barsabas sirnamed Justus Elected to be an Apostle together with S. Matthias having swallowed deadly Poison was not hurt by it Moreover he assures us that Papias had collected in his Books divers Explications on some words of Jesus Christ composed by Aristion a Disciple of the Apostles and the Traditions likewise of the venerable Elder S. John but omitting these things he is content only to recite a passage wherein this ancient Writer affirms that S. Mark compiled his Gospel from what he had heard S. Peter tell of the Actions and Discourses of Jesus Christ and this is the reason that he hath not observed an Historical Method That S. Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew and that it was afterward Translated into Greek Lastly Eusebius affirms that he cited the first Epistles of S. Peter and of S. John and that he explained the History of a Woman that was accused before our Saviour of several Crimes which was found in the Gospel according to the Hebrews Thus we have given an account of all that is recorded by Eusebius concerning Papias Andreas Caesariensis and Oeoumenius have likewise produced some Passages d Andraeas Caesariensis and Oécumenius have likewise produced some Passages Andraeas Caesariensis in Serm. 12. in Apocalyps cites a Passage of Papias wherein he says that the disposing of Sublunary Things was committed to the Care of the Angels that are round the Earth but that they did not perform their Duty as they ought to do Oecumenius upon the Acts observes that Papias believed that Judas did not end his Life by hanging but that he was run over with a Chariot which is the Opinion of Theophylact Euthymius and Oecumneius of his Works in their Commentaries on the Holy Scripture but it is not certain whether they were Papias's or no. The Judgment that ought to be given concerning him is that which hath been already given by Eusebius that is to say that he was a good Man but very credulous and of very mean Barts who delighted much in hearing and telling Stories and Miracles And since he was exceedingly inquisitive and inclined to believe every thing that was told him it is not to be admired that he hath divulged divers Errors and extravagant Notions as the Judgments of the Apostles and hath given us fabulous Narratives for real Histories which shews that nothing is so dangerous in Matters of Religion as lightly to believe and too greedily to embrace all that hath the appearance of Piety without considering in the first place how true it is e Without considering in the first place how true it is This is conformable to an excellent Passage of S. Augustin Non sit Religio nostra in Phantasmatibus nostris melius est enim qualecumque verum quà m omne quicqùid pro arbitrio fingi potest melior est vera stipula quà m lux inani cogitatione pro suspicantis voluntate formata De ver Rel. c. 55. QUADRATUS and ARISTIDES THese two Defenders of the Faith presented Apologies for Christians to the Emperor Adrian The first was a Disciple of the Apostles a A Disciple of the Apostles Hieron Ep. 84. ad Magnum This appears from the Fragment that is set down afterward We must not confound this Quadratus with another of this Name who was Bishop of Athens and the Successor of Publius mentioned by Eusebius Lib. 4. cap. 23. S. Jerom makes no distinction between them in his Catalogue nor in his Epistle to Magnus and they are likewise confounded in the Menâlogium Graecârum But Valesâus clearly proves that they are different for the first was not a Bishop as appears from the Testimony of Eusebius Lib. 3. c. 37. and Lib. 4. c. 3. Besides the former Quadratus was a Disciple of the Apostles and lived in the time of the Emperor Adrian whereas the other never saw the Apostles as being Contemporary with Dionysius Corinthius under the Reign of Antoninus And it cannot be doubted but that it was the Elder who presented the Apology to Adrian and it is said that he had the Gift of Prophecy Quadratus Aristides b It is said that he had the gift of Prophecy Eâsebius Lib. 3. cap. 37. assures us that he was endued with the Gift of Prophecy as were the Daughters of Philip the Deacon and Miltiades in Euseb. Lib. 5. cap. 17. reckons him in the number of the Prophets of the New Testament Eusebius assures us that the Apology of this Author was extant in his ãâã and that it shewed the Genius of this Man and the true Doctrine of the Apostles But we have only a small Fragment produced by Eusebius in the fourth Book of his History chap. 3. wherein the Author declares that none could doubt of the Truth of the Miracles of Jesus Christ because the Persons that were healed or raised from the Dead by him had been seen not only when he wrote his Miracles or whilst he was upon Earth but even a very great while after his Death So that there
had one and the same Faith whereas afterward the Arch-Hereticks divided the Professors of Christianity rent the Church and propagated their pernicious Errors It were a manifest Abuse of this Passage to interpret it otherwise but that after the Death of those that had heard and seen Jesus Christ in the Flesh the first Heresiarch's began openly to divulge their detestable Errors The fourth Fragment concerning Antinous whom Adrian caused to be Registred amongst the Gods is cited Book 4. Chap. 8. only to shew that Hegesippus lived after the time of that Emperor The fifth is in Book 4. Chap. 22. where Hegesippus speaks of his Journey to Rome in passing through Corinth where he saw Primus the Bishop of that City he describes the Election of Simeon in the room of S. James and makes mention of a certain Person named Thebutis whom he affirms to have been the first that rent the Church by his Errors being incensed because he was not made a Bishop he observes that this Thebutis had collected his Doctrines from the seven Sects that were among the Jews as well as the other Hereticks Eusebius adds that Hegesippus produced divers Passages out of the Hebrew and Syriack Gospels and that he speaks of several Traditions of the Jews it is likewise observed by him that he cites the Proverbs of Solomon as well as S. Irenaeus under the Name of The Book of Wisdom and that he mentions certain Apocryphal Writings composed by the Hereticks of his tme This is all that is extant of the five Books of the History of Hegesippus the order of which is also unknown to us but as far as we can judge by the remaining Fragments of this Work it was not very exact and was rather filled with feigned and fabulous Relations than with solid and real Histories We have besides under the Name of Hegesippus an History of the Wars of the Jews and of the taking of the City of Jerusalem divided into five Books which hath been often published and particularly at Colen with the Notes of Galterius in the year 1559. It was likewise printed in a Collection of the Works of the Fathers set forth by Laurentius de la Barre A. D. 1583. as also in the Bibliotheca Patrum of La Bigne c. But it is certain that this Work does not belong to Hegesippus it being evident that it was written by an Author who lived after the Reign of Constantine the Great For first The History of Hegesippus was merely Ecclesiastical whereas this is an History of the Jews copied out in part from Josephus Secondly We do not find therein any of the Passages of the true ãâã that are produced by ãâã Thirdly it is Râcorded by thi Authââ in Book 3. Chap. 5. that thâ City of ãâã wâich was ãâã as the third in ãâã and Digââity ãâã those of the Roman Empire became the second ever since the City of ãâ¦ã was called by the name of Constantinople It is plain therefore that the Author of this ãâã ãâã ãâã â⦠Some with Gronovius attribute it to S. Ambrose by reason of the ãâã of its ãâã âo that of the Writings of this Father others as Labbââ are of opinion that it is a Greek Version and lâstly ãâã as Vossius and Mirââs affirm that this Book was Compiled since the time of ãâã ãâã thââ is to say after the tenth Century because the Author discoursing concerâing the City of ãâã declares that it formerly belonged to the Persians and that at present it was a ãâã against thââ which may be understood of the taking of this City by the Emperor Phocas However iâ be this Author is only a Transcriber or an Interpreter of Josephus who hath made a kind of an imperfect Epitome of his History The Latin Interpreter who hath Translated it from Josephâs gave iâ the Title of Josepââ or Josippi and the Transcribers not understanding this Word have substituted Igisâppâ or Egesipââ in its room as it appears from some ancient Manuscripts Father Mabillon observes in his Voyage into Italy that he found in the Ambrosian Library at âââlan an ancient Manuscript of this Book wherein it is said that it was Translated by S. Ambrose in thâ Titles whereof it is sometimes written Josippi he saw another likewise at Turân that appeared to be about 700 years old and that was entituled Egesippi If these Manuscripts are as ancient as Mâbillon would have them to be this Book must of necessity be of greater Antiquity than Vossius and Miraeus have imagined It was Printed by it self at Paris in the years 1511 1589 1610 and afterwards inserted in the Bibliothecae Patrum S. JUSTIN ST Justin was a Native of the City of Sichem otherwise called Naples of Palestine a Of the City of Sichem otherwise called Naples of Palestine In Dialog 2. a p. 212. ad p. 223. Just. Apâl 2 p. 53. ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Justin the Son of Priscus Bacchius of Flavia The new âity âr Naples of Syria This was one of the principal Cities of the Samaritans and it hath had four Names The first and most ancient is that of Sichem thus it is usually called in the Holy Scripture and in the Works of Josephus The Second is Maâoâortâa or Mamorthâ in Joseph Lib. 5. de bellâ Judaico c. 4. and in Plin. Lib. 5. Nat. Hist. c. 13. The Third is Naples and the Fourth is Flavia which Name it has had ever since one of the Emperors it is not certainly known whether it were Vespasiaâ or Domitian caused a Colony of the Greeks to be Transported thither Moreover this Name is to be found not only in the passage of S. Justin that we have even now cited but also in ancient Medals and particularly in one of Dââitian's ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which even at this day bears the Name of Napolous his Father was called Priscus Bacchius he was a Grecian by Birth and Religion b He was a Greek by Birth and Religion S. Epiphanius seems to believe that S. Justin was of the Extraction and Religion of the Samaritans when he says that he passed from the Samaritââ to the Christian Religion ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã But when S. Justin himself mentions his Conversion he declaâes that he had been Educated in the Greek Religion and that having discââered the Falshood thereof he readily embraced the Christian. It is true indeed that he calls the Samaritans in his Dialogue and in his first Apology his Stock his Nation and the like But it was because he was horn among them in a City the Original whereof was Samaritan as S. Paul is said to be a Citizen of Rome and of the City of Tarsus tho' he was a Jew and of the Tribe of Benjamin and perhaps Epiphanius meant nothing else in this place but having in vain sought for the Knowledge of the true S. Justin. God among all the Sects of the Pagan Philosophers tho' ââe chiefly adhered to the Platonick was Converted
Woman but his Wife That his Daughters remained Virgins and his Son was very Chaât He says that the Apostles S. Peter and S. Philip were Married and that they had Children That even S. Philip married his Daughters and he adds also that S. Paul had a Wife wherein he is mistaken Tho' it is uncertain whether S. Paul was ever Married yet it is a rash thing to say positively he was not S. Clement alledges a Tradition in this Matter which might easily be conveyed entire down to his time It is plain that the true Yoke-fellow Philip. 4. 3. was a Woman which others of the Antients understood of his Wife besides S. Clement His Expostulating with the Corinthians and asserting that he had a Power to lead about a Sister or a Wife as well as S. Peter or any of the Apostles may as well prove that S. Paul justified his own Practice as that he thought the thing simply lawful especially since he is there making a Defence for himself The Question however is very far from being certain in the Negative and therefore at least ought to be left undetermined In the Fourth Book he treats of Martyrdom and Christian Perfection He shews the Excellency of Martyrdom and exhorts Christians to undergo it confuting the Hereticks who held that Martyrdom was no Vertuous Action He makes the perfection of Christianity to consist in the Love of God and our Neighbour He would have us love Sinners and yet detest their Sin that we should do good out of a principle of Love and not for Fear For that Man says he that abstains from Evil only out of a slavish Fear is not good voluntarily but for Fear-sake and he who would not have abstained but in Consideration of the Recompence cannot be said to be just with a good Heart For in the one 't is Fear and in the other the hope of a Reward which renders them Just or rather which makes them appear so to the Eyes of the World He says that God inflicts Punishments upon Men for Three Reasons First that the Man whom he Chastises may become better Secondly that those who are to be saved may take warning by these Examples Thirdly lest he should be despised by Men if he did not avenge Affronts and Injuries done to himself In the Fifth Book after having shewn that the way of instructing by Allegories and Symbols was very ancient not only among the Jews but also among the Philosophers he proves that the Greeks took the greatest part of the Truths which are in their Books from the Barbarians and principally from the Hebrews This Book is full of Citations from the Poets and the heathen Philosophers In the Sixth Book he speaks again advantageously of Philosophy Afterwards he begins to draw a Character of the True Gnostick that is to say to give the Idea of a Christian that is perfectly Good and Wise. These are the principal strokes of his Picture The True Gnostick has the Command over his Passions He is exactly Temperate and allows his Body no more than what is necessary He loves God above all Things and the Creatures for Gods-sake and the Relation they bear to him and nothing is able to separate him from this Love He bears with Patience all unfortunate Accidents He makes it his Business to know all things which relate to God without neglecting humane Learning His Discourses are regular and to the purpose full of Sweetness and Charity He is never overcome with Anger He prays continually by Charity that unites him to God First begging of him the Remission of his Sins and then the Grace not to sin any more but to do Good Afterwards S. Clement enlarges upon the Source or Spring from whence this Gnostick derives this true Knowledge and compleat Science He says that it is the Holy Scripture the Law and the Prophets and in particular the Decalogue which he briefly explains and Lastly the Doctrine of Jesus Christ foretold by the Prophets preached throughout the World and received notwithstanding all the Contradiction of Kings and the great Men of this World who opposed it with all their Might In the Seventh Book he goes on to describe the Vertues of his Gnostick he says that he employs himself entirely in honouring God in loving him in understanding hearing and imitating his WORD which was made Man for our Salvation that he does it not only upon certain days but during the whole Course of his Life that the Sacrifices by which he Honours him are the Prayers and the Praises which he offers up at all times and in all Places that he is Gentle Courteous Affable Patient Charitable Sincere Faithful and Temperate that he despises the good things of this World and that he is ready to suffer every thing for Jesus Christ that he does nothing either out of Ostentation or Fear or the Desire of being rewarded but out of pure Love to the Goodness and Justice of God Lastly that he is entirely Holy and Divine Afterwards S. Clement Answers several Objections of the Greeks and Jews who affirmed that the multiplicity of Heresies ought to hinder Men from the embracing the Religion of Jesus Christ. To which he Answers that this multitude of Sects is likewise to be found among the Heathens and the Jews that it was foretold by Jesus Christ that such a thing should happen among the Christians That it ought not to make us forsake the Truth but rather on the contrary to seek after it with the greater Care and Diligence That there is an infallible Rule to distinguish Truth from Falshood that this Rule is the Holy Scripture which being an incontestable Principle serves for a Proof of whatever we say That it must be Confessed that the Hereticks make use of it as well as the Catholicks But then first they do not make use of all the Sacred Books Secondly those which they do use are corrupted Thirdly they chiefly urge ambiguous Passages which they explain according to their own Fancy by departing from the true Sense and keeping only to Terms Hence he takes occasion to condemn in general all Hereticks who rejecting the Tradition of Jesus Christ and his Apostles and forsaking the Faith of the Church have made themselves the Authors of particular Sects by inventing new Doctrines and corrupting the Truth He says that there is but only One Catholick Church which is more ancient than all the Assemblies of the Hereticks that it was founded by Jesus Christ who dyed under Tiberius and established it in the World by the Apostles before the end of Nero's Region Whereas there was hardly so much as one Heresie older than Adrian's Time and that they all bore the Name of their Author or that of the Places and Countries where they first appeared or from the Doctrine they taught or the things which they honoured which sufficiently discovers their Falshood and Novelty He concludes by making the Description of these Books of the Stromata and by promising to begin
Hom. 35. Luc. 3. per. He says however concerning that to the Hebrews that the Thoughts of this Epistle are St. Paul's but that it was Composed by some other Person and that there is none but God who knows the Author of it though some attribute it to S. Clemens others to S. Luke He says that there is but one Epistle of S. Peter which was received by all the Churches but that we may grant the Second likewise to have been his He says the same thing of the Two last Epistles of S. John He cites the Epistles of St. Jude and St. James in his Commentary upon the Epistle to the Romans He likewise quotes the Revelations and attributes them to St. John Besides these Books he often cites Apocryphal Writings as the Gospels according to the Aegyptians and according to the Hebrews the Book of Hermas the Epistle of S. Barnabas the Book of Enoch and even some Heretical Books as the Apocalypse of S. Paul a Book conterning the Twelve Apostles the Doctrine of S. Peter the Acts of S. Paul the History of Isaiah and and some others Origen had very quick Parts a very strong and Extensive Phancy but he relied too much on the Vivacity of his Genius and often lost himself out of too great earnestness to fathom and subtilize every thing He had a very happy invention and a much more happy delivery of what he had invented But he had not that exactness in his Inventions nor all that Gracefulness in the Delivery as might be wish'd He carried on his Work with so great ease that he is said to have Dictated to Seven or Eight Persons at a time and he was so ready in Expressing himself that he made the greatest Part of his Homilies Extempore Upon which account his Style was not very Correct nor Coherent He had a vast Memory but he often trusted too much to it He was a Person of most profound Learning and he particularly Studied Plato's Philosophy which he understood to Perfection and indeed he was too much addicted to it for a Christian. He understood likewise the Maxims of the other Philosophers He had apply'd himself mightily to the Study of Humane Learning He was neither Ignorant of History nor Mythology and he had as great knowledge in all the Profane Sciences as those who had Studied nothing else all their whole Lives But he particularly excell'd in the knowledge of the Holy Scripture to the Study of which he entirely addicted himself He had Learned it all by heart and that he might not neglect any thing which might be of use for the understanding the Letter thereof he carefully Examined all the Versions of the Bible which were in his time and compared them all together with the Hebrew Text adding thereto a Literal Commentary upon the most difficult Places He was not very well skill'd in the Hebrew yet he knew enough of it to understand it and to observe the Differences of the Text and the Translations but he did not keep to the Literal Explication of the Bible He thought it necessary for the setting off of the Holy Scripture to the best advantage which appeared but plain and simple to the Heathens and for the rendring it of greater use to all the World to give Mystical or Allegorical Interpretations of every thing in it And herein imitates the way of Philo and Aristobulus and followed the Genius and Manner of the Platonists We have already taken notice that Hippolitus explained the Scripture Allegorically and that it was in imitation of him that Origen undertook this way of Writing St. Clement of Alexandria his Master is also full of Allegories and 't is not to be denied but that the Hellenistical Jews and the Primitive Christians made very frequent use of them But Origen has carried on an Allegory as far as it can possibly go and he has furnished Matter to all the Greek and Latin Fathers who have imitated him and have hardly done any thing else than copy him This way of explaining the Holy Scripture by continual Allegories seems to me to be very defective For though it may be good sometimes to awaken if I may so say the Auditor and to direct him by such kind of Allegories yet they become useless and tedious when they are perpetual and the Mind which requires great Application for the comprehending of them is tired and soon looses the Consequence both of Reasoning and Thought Besides that by minding only the Allegorical Sense we neglect the Literal which is oftentimes more excellent and of greater Advantage than all the Allegories in the World that divert the Mind without instructing it and strike the Imagination without affecting the Heart Lastly If in explaining the Holy Scripture we should only stick to the Allegory as Origen has done it might give occasion to believe that the Scripture taken barely in the Literal Sense would be but of very little Advantage which is a very great Error 'T is therefore a very ill way of defending Origen in this Point to say with a modern Author that he seems to have been excusable in this because he had learned by Experience that the Letter of the Scripture was but of little use for Instruction For this is to make him assert a thing which is very false the Letter of the Scripture being of exceeding use for Instruction and even more profitable than any Allegory which is not to be us'd but only now and then to awaken the Auditors Origen's Books against Celsus are an excellent Work and stored with extraordinary Learning He answers the Objections of Celsus who of all the Heathens that have written againg the Christian Religion had made the most cunning ones and proposed them the most maliciously very solidly He establishes by convincing Proofs the History of Jesus Christ his Miracles his Divinity and Resurrection He confutes the Calumnies and Impostures of Celsus and of the other Heathens against the Chri-Christians and Lastly he proves the Truth and Excellency of the Doctrine and Religion of Jesus Christ. This Book is written very Politely and with great Care and Exactness 'T is not only the best of Origen's Works but also the most accomplish'd and best Composed Apology for the Christians which we have of all the Antients The Books of Principles were likewise written with great Care and they had been of very great use if he had contented himself to explain the Principles of Religion according to Scripture and Tradition without mixing therewith his own Philosophical Notions His Commentaries upon the Scripture are more Polite than his Homilies they are full of Learning but they are not very Exact and we may observe therein a great many Fancies which are useless obscure and perplexed Often after having begun one Explication he passes to another without finishing the first His Homilies are plainer and intelligible but their style is less Elegant The Treatise concerning Prayer is an Excellent Piece of Devotion It contains a great many
Christ who is the end and accomplishment of the Law has given liberty to Men to eat of all sorts of Meats provided they don 't violate the bounds of Christian Sobriety and from thence he takes occasion to reprove the Irregularities and Disorders of some Christians who lived intemperately He observes that this is by no means fitting for those Persons who are to pray Night and Day At last out of the number of Meats that are permitted to be eaten he excepts those that have been offered to Idols from which the Primitive Christians abstained very Religiously and he concludes all with these Words that are an Abridgment of his whole Discourse Having therefore shewn what is the nature of Meats for he had before discovered the Genius of the Mofaical Law and explained the nature of the Evangelical Liberty Let us live up to the Rules of Temperance and abstain from things Offered to Idols giving thanks to our Lord Jesus Christ his Son to whom be Praise Honour and Glory forever and ever Amen Some think that Novatian writ this Letter during the Persecution of Decius before he had separated from the Church but his way of speaking at the beginning makes me rather believe that it was composed after he became Chief of the Party in the Persecution of Gallus and Volusian This Author has abundance of Wit Knowledge and Eloquence his Style is pure clean and polite his Expressions choice his Thoughts natural and his way of Reasoning just He is full of Citations of Texts of Scripture that are always to the purpose and besides there is a great deal of Order and Method in those Treatises of his we now have and he never speaks but with a world of Candor and Moderation Saint MARTIALIS SAint Martialis came into France with St. Dionysins a Under the Emperor Decius St. Gregory of Tours is the Man that fixes this Epocha of the coming of St. Denis Martialis and their Colleagues into France There is no Author extant who is either more ancient or more worthy to be believed than St. Gregory that has given us any Account of their arrival there any sooner under the Emperor Decius towards the year of our Lord 250. Two Letters attributed to him one written to the People of Burdeaux the other to those of Tholouse which were said to be found in the Vestry of b Peter of Limoges This Story is related by a Monk called Gausius in a Chronicle which is to be found in the Bibliotheca Patrum p. 288 289. first printed in the year 1521 with Abdias and afterwards in 1571 and 1614. St. Peter of Limoges in the Eleventh Century and have been since c Frequently Printed They were first printed by Badius in the Year 1521 afterwards by Bârdes in the Year 1573 with the Notes of Elmenhorstius at Helmstad in 1614 at Basil in 1655 at Colen in 1560. frequently Printed and inserted into the last Bibliotheca Patrum though no man questions that these Letters are Supposititious For in the first place the Author tells us that he lived with Jesus Christ which can by no means agree with him who was Bishop of Limoges in 252. Secondly in the Eighth Chapter of the Second Letter he saith that he Baptized King Stephen and another Tyrant with his Noblemen Now in the time of Martialis there was neither King nor Tyrant in France Thirdly he tells us that in his time the Temples of the Gods were demolished and that Churches were built by the Kings Authority which does not agree with the time of St. Martialis Fourthly the Texts of Scripture quoted in these Letters follow the vulgar Translaation which was composed long after Fifthly the Author tells us that he had eaten with Jesus Christ at the last Supper though it is certain that none but the Apostles were there The Life of St. Martialis Printed at the end of Abdias which carries the Name of Aurelian Bishop of Limoges is a spurious Piece no less than the Epistles of that Bishop and full as Fabulous as the History of Abdias to which it is joyned The Author by a very gross Error supposes that Vespasian succeeded Nero immediately He tells us that St. Martialis received from Jesus Christ after his Resurrection the same Power which the Apostles had that he never suffered either Hunger Thirst or Pain and recounts several other Fables concerning him which are no less ridiculous than those that are to be found upon the same Subject in the two Councils of Limoges held in the Years 1029 and 1031. SIXTUS or XYSTUS Sixtus IT is a long time ago since under the name of Pope Sixtus who presided in the Roman Chair in the Year 257. Ruffinus published a Book of a certain Pythagorean Philosopher named Sixtus translated out of Greek into Latin a Saint Jerome often reproaches him with this Imposture Ep. ad Ctesiphont contra Pelag. in Cap. 22. Jerom. in Cap. 18. Ezechielis St. Jerome often reproaches him with this Imposture St. Austin suffered himself at first to be deceived by it and has cited it in his Book of Nature and Grace as if it had been composed by Pope Sixtus but afterwards b He retracts this Error Aug. lib. 2. retract c. 42. he retracts his Error Gelasius placed it amongst the Heretical Books supposing it to have been written by some Christian. c It is still extant In the Bibliotheca Patrum but I cannot tell whether it was ever Printed by it self It is still extant being a medley of Philosophical Sentences useful indeed in themselves and serviceable to the Truth but having little of the Spirit of Christianity in them There is no mention made in it either of Jesus Christ the Holy Ghost the Prophets or the Apostles and it is full of the Errors of the Pythagoreans and the Stoics It renders Man equal to God and affirms that he is made of a Divine Substance and would have him be without Passion according to the Principle of the Stoics and without Sin pursuant to the Doctrine of the Pelagians There are several other Pelagian Errors to be found in it Saint GREGORY THAUMATURGUS SAint Gregory whose Name at first was Theodorus and afterwards Surnamed Thaumaturgus that is to say the Worker of Miracles by reason of the great number of Miracles he is supposed to have wrought both in his Life-time and after his Death was born in the City of Neo-Caesarea in Pontus descended of a Family that was very considerable as well for its Nobility as for its great Possessions He was educated in the Idolatrous Worship having a Father who was extreamly bigotted to Paganism After he had lost him at the Age of Fourteen years his Mother would have him study Rhetoric to qualifie himself for the Bar. His Sister being married to a Lawyer who was afterwards Governour of Palaestine and being obliged to follow her Husband Gregory and Athenodorus her Brothers went along with her intending to go as far as Berytus and
Happiness and the Wicked everlastingly Punished They never disquieted themselves in examining wherein the Beatitude consisted but they were perswaded That the Wicked should be punished with Fire and that not Metaphorical but Real They advanced Man's Free-Will very highly and maintained that he might carry himself either to Good or Evil and yet they acknowledged That since the Transgression of the First Man we were naturally inclined to Evil and that we stood in need of the Assistance and Grace of God to determine us to what was Good They did not Philosophize too far about the Nature and several Species of Angels but only satisfied themselves that there were good Angels and likewise bad ones called Daemons They were of Opinion that both the one and the other were Corporeal and imagined that the bad Angels were lost for their love of Women and they positively asserted that the good Ones took care of things below All of them were sensible of the Wounds and Punishment of Adam's Sin but they don't seem to agree that Infants were born subject to Sin and worthy of Damnation Nevertheless this appears to be the common Opinion as is evident from St. Cyprian who says That it was requisite to Baptize Infants before the Eighth day for fear lest if they died without Baptism this delay should prove the occasion of their Destruction They often spoke of the Necessity and wonderful Effects of Baptism and said that the Holy Ghost descended by the Imposition of the Hands of the Bishop They maintained That the Church had Power to reconcile those that repented of their Sins and did not doubt but that the Eucharist was the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ and accordingly called it by that Name They extolled Virginity without condemning Marriage they honoured the Saints and Martyrs as the Servants of God they spoke of the Virgin Mary with a great deal of respect and yet with no less discretion and advisedness St. Clement affirms That she continued a Virgin after her Delivery but Origen Tertullian and some others were of the contrary Opinion We find nothing in the Three first Ages of the Church either for or against the Assumption there is a Passage in St. Irenaeus that is not favourable to the immaculate Conception They believed that the Holy Scriptures were written by the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost that they contain all the principal Articles of our Faith that though they are obscure in some places yet they are clear enough in many others and that even their Obscurity has its Use and that all Christians might read them provided they made good use of them That it is necessary to believe what the Scripture Tradition and the Church teach us without endeavouring to search too deep into the Mysteries of our Religion and disputing about them They acknowledged no other Books of the Old Testament to be Canonical but those that were received into the Canon of the Jews though now and then they cited some other Books as very good and useful In the New Testament they received as Canonical the Four Evangelists the Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul though some of them questioned that to the Hebrews and many Persons attributed it to another and not to St. Paul the First Epistles of St. John and of St. Peter The Epistles of St. James and St. Jude The Second of St. Peter the Second and Third of St. John were received by some and rejected by others as well as the Apocalypse They sometimes cited the Apochryphal Books but never reckoned them amongst the Canonical Scriptures Thus I have given you a short Summary of part of the Opinions of the Fathers in the Three First Ages of the Church The most part of the Proofs which I have here laid down are to be found in the Abridgment of those Authors that I have made in this Volume and I don 't in the least question but that those Persons who will carefully read over the same Authors will be sensible that I have imposed nothing upon them and that their Doctrine is what I have now represented it An Abridgment of the Discipline WE cannot say of the Discipline of the Church what we have affirmed concerning its Doctrine viz. That it is the same in all Times and all Places because it is an undeniable An Abridgment of Discipline Truth that it has been different in many Churches and has been from time to time subject to change We ought not however to conclude from this Principle that it is unnecessary to study the Primitive Discipline or that we are obliged only to learn that of the Time and Church where we live for besides that those Persons who are ignorant of the Discipline of the Primitive Church cannot pretend to understand the Books of the Ancients this ancient Discipline is the Foundation of ours And though the Exteriour part has been changed yet the Spirit of the Church is always the same It is not therefore an unprofitable Labour as some have vainly imagined to busie ones self in examining the Discipline of the Ancient Church on the contrary it is a Study extremely useful and necessary for a Divine It must be acknowledged that the Discipline that was observed in the Infancy of the Church however Holy it was in its Simplicity yet was not arrived to its Perfection for the Apostles altogether applying themselves to what was necessary at the beginning were content to Preach the Doctrine and Morality of our Blessed Saviour without giving themselves the trouble to regulate what related to the Ceremonies or Discipline of the Church Nevertheless we are not to imagine that they intirely neglected it and St. John who lived longer than the rest of the Apostles seems to have applied himself more particularly to it But the Successors of the Apostles by little and little regulated the Ceremonies that ought to be observed as well in the Administration of the Sacraments as in the Assemblies of Christians and made particular Orders about the Government of Churches the Form of Ecclesiastical Judicatures and many other Points of Discipline These Ceremonies were exceedingly augmented in the Fourth Century when the Church began to enjoy the benefits of Peace and Tranquillity and Publickly celebrated the Divine Service in the time of the Emperour Constantine Then it was that the Bishops met together with Liberty being supported by the Authority of Princes and made abundance of Rules concerning the Government of the Church the Rights of the Bishops of the greater Sees the Forms of Judicature and infinite Numbers of other Matters We have here obliged our selves to speak only of the Discipline that was observed in the Three First Ages of the Church Then it was plain and simple and had scarce any other Splendor to recommend it but what the Holiness of the Manners and Lives of the Christians gave to it They Assembled every Sunday in particular in certain Places appointed and set apart for Publick Devotion where they continued a long
du Pin. Books doubted of at first by several but soon received as Canonical by the Catholick Church The Epistle to the Hebrews The Epistle of St. James The second Epistle of St. Peter The second and third Epistle of St. John The Epistle of St. Jude something later The Revelation which was not universally received of a long time Apocryphal Books not full of Errours The Letter of J. C. to Agbarus The Letters of the V. M. The Gospel according to the Aegyptians The Gospel according to the Hebrews The Proto-Evangelium of St. James The Gospel of Nicodemus The Ancient Acts of Paul and Theolâ The Epistle to the Laodiceans The Letters of St. Paul to Seneca The Epistle of St. Barnabas The Liturgies Of St. Peter Of St. Mark Of St. James Of St. Matthew The Canons and Constitutions of the Apostles The Book of Prochorus The Book of Abdias The Ancient Acts of the Passion of St. Andrew Erroneous Books Forged by Hereticks The Gospels Of St. Thomas Of St. Matthias Of St. Bartholomew Of the Twelve Of Philip. Of Judas Of Thaddaeus Of Barnabas A Book of the Childhood of Jesus Christ. A Book of the Genealogy of Mary The Acts Of St. Peter Of St. Paul Of St. Andrew Of the Apostles Of St. John Of St. Philip. Of St. Thomas The Doctrine and Sermons of St. Peter The Clementines The Memoirs of the Apostles The Travels of the Apostles A Book of the Priesthood of Jesus Christ. The Life of the Virgin Mary Questions of the Virgin Mary Revelations Of St. Peter Of St. Paul Of St. Thomas Of St. Stephen Other Supposititious Books favourable to Religion A Letter of Agbarus to Jesus Christ. Letters of Lentulus and Pilate concerning Jesus Christ. The Sibylline Oracles The Books of Hermes Trismegistus The Books of Hystaspes Seneca's Letters to St. Paul A Passage of Josephus concerning Jesus Christ which we cannot tell whether it be Supposititious or no. A TABLE Of all the Ecclesiastical Writers Mentioned in this Volume Names of Authors Genuine Books still Extant Books lost Supposititious Books HERMAS A Discourse entituled Pastor divided into three Books   St. CLEMENT Two Epistles to the Corinthians  The Conferences of St. Peter and Appion Recognitions Apostolical Constitutions Clementines DENYS the Areopagite   Books of the Celestial and Ecclesiastical Hierarcy A Discourse of the Names of God A Discourse of Mystical Theology Ten Letters St. IGNATIUS Epistles to the Smyrnaeans to St. Polycarp to the Ephesians to the Magnesians to the Philadelphians to the Trallians to the Romans According to Vossius's and Usher's Editions  Five spurious Greek Letters to Maria Cassobolita to the Tarsians to the Antiochians to Hero the Deacon to the Philippians Three in Latin one to the V. M. the other two to St. John St. POLYCARP Epistle to the Philippians Some Letters to the Neighbouring Churches A Letter to St. Denys the Areopagite A Discourse of the Union of St. John Dr. Cave produces a Quotation out of Holloixius's Life of St. Polycarp which says This Book was concerning St. John's Death They both mean the same Book because they say from Halloixius that it is extant in the Library of the Abby of Fleury I believe it is false printed in Mr. Du Pin. PAPIAS  Five Books entituled Explications of the Discourses of our Saviour  QUADRATUS ARISTIDES  Two Apologies for the Chrians  AGRIPPA HEGESIPPUS  A Discourse against Basilides An Ecclesiastical History divided into five Books  JUSTIN Martyr Two Apologies The Second Part of the Book of the Monarchy of God A Conference with Trypho the Jew Two Orations against the Gentiles doubtful A Letter to Diognetus doubtful These are owned by Doctor Cave A Discourse against Heresies particularly against Marcion Two Books against the Gentiles one called The Psalmist A Book of Collections concerning the Soul Besides these Dr. Cave mentions An Exposition of the Revelations A Commentary upon Hezameren Letters ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã A Discourse upon the Resurrection Letters to Zena and Serenus Owned by Dr. Cave as Genuine A Confutation of some Arostotelian Opinions Owned likewise by him Questions and Answers to the Questions of the Orthodox An Exposition of the Faith concerning the Trinity MELITO  Two Books of Esther One of the Lives of the Prophets One of the Church Of the Lord's Day Of the Nature of Man Of the Creation Of the Obedience of our Senses to the Faith Of the Soul the Body and the Spirit Of the Truth Of Baptism Of the Generation of J. C. Of Prophecy Of Hospitality A Book entituled The Key Of the Devil Of the Revelations Of God Incarnate Collections out of the Scripture An Apology for the Christian Religion  TATIAN A Discourse against the Gentiles A Gospel composed out of the four A Discourse of Evangelical Perfection  ATHENAGORAS Apology for the Christians A Discourse of the Resurrection  A Romance of True and Perfect Love in French said to have been Translated out of Greek Huetius in his Discourse of the Original of Romances thinks that this Book might possibly have been composed by Philander who imposed upon M. Fumâe as if it had been really written by Athenagoras This Dr. Cave says is very improbable But if we consider how extremely particular this Author is in his Description of those Buildings he mentions how very improbable it is that Athenagoras should have brought in his Melangenia describing Jupiter Hammon's Temple more like an Architect than an Historian we can hardly conceive it to have been written by a Greek Besides the Architecture it self is so very exact according to the Rules of the Five Orders the Four Ancientest whereof were introduced first by the Greeks that it is not likely that one of that Nation who knew very well that Jupiter Hammon's Temple was never raised by Men that were acquainted with their Models of Building would ever have described it as Built after such a manner if he he had thought fit to have described it at all So that though we cannot certainly tell whether Philander who wrote Commentaries upon Vitruvius was the Author of this Romance or no yet these Reasons seem to make it more than probable that it was not written by Athenagoras especially since a Greek Copy was never yet produced and that none of the Ancients ever quoted it either as his or as belonging to any Body else And I do not doubt but Dr. Cave would have been of the same Opinion if he had read the Book over himself HERMIAS A Discourse to shew the Ridiculousness of the Opinions of the Pagan Philosophers   THEOPHILUS Three Books to Autolycus A Discourse against Marcion A Discourse against the Heresie of Hermogenes And some other little things Since the first Edition of Mr. du Pin's Bibliotheque was published Mr. Dodwell set out the Chronological Fragments of Bishop Pearson with Additions of his own to the late Bishop of Chester's Discourses concerning the Succession of the first Bishops of
was dearest to him in this World He confutes the Opinion of the Pharisees who held that Men are raised again from the dead to eat and drink and enjoy the same Pleasures which they ââ¦d in this Life The Fourth Tract is a Discourse upon the Day of the Ascension of Jesus Christ wherein he proves the Truth of his Resurrection and Ascension by the Constancy of the Martyrs and Apostles and by the wonderful Promulgation of the Gospel He observes how impossible it was that ever the Apostles should undertake to Preach the Christian Religion and succeed in their Attempt if God had not encourag'd them by his Spirit and dispos'd the Hearts of Men to receive their Doctrine In this Discourse he describes also the Martyrdom of St. Romanus Deacon of Antioch In the Six following Tracts he discourses of things Spiritual and Invisible and in the First he shows That God is Incorporeal and Invisible and demonstrates that things Incorporeal and Invisible are infinitely more Excellent than those that are Material and Earthly In the Second and Third he proves That the Soul of Man is Immortal and Spiritual and describes the great Advantages it gives a Man above the Beasts The Fourth Tract is concerning the Thought of Man which has these Remarkable Properties First That it knows it self and Secondly That it resists and checks the Motions of Lust. In the Fifth He goes on still to prove That God is Invisible and Incorporeal and takes Notice as he goes along That Angels are Spiritual In the Sixth He answer some Passages of Scripture which seem to attribute Members to God The following Discourse is concerning the Advantages of the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and the great Benefits it hath procur'd to Mankind There he explains that saying of our Saviour I came not to bring Peace but War by shewing That Jesus Christ came indeed to bring Peace but Men being unwilling to receive it there must be War by necessary consequence as arising only from the bad Disposition of their own Hearts Towards the end of this Discourse he praises those that suffer for the Religion of Jesus Christ and continues the same Subject in the following Discourse wherein he shews upon occasion of those Words of our Saviour Preach ye upon the House-tops what has been said to you in secret That nothing can dispense with a Christian's suffering for the Religion of Christ. He adds That tho' there be no Persecution yet we are oblig'd to suffer and to be as one may say continually Martyrs because we are always to fight against the World and our selves The Two last Discourses are concerning good Works in the First of which he recommends it to Christians if they would be happy to follow after that which is Good and shun that which is Evil. And in the Second he exhorts them to the practice of good Works and chiefly to giving of Alms. This is the Subject of those Discourses which are more concerning Doctrines than Morality wherein there appears a great deal of Wit good Sence and Eloquence but little of Order and Method Eusebius was one of the most Learned Men of all Antiquity as both his Friends and Enemies do equally acknowledge r Eusebius was one of the most Learned Men of all Antiquity as both his Friends and Enemies do equally acknowledge See here a part of the Testimonies which the Ancients have given to the Learning of Eusebius Constantine in his Epistle to those of Antioch and in a Letter which he wrote to himself praises his vast Learning St. Basil in his Book of the H. Spirit Ch. 29. calls him an Author worthy of Credit because of his Universal Learning ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã St. Jerom tho' the great Enemy of Eusebius could not forbear often-times to praise his Learning to confess that he priz'd his Books and to say in his Second Book against Ruffinus That he was a most Learned Man Vir doctissimus Eusebius doctissimum dico non Catholicum The most Learned Eusebius I call him most Learned but not Catholick It is not to be wondered at that Ruffinus his Friend gives him the same Title Antipater of Bostria tho' he did not favour him yet gives him the Name of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã i. e. one very knowing in most Matters and further says of him That he had read all the Books of the Ancients examin'd and explain'd all their Opinions and that he had written himself most useful Books Philostorgius praises him for his History Socrates and Sozomen vindicate him Victorius calls him a most Learned Man Gelasius the Pope durst not reject his History because of it's great Learning and singular usefulness for information Pelagius assures us That there is no History that deserves greater Esteem than that of Eusebius Photius who censures the Stile and Doctrine of Eusebius nevertheless commends his Knowledge and Learning I take no Notice of the Testimonies of Modern Authors of whom it may be said without fear of mistaking That there was no Man of so great Reading and Learning amongst all our Greek Authors Almost all his Books are the effects of prodigious Labour and very long and laborious Enquiries And yet it must be confessed that he had great Helps by the Memoirs of those who had written before him upon the same Subjects whose Works he makes no scruple to Transcribe He did not much Study to polish his Discourses which is the common Fault of almost all those that make Knowledge and Learning their chief Business His Stile is neither Elegant nor Grateful as Photius has many times observed but dry and barren and extremely unpleasant He is very proper to teach those who apply their minds seriously to Study and search after Truth and love to consider it absolutely naked despoil'd of all the Ornaments of Language but he is not at all proper to entice those who are taken with the manner of Expressing things and the force of Eloquence I shall not here add any thing to what I have said concerning his Learning But as to what concerns his Person he seems to have been very impartial very sincere and a great Lover of Peace Truth and Religion For altho' he maintain'd an intimate Correspondence with the Enemies of St. Athanasius it does not appear that he was his Enemy nor that he sided much with any Party in the Controversy of the Bishops of that time He was present indeed in the Councils wherein unjust things were done to Eustathius and St. Athanasius but it does not appear that he gave any Signs of an angry Temper nor that he serv'd the Passions of other Men. He was not the Author of New Confessions of Faith neither did he carry on any Plot to the Destruction of St. Athanasius or the Ruin of his Party but he only desir'd to accommodate Differences and reconcile the two Parties He did not abuse the Credit which he had with the Emperor to Advance himself nor to Destroy his Enemies as Eusebius of
Arius vigorously and endeavour'd to stiââe it in its Birth by Excommunicating him who was the Author of it and his Followers This he did in a Council assembled in the City of Alexandria for that purpose But Arius and those of his Faction having found some Bishops that receiv'd them into their Communion though they were Condemn'd by their Bishop Alexander complains in a Letter which he wrote to his Fellow-Bishops which is related by Theodoret Ch. 4. of the First Book of his History wherein he describes the Troubles that were caus'd in the Church by Arius and his Faction he lays open their Heretical Doctrine and observes that they had withdrawn to some Bishops who had received them into their Communion and sign'd Letters in their Favour because they disguis'd their true Sentiments and conceal'd the Poison of their corrupt Doctrine He reprehends the Conduct of those Bishops and accuses them of having violated the Canon of the Apostles by Patronizing the Actions of those who deny'd the Divinity of Jesus Christ. Afterwards he refutes the impious Opinion of the Arians and proves from Testimonies of Scripture That the Word was not a Creature made of Nothing but that he subsisted from all Eternity and is equal to his Father being of the same Nature with him and that there never was a time when the Son of God was not and that the Father was always a Father After having thus Establish'd the Divinity of the Son of God by most convincing Proofs drawn from the holy Scriptures he proceeds to the Explication of the Articles contain'd in the Creed concerning the Holy Spirit the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and the Resurrection of the Dead He observes that Jesus Christ had a real Body and not an imaginary one that he was Crucified and was dead but his Divinity suffer'd nothing He adds That this is the Doctrine of the Apostolick Church for which he is ready to die and says that Arius and Achillas were cast out because they taught another Doctrine wherefore he exhorts his Fellow-Bishops to avoid them and to joyn with him to repress their Insolence After all he prays them to send him their Letters approving what he had done and concludes his Letter with the Names of those Hereticks whom he had Condemn'd and cast out of the Church When the Bishops who maintain'd Arius wrote also on their Side in his favour Alexander found himself oblig'd to write again a large Letter on this Subject to all the Bishops in the World which is set down by Socrates and Theodoret Ch. 6. of the First Book of their History I know very well that 't is commonly thought that this Letter was written immediately after the Excommunication of Arius before that which is in the Fourth Chapter of Theodoret But this is a mistake since this Letter was written at the time when Eusebius of Nicomedia was fully declar'd a Patron of Arius Wherefore Alexander having observ'd in this Letter That since the Catholick Church was but one Body and all the Bishops were oblig'd to preserve Peace in it It was expedient that they should reciproâally advertise one another of what happen'd in each Diocess to the end that when one Member was afflicted all the rest should mourn or else rejoice together with it After he had begun his Letter with this handsom Reflexion he adds That he had once a design to have buried this Disorder in Silence but since Eusebius had taken upon him the Patronage of these Apostates and had written on all hands in their favour he thought himself oblig'd to break Silence and to give Notice to all the World of this New Error and to hinder his Fellow-Bishops from giving credit to the Letters which Eusebius might have written After this he inserts the Names of these Hereticks lays open their Error and refutes it in a few words He says That their Impiety was the cause why they were thrown out of the Church and smitten with an Anathema and though he acknowledges that he was sensibly troubled for their loss yet he must not wonder that such false Teachers should arise and corrupt the Faith and Doctrine of Jesus Christ since we are forewarn'd of them by Christ and his Apostle These Two Letters of Alexander were sharp and vehement wherein he pursues Arius and his Party vigorously and having represented their Doctrine after such a manner as discovers all that 's odious in it he disputes against it by many solid Arguments and writes to his Fellow-Bishops with great Assurance and yet with due respect In short one may say That these Letters are the best in their kind Cotelierius has also publish'd a Letter or a Pastoral Advertisement of Alexander to his Priests of Egypt and Mareotis written after these Two Letters in which he tells them That tho' they had subscrib'd to the First Pastoral Advertisement which he had address'd to Arius and those of his Faction wherein he exhorted them to return from their Impiety and make Profession of the Catholick Faith yet he thought it still necessary once more to Assemble the Clergy of Alexandria and Mareotis to shew them the Letter which he had written to all the Bishops since the first Condemnation of the Arians and to give them Notice that Carus and Pistus Priests Serapion Potamon Zosiâus and Irenaeus Deacons having join'd themselves to the other Arians were depos'd He demands their Consent and Approbation because says he 't is reasonable that ye should know what I have written and imprint it in your Minds as if you your selves had written it This Monument of Antiquity gives us to understand That according to the Discipline of the Church of Alexandria which was agreeable to that of other Churches the Bishop of that great See held Synods of his Priests or Curates not only of those that were in the City but also of those that were in the Country and that he would do nothing without the Consent and Approbation of his Clergy The Cause of Arius being afterwards carried into the Council of Nice Alexander assisted there and held one of the Chief Places as appears by the Council's Letter to the Alexandrians wherein they say That he was Head of the Council and had a great Hand in all its Decisions He liv'd but five Months after this Council and left Athanasius Successor to his See and to his Zeal against the Arians St. ATHANASIUS ST Athanasius was born at Alexandria a At Alexandria He was a Clergy-man of this Church and the Clergy were commonly of that Place where they discharg'd their Office but besides this Conjecture 't is plain also that he was originally of Alexandria by the Letter of Constantius who recalling him from his Exile says that he would restore him to his own Country c. Apol. 2. p. 769 770. and he takes his Country and Church for the same thing Orat. 1. contr Ar. but the precise Year of his Birth is not certainly known neither do the Ancients tell us
Days of the Creation which are mention'd in Genesis do not begin at Night but at the Morning and end at the Morning of the Day following The First and Third of his Hymns are in commendation of the Mystery of the most Holy Trinity which he explains in many Words The Second is a Prayer to God and is rather in Prose like the Creed attributed to St. Athanasius than in Verse The Poem of the Maccabees is a Description in Hexameter Verse of the Martyrdom of those Seven Brethren There is nothing extraordinary in this Poem there is nothing Poetical in it but some mean Imitations of Virgil and for the most part the Verses are low and despicable The Commentaries of Victorinus upon St. Paul have not yet been publish'd Sirmondus found some Fragments of them in a Manuscript from which he took those two little Treatises of which we have already spoken But probably he judg d them not worth publishing though he says in his Advertisement That the Stile of these Commentaries is more clear and clean than that of his Dogmatical Works There are many Philosophical Books attributed to the same Victorinus as his Commentaries upon Tully's Rhetorick cited by Cassiodorus in his Bibliotheca and by Pope Sylvester the II. in his Epistle 130 which have been Printed several times There is also attributed to him the Version of Porphyrie's Isagoge which is amongst Boetius's Works a Book about Poetry and some Books of Grammar But those sort of Books ought not to come into our Bibliotheca which should contain none but Ecclesiastical Monuments St. PACIANUS ST PACIANUS Bishop of Barcelona no less Famous says St. Jerom for the Holiness of his Life than the Eloquence of his Discourse wrote many Books among which there is one entitled St. Pacianus Cervus or The Hart and some other Treatises against the Novatians He died under the Reign of Theodosius towards the Year 380. We have three Letters of his against the Novatians address'd to Sempronianus who was of this Sect. An Exhortation to Repentance and a Treatise or Sermon of Baptism address'd to the Catechumens All these Pieces are written with much Wit and Eloquence The First Letter to Sempronianus has Two Parts In the First he makes use of the way of Prescription from the Name and Authority of the Catholick Church to show that the Sect of the Novatians cannot be the Church of Jesus Christ. In the Second he refutes their Doctrine about Repentance He observes at the beginning of the First Part That since the coming of Jesus Christ there have appear'd an infinite Number of Sects who have all been denominated from the Names of their Authors That the Name of Catholick is continued only in the True Church That the Novatians make one of those Sects which are separated from the Catholick Church That they have forsaken the Tradition of the Church under pretence of Reformation He opposes to them the Authority of the Ancient Fathers of the Church who were Successors to the Apostles Why should not we says he have a Respect to the Authority of those Apostolical Men Shall we pay no Deference to the Testimony of St. Cyprian Would we teach this Doctrine Are we wiser than he But what shall we say of so many Bishops dispers'd over all the World who are united with these Saints What shall we say of so many Venerable Old Men of so many Martyrs and so many Confessors Is it for us to Reform them Shall our times corrupted by Vice efface the Venerable Antiquity of our Ancestors My Name says he addressing himself to Sempronianus is Christian and my Sur-Name is Catholick Christianus mihi nomen est Catholicus cognomen He explains afterwards the Name of Catholick and tells us that the most Learned say that it signifies Obedient and that according to others it means one thro' all and shews that these two Significations agree to the Catholick Church which alone is obedient to the Voice of Jesus Christ and which only is the same in all the World After he has thus spoken of the Church he proceeds to Penance and so he enters into the Merits of the Question May it please God says he that none of the Faithful may ever stand in need of it That no Man after Baptism may ever fall into the precipice of Sin That so the Ministers of Jesus Christ may never be oblig'd to Preach and Apply long and tedious Remedies for fear of Patronizing the Liberty of sinning by flattering Sinners with their Remedies Nevertheless we allow this Mercy from our God not to those who are so happy as to preserve their Innocence but to those who have been so unhappy as to lose it by their Sins It is not to the Sound but to the Sick that we Preach these Remedies If the Evil Spirits have no more Power over the baptiz'd If the Fraud of the Serpent which destroy'd the first Man and gave so great occasion of Damnation to his Posterity has ceas'd If I say the Devil is gone out of the World If we may sport our selves in Peace If Man does not fall into many Sins of Thought Word and Deed Then let us not acknowledge this Gift of God Let us reject this Aid Let us have no more Confessions Let us no longer hearken to Sighs and Tears Let Justice and Innocence proudly despise these Remedies But if Man be subject to these Miseries Let us no more accuse the Mercy of God who has propos'd these Remedies to our Diseases and Rewards to those that preserve their Health Let us no more efface the Titles of God's Clemency by an unsupportable Rigour nor hinder Sinners by an inflexible hardness from rejoycing in those Gifts which he has freely bestow'd upon them 'T is not we who give this Grace of our own Authority but God himself who says Be converted to me c. After he has set down many Passages of Scripture which prove That God Pardons penitent Sinners he proposes this Objection of the Novatians God only will you say can grant Pardon of Sin That 's true answers he but what he does by his Ministers he does by his own Power For he says to his Apostles Whatsoever ye shall bind on Earth shall be bound in Heaven and whatsoever ye shall loose on Earth shall be loos'd in Heaven But perhaps he did not give this Power to any but the Apostles If this were true then we must say That they only had also Power to Baptize to give the Holy Spirit and to Purify the Gentiles from their Sins For in the same place where he gives them Powr to Administer the Sacrament of Baptism he also gives them Power to loose Sinners Either then these two Powers were peculiarly reserv'd to the Apostles or they are both continued to their Successors and therefore since it is certain that the Power of giving Baptism and Unction is continued in the Bishops that same must consequently be granted of the Power of binding and loosing
to believe concerning the Divinity acquaints them with the Knowledge of their own Natures teaching them that they are compos'd of Body and Soul That the Soul is Immortal because of Jesus Christ who has given it Immortality That it is free and has the power of doing Good and Evil That it did not Sin before it came into the World That the Souls of Men and Women are of the same Nature That the Body is the Work of God That it is not Wicked by Nature That when it meets with a holy Soul it is the Temple of the Holy Spirit and that we ought to be very watchful lest we defile it by Uncleanness He occasionally takes Notice That Virginity is the more perfect state but that we ought not to blame Marriage That Married Persons may hope for Salvation provided they use Marriage aright That in Order to their living holily in this state they must abstain sometimes from the use of Marriage to give themselves unto Prayer and that their Intention should not be to satisfie a brutal Passion but to have Children He adds That we ought not to condemn even those that proceed to Second Marriages and that this weakness should be pardon'd in those who stand in need of this Remedy to avoid Fornication As to what concerns Abstinence from Meat St. Cyril says That Christians do abstain during their Fasts from Flesh and Wine but that they have no aversation to those things as if they were in themselves Abominable That they do not abstain but to Merit the more by despising what is agreeable to our sense that they may enjoy the heavenly Feast He absolutely forbids the Eating of things Sacrificed to Idols and things Strangled As for Clothes he desires that they may be modest and such as may serve not to adorn but to cover the Body and defend it from the Injuries of the Weather He speaks afterwards of the Resurrection and brings Examples to show that it is not impossible The Holy Scripture is the last thing of which he treats in this Lecture He says That the Old Testament is part of the Holy Scripture and exhorts them not to read the Apocryphal Books He informs them That there are but 22 Canonical Books of the Old Testament and observes That they have been translated by the LXX He believes that this Translation was made by Inspiration and that the Seventy Interpeters being shut up in separate Cells all their Versions were found to agree together He recommends the Reading of the Canonical Books and Meditation upon them He reckons amongst this Number in the Old Testament the Book of Ruth that of Esther Job and Baruch but he does not reckon those other Books which are not in the Hebrew Canon The Canonical Books of the New Testament are according to him The Four Gospels the Acts of the Apostles the Seven Canonical Epistles and the Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul which in his time and in his Country were at the End of the New Testament after the Canonical Epistles He says nothing of the Revelation He condemns Judicial Astrology Necromancy Publick Spectacles Games Usury Covetousness the other Superstitions of the Jews and Pagans and the Assemblies of Hereticks In the Fifth Lecture after he has prov'd by many Examples the Necessity and Vertue of Faith he says That we must continue in that Faith which we have received from the Church and which is fortified with the Testimony of Holy Scripture But says he because Men cannot read the Scripture some being hindred by their Ignorance others by their Worldly Business therefore all that we are oblig'd to believe is compriz'd in a few words I pray you then to remember to fix it upon your Minds and to be fully perswaded that this is the only true Faith Afterwards at your leisure ye may search for the Proofs of it in the Holy Scripture But at present do you acquiesce in the Doctrine which you have learn'd by Tradition engrave it upon your Hearts that you may persevere in it with Piety for if you remain in doubt and uncertainty 't is to be fear'd that the Enemy will work your Perdition and that Hereticks will overthrow that Doctrine which I have taught you The Sixth is concerning the Monarchy or the Unity of God against Pagans and Hereticks He describes the Errors both of the one and the other and more particularly enlarges upon the Heresie of the Manichees and gives an account of its Original Progress and Impiety He produces a Fragment of the Dispute of Archelaus against the Heretick Manes He observes That Men cannot comprehend the Nature and Essence of God In the Seventh he explains how the Name of Father agrees to God He observes that he has only one Son by Nature who is Jesus Christ and that Men are his Children by Adoption He takes occasion from hence to Exhort his Hearers to live worthy of the Title of the Sons of God and to honour him though of his good Pleasure he chose them to be his Children At the same time he admonishes them to have a Reverence for their Fathers and Mothers In the Eighth he shows That God is Almighty because he can do all things and all things depend on his Power The Ninth is upon these words the Creator of all things visible and invisible There he shows what cause we have to admire the Greatness and Beauty of God's Works The Tenth is upon these words in Jesus Christ our only Lord. He says That in order to the Pious Adoration of the Father we must adore the Son also He explains all the Names that are given him He maintains That 't was the Son who appear'd to Adam and Moses He makes Moral Remarks upon the Name of Jesus and that of Christ. He produces many Proofs concerning Jesus Christ and places in this number the Wood of the Cross which says he is seen to this day amongst us and with those who having taken of it here have fill'd the whole World almost with it The Eleventh is concerning the Divinity of the Word and his Eternal Generation There he refutes the Error of the Arians and proves that the Word is of the same Nature with the Father That he was from all Eternity and that he made all things There he calls St. Peter the Prince or the Chief of the Apostles and the Sovereign Preacher of the Church The Twelfth is concerning the Incarnation where he shews by many Testimonies of Scripture That Jesus Christ was made Man for the Salvation of Mankind He quotes some of the Prophecies that foretold the Incarnation of Jesus Christ and shows That the time of the Messias's coming the place where he was Born his Condition and the manner of his coming into the World were foretold he praises Virginity and observes That those who perform'd the Sacerdotal Office observ'd Celibacy In the Thirteenth he relates the Prophecies which concern the Death and Passion of Jesus Christ. He recommends to the Faithful the signing
had us'd to him this Year 370 by Order of the Emperour Valens 'T is probable that the Letter 409 wherein he thanks an Eastern Bishop call'd Innocentius for what he had written to him is also of the same Year for 't is likely that this Bishop wrote to him a little after his Ordination and that St. Basil took no long time to Answer him The Deacon Dorotheus departed in the Year 371 but his Journey had not all the Success that might have been hop'd for However the Western Bishops wrote a Letter to the Bishops of the East which was sent to them by St. Athanasius but the Contents are not known It appears also by the Letters of St. Basil That there came from the West a Deacon nam'd Sabinus who carried the Letters of the Bishops of Illyricum Italy and Gaul The Eastern Bishops answer'd the Letter of those of the West which they received by St. Athanasius and that which was brought them by Sabinus There Answers are the Letters 61 and 69. In Letter 61 after they have testified their Joy that they had when they understood that the Western Bishops were all at present United in one and the same Doctrine they desire of them help and relief in their Miseries which they describe in a most lively and natural manner Our Miseries say they are known to you though we should not write them being publish'd over all the Earth The Doctrine of our Fathers is despis'd The Tradition of the Apostles is overthrown The new Inventions of some particular Persons prevail in the Churches They treat Religion as Sophisters not as Divines The Wisdom of this World Domineers and the Glory of the Cross is abhorr'd The true Pastors are driven away and ravening Wolves are entred into their places who tear the Flock of Christ in pieces The Churches are abandon'd The Desarts are fill'd with desolate Christians The Old Men sigh when they compare the times past with the present and the Young Men find themselves miserable because they never saw the Good things of which they are now destitute These things ought to affect those who have any love for Jesus Christ and his Church But what we have said of them is very far short of the Truth wherefore if you have any Charity for us if you be of the same Mind if you have any Bowels of Pity come speedily to our help Arm your selves with Zeal for Piety and deliver us from this Raging Tempest At the end of this Letter they make a short Confession of their Faith wherein they acknowledge that the Holy Spirit is ador'd together with the Father and the Son And they conclude with the Approbation of what the Western Bishops had done in Conformity to the Canons The Second Letter upon the same Subject is written in the Name of Meletius Eusebius of Samosata St. Basil and many other Eastern Bishops to the Bishops of Italy and Gaul that is the 69th among those of St. Basil. There they give a Description of their Miseries yet more large and more moving than the former and conjure the Western Bishops to help them and bring them relief and to send to them speedily a great number of Deputies who may take their Seats in a Synod hoping by this means that they may restore the Faith of the Council of Nice destroy Heresy and re unite the Orthodox who at present are divided in Communion though they hold one and the same Doctrine They compare the state of the Churches of the East to that of Jerusalem during the Siege of Vespasian and they say That as the Jews ruin'd themselves then by their Intestine Seditions while the Enemies Army reduced them to the last Extremity so their Churches were now brought to Desolation not only by the War of the Hereticks who openly attack'd them but also by the Divisions of the Orthodox That if they desire Assistance of the Bishops of the West it was for this particular Reason That Peace might be restor'd and in this they say consisted the Relief of their Churches They conclude their Letter with saying That they commend and approve the Confession of Faith that was made by those of the West and that they consented to all that they had lawfully and canonically determin'd in their Synodical Epistle These two Letters were sent by Sabinus who they say is a Witness of all that they affirm St. Basil wrote particularly by the same Sabinus to Valerianus Bishop of Illyricum or rather of Aquileia the Letter 324 wherein he Thanks him for the Charity he had testified in the Letter he had written and prays him to assist with his Prayers the Eastern Churches that were afflicted with Heresy and Schism These are all the Letters of St. Basil written in this Year 371 concerning the Union of the East and the West The Letters which he wrote in favour of Eustathius of Sebastea against Theodotus of Nicopolis are also of this Year 371 because he was at Difference with the former in the Year 372. The First Letter written upon this Subject is the 26th address'd to Eusebius of Samosata He acquaints him That Meletius and Theodotus of Nicopolis invited him to be present towards the Middle of June at a Synod which was to be held at Phargama He prays St. Eusebius to be present there He sent him this Letter by Eustathius of Sebastea and tells him That he waited for an Answer Eusebius came not to this Synod but Eustathius was present there and St. Basil before he did Communicate with him would have assurance of his Doctrine and having had two Conferences with him he made him agree to the Doctrine of the Church Being thus perswaded that he was Orthodox he joyn'd his Prayers with those of this Bishop to thank God who had given them Grace to think and speak after the same manner The Design of St. Basil was to have a Confession of Faith drawn up by Theodotus or those of his Party which Eustathius should Sign But Theodotus without enquiring into the Conduct of St. Basil refused to admit him to his Synod because he had communicated with Eustathius St. Basil being to go into Armenia passed by a Country House of Meletius called Getasa where Theodotus was present and after a free Conference between them it was agreed That if St. Basil could make Eustathius sign a Confession of Faith which plainly contain'd the Doctrine of the Church he should then continue in his Communion but on the contrary he should separate from him if he refus'd to sign that Confession Meletius and his Priest Diodorus having approved this Proposal it was also agreed to by Theodotus who invited St. Basil to go with him to Nicopolis But when he was arrived there he would not communicate with him contrary to his Word which he pass'd to him which obliged St. Basil to withdraw and to go to Satala there to regulate some Affairs of Armenia and Ordain some Bishops He wrote from thence to Count Terentius the 187
to preserve the Exemptions of Priests and Deacons We may place also in this time the Letter 86 to Bosphorus wherein St. Basil gives an Account of the Difference which he had with his Predecessor Dianius Bishop of Caesarea He says That he had not anathematis'd him but that he was extremely troubled when he understood that this Bishop had Sign'd the Creed of Constantinople and that for this Cause he separated from him but that he returned to his Communion before he died when he declared That he had Signed this Creed by Surprize and without knowing any evil by it There is another Letter wherein he speaks of this Bishop Bosphorus It is Letter 300 address'd to the Nuns There he confutes those who accused him of not receiving the Nicene Creed He approves it and yet confesses that there are Catholicks who do not allow of the Word Consubstantial because they believe that it has an ill Sence He says That they ought to be pardon'd because this Term did very much displease the Bishops who condemned Paulus Samosatenus He explains the good Sence of this Word and the distinction of Hypostases Lastly He proves the Divinity and Equality of the Father and the Son St. Peter of Alexandria having Succeeded St. Athanasius in the Year 373 St. Basil did not fail to write to him immediately after his Promotion to the Bishoprick This Letter is the 320. He Congratulates his Exaltation and exhorts him to follow the Footsteps of St. Athanasius Soon after this Peter was forced away and the Church of Alexandria was persecuted most violently by the Arians Immediately St. Basil comforts them in a Letter wherein he deplores their Misery This Letter is the 71. Amphilochius was Ordained Bishop of Iconium at the End of the Year 372 as appears by the Eighth Letter of St. Basil. 'T was therefore towards the End of the last Year or rather at the Beginning of this that St. Basil congratulated him by Letter 393 and 't was certainly in 373 that he invited him by Letter 344 to the Feast of St. Eupsichius which was September the 5th The 395 to the same is also of the same Year He acquaints him That he had finish'd the Book of the Holy Spirit The Letter 363 to Eusebius of Samosata was written before Easter of the same Year during the sharp Winter-Season St. Basil acquaints him That he was dangerously Sick Towards the End of this Year St. Eusebius of Samosata was banish'd into Thrace and St. Basil wrote to him the Letters 9 and 251 to Comfort him in his banishment and the Letter 269 to his Nephew Antiochus who accompanied his Uncle The Clergy of Samosata being troubled by the Arians and by the Division of some particular Persons he Comforts them and Exhorts them to Peace by Letter 280 and praises the Senate of that City by Letter 294. He wrote also to Otreus Bisâop of Melitine the Letter 316 where he speaks of the Banishment of Eusebius It was towards the End of this Year that St. Basil wrote to the Bishops of the Sea-Coasts and of the Isles the Letter 77 wherein he complains that they had sent no body to him for Relief in their Mâseries and prays them to send their Deputies and Letters of Communion 'T was also about the same time that he wrote the Letter 322 upon the same Subject to Elpides We may place also in the same time the Letter 87 which he wrote to a Heretical Woman call'd Simplicia who concerned her self to make Remonstrances to him He tells her with some warmth That it does not belong to her to judge That he expected his Judgment from God He adds That he should not want Witnâsses to justify his Conduct and that he would not make use of Slaves or Eunuchs whose Testimony ought not to be taken He gives a dreadful Character of the Eunuchs of his time We cannot find a Year wherein we can better place than in this the Letter 184 to Palladius and to ââ¦centius Priests and Monks He informs them That he is a lover of Peace He prays God to restrain the Authors of Division and recommends himself to their Prayers St. Basil being recovered of his Sickness which had tormented him during the two Winters of the Years 373 and 374 went into Pisidia and Isauria to regulate the Affairs of those Countries as it appears by Letter 272. It was before this Journey that he wrote to Amphilochius the Letter 396 wherein he acquaints him with his Disease and prays him to delay their meeting for some Days so it was also in the same Winter that he wrote the first Canonical Letter to Amphilochius which he could not send to him because of his Sickness and St. Amphilochius having sent to him some more Questions wherein he desired to be informed St. Basil answered him by the Second written in the beginning of the Year 374 The last of these Letters was probably written towards the end of this Year after St. Gregory was retir'd from Nazianzum We shall speak severally of these Letters The Affairs which he had in Pisidia concerned the Churches of Isaurus or Isauria which had been ââ¦embred from their own Province to be joyned to the Churches of Pisidia and Lycaonia St. Amphilochius who was Bishop of Iconium the Metropolis of Lycaonia had written about it to St. Basil and prayed him to come thither This Saint before he went into that Country acquainted him by Letter 406 That he did well to take Care of these Churches but yet he did not approve of the Design which he had of sharing them amongst many Bishops lest the Dignity of a Bishop should thereby become contemptible He says That it would be better to chuse one Man worthy of a Bishoprick who might take some Priests to his Assistance than thus to divide a small Territory into many Bishopricks He advises him to place Parish Priests in the Towns where there had formerly been Bishops before any Bishop was Ordain'd lest if there should be one Ordain'd before he would not approve of this Regulation In fine he admonishes him to confine the Church of Isauria within its own Bounds He adds That the Affairs of the Church of Nyssa are in the same Condition and that some of his Enemies were gone to Court He subjoyns a Question of Doctrine about the Opinion of Philo who affirms That Manna had all sorts of Tastes He says That this Opinion was grounded only upon a Jewish Tradition He advertises Amphilochius that Sympius had sent him a Letter of Communion and that he had answer'd him This Letter is probably the 398 directed to Amphilochius but it could not be address'd to him since it appears by this Letter that he to whom ãâã Basil wrote had been at difference with him and was reconciled some time before since he thanks him for his Reconciliation In all probability it was about this Affair of Isauria and some others of the like Nature that St. Basil went into Pisidia and Isauria
St. Gregory's And in the Second place some Reasons which are us'd to dissuade Men from Pilgrimages to Jerusalem respect all Christians in general In the mean time 't is no ways probable that St. Gregory Nyssen who was so very much devoted to the Saints should absolutely condemn the Piety of those who travell'd upon a good Design to visit the Holy Places especially since this Practice was Authoriz'd and Approv'd from the beginning of the Fourth Age of the Church It must therefore be said that he did not condemn it but upon the account of the Abuses and Superstitions which began in his time to creep into these kind of Devotions of which he was a Witness in his Journey to Jerusalem Thus St. Jerom who was very much devoted to the Holy Places in his 13th Epistle dissuades Paulinus Bishop of Nola from a Journey to Jerusalem upon the same Reason that St. Gregory uses And to show that St. Gregory could have no other Aim or Design one needs but compare this Letter with the following to Eustathia Ambrosia and Basilissa wherein he acknowledges that 't is a Happiness to see the Holy Places provided a Man represents the Death and Sufferings of Jesus Christ by his own Actions to himself He complains in this Letter that the Church of Jerusalem was no more exempt from Divisions than other Churches and explains towards the latter end the Mystery of the Incarnation There he teaches that the Divinity was not chang'd into the Humanity but that the Divinity was united to a Nature like to ours that it assum'd a Body and a Soul and was never separated from them that the Virgin ought to be call'd the Mother of God and not the Mother of a Man He rejects the Opinion of the Millenaries He complains of some that would not communicate with him in the Journey which he made to Jerusalem At last he exhorts those to whom he writes who were at Jerusalem to continue firm in the Faith of their Fore-Fathers and not to preferr Novelties to the Ancient Doctrine receiv'd from their Fathers by Tradition St. Cyril in the Book written to Evoptius quotes a Passage of St. Gregory's taken out of his Commentary upon the Epistle of St. Paul to the Philippians which can be no other St. Gregory but this of Nyssa The Eight Books of Nemesius's Philosophy have formerly been attributed to him but now it is generally agreed that this was a gross Error Tho' St. Gregory Nyssen professed Rhetorick and Photius assures us That his Stile is Lofty and Smooth yet one may say that he came not near the Eloquence of St. Basil and St. Gregory Nazianzen His way of Writing is affected and his Stile is no ways Natural he speaks more like a Declaimer than an Orator he is always abstruse either by Allegories or abstracted Reasonings he mingles Philosophy with Divinity and makes use of the Principles of Philosophers both in his Explications of Mysteries and in his Discourses of Morality Upon which Account his Works are more like the Treatises of Plato and Aristotle than those of other Christians He follows and imitates Origen in his way of Allegorizing and there are also some of this Author's Errors in his Works about the Nature of Souls and the End of the Pains of the damned but he rejects and refutes them expresly in other places 'T is very probable therefore that the places wherein these Errors are to be met with were added since which Germanus the Patriarch of Constantinople shows in a Book out of which Photius relates an Extract in Vol. 218. of his Bibliotheca wherein he proves as well by what goes before those places as by what follows after them and by an infinite Number of contrary Passages that those places which agree with the Doctrine of Origen concerning the End of the Pains of the damned were either added or corrupted by the Disciples of this Author He observes also That the like happened to the Conference about the Soul with Macrina to the Catechetical Discourse and the Book of the Perfection of a Christain And he should have added also the Treatise about Infants who die before they come to the use of Reason It may be said also That St. Gregory Nyssen having his Head full of the Books and Principles of Origen could not always be so careful but some of his Errors would slip unawares into his Reasonings tho' he was not really of his Opinion and he rejected them at other times when he was more attentive Yet 't is plain that there is an Addition at the End of the great Catechetical Discourse wherein mention is made of the Heretick Severus 'T was a long time before the Works of St. Gregory Nyssen were all collected together into one Body The First Editions have only the Eight Books of Nemesius's Philosophy In 1536 Aldus Minutius printed at Venice three Greek Orations and in 1537 the Greek Text of the Book of the Formation of Man and the Version of this Book made by Dionysius Exiguus was printed with the Treatise of the Life of Moses and the Eight Books of Nemesius at Cologne in 1551. The Book of the Life of Moses translated by Georgius Trapezuntius was printed at Basle in 1521. In 1544 Camerarius publish'd a Verson of the Homily upon Abraham In 1550 Zinus publish'd a Version of some Moral Homilies which was printed by Vascosanus The Conference about the Soul translated by Augerius was printed at Paris in 1557. Laurentius Sifanus collected together and translated several Treatises of St. Gregory Nyssen's and caused them to be printed at Basle in 1562. In 1567 Leunclavius made a New Translation of the Book of the Life of Moses In 1564 Hoëschelius caused the Greek Text of some Orations of St. Gregory Nyssen to be printed at Ausburg In 1567 the Book of Virginity was printed at Rome translated by Galesinius together with Five Orations the same Book was also translated by Livineius whose Version appeared in 1574. The Discourse of Purification and of the Soul was printed at Cologne in 1568. The Edition of the Year 1562 was re-printed at Basle in 1571. There was added to it the Exposition upon the Canticles translated by Leunclavius and the Letter to Flavianus The Edition of Nivellè of the Year 1573 is larger and contains the Version of almost all the Treatises of St. Gregory Nyssen which had been then publish'd Since that Edition Maximus Margurius caused the Version of the Book of Perfection and of the Letter to Letoius and of the Book upon the Titles of the Psalms to be printed at Venice in 1585. The Letter to Letoius was also printed at Venice in 1589 together with the Notes of Antonius Augustinus and at Paris with those of Balsamon in 1561 at Ausburg together with the Homily of the Divinity of the Son and Holy Spirit translated by Hervetus in 1591. The Book of Perfection of Zinus's Translation was printed at Venice in 1575. In 1593 Hoëschelius printed in Greek at
This is First of all to persuade those that are present that the Souls of the Dead are still alive and that they are not annihilated Secondly To make us apprehend that there is good hopes of those that are dead Moreover Prayers are not only useful to the Living but also to the Dead tho' they do not blot out all their Sins yet they serve to expiate some of those which they committed in this Life We mention Sinners and Righteous Men Sinners to implore the Mercy of God for them Righteous Men such as the Fathers the Patriarchs the Prophets the Apostles the Evangelists the Martyrs the Confessors the Bishops the Hermites and all Christians that Jesus Christ may be distinguished from all his Creatures and that we may learn to give to him the Worship that is due to him only being persuaded that we ought not to equal Mortal Men to the Lord whatsoever Righteousness and Holiness they have After this he distinguishes Two Sorts of Saints those that are on Earth and those that are in the Heavenly Jerusalem and he adds that the Church does well to observe a Custom which she has received by Tradition That the Laws of our Fathers cannot be subverted nor the Commands of our Mothers despised without impiety according to the Words of Solomon Hearken my Son to the Commands of your Father and do not reject the Admonitions of your Mother Jesus Christ our Father has taught us his Doctrine by Writing and by Tradition The Holy Church our Mother has Laws which cannot be destroyed nor abrogated Nothing is greater nor more admirable than those Laws and all those who would oppose them are self-convicted of an Error Can there be any thing more agreeable to the Doctrine of the Church or more contrary to the principal Errors of the Innovators But says Scultetus these Arabian Women who offered Sacrifices to the Virgin did not believe her Eternal or Infinite But tho' these Women did not it may be think so yet they gave her that Worship which is due only to a sovereign and infinite Being by offering Sacrifices unto her and placing all their Religion in doing so The Second Objection of Scultetus is about the use of Images which St. Epiphanius condemns in his Letter to John of Jerusalem and which he seems also to reject as contrary to the Law of the Gospel We have already answered this Objection by saying That indeed St. Epiphanius seems to have disallow'd the use of Images because this Custom was not then established in his Country But 't is certain and Baillee himself does not deny it that 't was then establish'd in other Churches Moreover we must not wonder that St. Epiphanius speaks of it as a Practice contrary to the Gospel For 't is well known that those who speak against Customs that were not established in their own time do sometimes make use of Expressions too vehement in rejecting them as for Example St. Cyprian condemning the practice of those who did not put Water into the Chalice makes no scruple to say that their Custom was contrary to the Law of Jesus Christ. Many other Examples may be brought of this nature and the Calvinists themselves must acknowledge that the same is to be said of the Words of St. Epiphanius since they cannot affirm that the use of Images whereof St. Epiphanius speaks in this place is This Excuse is not defensible The New Testament is as severe against Idolatry as the Old was and more if we consider upon how much nobler Foundations it is constituted Neither is this only a Matter of Discipline or if it is yet it is not an indifferent thing The Church of Rome was very sensible of this when she removed the Second Commandment out of the Catechisms by which she orders her People to be instructed If the Abuses occasioned by placing of Images in Churches had never been more dangerous than they were in St. Epiphanius's time this Plea might have been valid for those Churches which still desired to retain them or if the Church of Rome in her Offices Catechisms and Directions to her Priests to guide them in their Sermons and Exhortations to the People had taken all possible care to obviate all Objections whatsoever which could have been raised she could then have justly urged it But Mr. Du Pin knows very well that her constant connivance if not Command has long ago precluded her from all Pretences of this nature She knows also that the Laiety in all Countries of the Communion of the Church of Rome where they have not been over-aw'd by a promiscuous conversation with Protestants have without check paid as gross Acts of Worship to senseless Images of sometimes fictitious Saints as ever the Heathens of old paid to the Images of Jupiter or Apis and lastly he knows that his Church is in this Point wholly inexcusable because it has establish'd and still maintains a Custom not mentioned at least if not expresly forbidden in Scripture unknown to the purest Ages of Christianity opposed as contradictory to the Law of God at its first appearance by Men eminent for Piety and Learning in the Time when they lived and received as Saints by the Catholick Church after their Deaths and abused by the ignorant People to the basest Idolatry and Superstition in all Countries where-ever it has been allowed contrary to the Gospel The Third thing which Scultetus pretends to find in the Books of St. Epiphanius contrary to the Doctrine of the Church is the condemnation of the Sacrifice of the Mass. He endeavours to prove that St. Epiphanius never taught it because he says in Heres 55. and 42. That Jesus Christ came to abolish the Sacrifices of the Old Law by one Sacrifice only The meanest Writer of Controversies would easily answer this Objection by saying First That St. Epiphanius in this place speaks only of the Sacrifices of the Old Law to which he opposes that of Jesus Christ upon the Cross and that he does no ways exclude the unbloody Sacrifice of the Eucharist Secondly That the Sacrifice of the Eucharist properly speaking is not different from that upon the Cross and that it is always the same thing which is offered tho' after a different manner Thirdly That St. Epiphanius acknowledges that the Priesthood of Melchisedeck and consequently the Sacrifice continued under the New Law The Fourth Objection of Scultetus is about Purgatory He affirms that St. Epiphanius did not own it because he says in Heres 59. That no Man can change his Condition after his death and that then there is no more room for any one to repent and to merit Glory But does it follow from this Proposition which all Catholicks acknowledged that those who died in a State of Damnation could no longer hope for Salvation Does it follow say I that those who died in the Guilt of some small Sins could not be purified from it after their deaths All the Catholicks deny this Consequence and St. Epiphanius
all Allegories He writ a Book likewise to justifie that way of expounding the Scripture intituled Of Allegory and of History against Origen quoted by Facundus Photius observeth further That Theodorus's Commentaries are full of frequent Repetitions that they are tedious and unpleasant to read The first of his Commentaries is that upon the Psalms he saith himself that it was the most imperfect and least exact In his Commentary upon Job he says That though the History of Job be true at the bottom yet it is written in a fabulous way He observeth besides when he Comments upon the Book of Canticles that it is a difficult thing to write an usefull Commentary upon that Book and that it was forbidden both among the Jews and among the Christians to read it publickly since in all probability it was a Nuptial Song though it is to be understood of the Love of Wisdom The other Treatises of this Author were very long and very numerous When he was young he composed a large Work of the Incarnation against the Apollinarists and Anomaeans divided into Fifteen Books which according to his own Testimony contain'd above Fifteen Thousand Verses wherein he shewed saith Gennadius by convincing proofs and by testimonies of the Scripture for he speaketh of Theodorus in the 12th Chapter of his Book concerning Ecclesiastical Writers That in Jesus Christ there is the fullness both of the Divinity and of the Humanity That Man is made of two Substances the Soul and the Body That Sense and Understanding are not separate Substances but Faculties of the Soul The Fourteenth Book is concerning the Trinity But in discoursing of uncreated Nature he treateth also of Creatures The Last Book contains many Quotations out of the Fathers to confirm his Doctrine by the Authority of Tradition Some considerable Fragments of this Treatise of the Incarnation are cited by Facundus and in the Fifth Council He wrote besides Five and Twenty Books against Eunomius in defence of S. Basil's Books mentioned by Photius in the 25th Volume of his Bibliotheca some whereof are cited by Facundus and in the Fifth Council Four Books against Apollinarius A Book intituled The mystical Book A Treatise to those that had been Baptized Two Letters to Artemius of Alexandria An Epistle to Cerdo upon the Interpretation of the Psalms Five Books of the Creature Five other Books to show that God permitted Sin because it is for Men's advantage which are all cited by Facundus and in the Fifth Council And Three Books of the Magick of the Persians directed to a Suffragan Bishop of Armenia mentioned by Photius in the 81st Volume of his Bibliotheca where he saith That Theodorus in the First of those Three Books explains that abominable Axiom of the Persians introduced by Zarades whereby Zarovas the God of Fortune for the first principle of all things from whom they suppose Oromazus to be descended by whom they mean the Evil Genius or Satan That when he had given an account of that Doctrine which was as base as it is impious he refuteth it in the same Book In the Two last Books he treateth of the True Religion and having begun with the World's Creation he falls insensibly upon the Law of Grace The Fifth Council attributes to Theodorus of Mopsuesta Charisius's Creed that was produced in the Council of Ephesus But Facundus says That it was none of his and that it was an injury to him to ascribe it to him Theodorus of Mopsuesta was charged with several Heresies after his Death and particularly that he was Nestorius's Tutor and that he taught in his Writings those Errors which since bear the Name of that Heresiarch This personal Accusation occasioned a great Contest that was agitated with much heat in the beginning of the Sixth Century Justinian caused this Author to be condemned in the Fifth General Council in despite of Vigilius who defended him He would have obliged all the Bishops to subscribe that Condemnation but some refused to doe it and undertook to plead for Theodorus Facundus Bishop of Hermiana a City in Africa proved one of his most zealous Defenders and composed Twelve Apologetical Books for him wherein he endeavoureth to justifie him fully of all the Accusations that were formed against him This is not a fit place to examine that Question which we shall handle at large hereafter when we come to speak of the Fifth Council and of Facundus's Books And so instead of examining the Doctrine of Theodorus Mopsuestenus I shall only give some Remarks upon his Style and way of Writing His Style if Photius may be credited is neither lofty nor clear he is full of tedious Repetitions but he brings strong Proofs and hath the Scriptures very ready at command This judgment of Photius is confirmed by the Fragments of his Writings that are extant His Style is perplexed and diffuse no clearness in it but the Notions are solid and exact enough He thought and spoke with ease He despised allegorical and mystical Interpretations of Scripture but insisted much upon Moral Heads and made it his main business to set forth the History and expound the Prophecies Here is a Catalogue of the Latin Fragments of this Author set down in the Fifth General Council and by Facundus which may be consulted to judge both of his Doctrine and of his Style WORKS of THEODORUS of Mopsuesta cited by Facundus by the Fifth Council col 4. by Photius and Gennadius Commentaries upon the Holy Scripture SEven Volumes upon Genesis 5. Conc. collat 4. cap. 62. Photius cod 25. Upon the Psalms Facund l. 9. c. 1. p. 131 132. l. 6. cap. 3. 5. Conc. c. 19. 23 24. Upon Job 5. Concil c. 63 64 65 66 67. Upon the Canticles 5. Concil cap. 68 69 70 71. Upon the Twelve minor Prophets Conc. 5. cap. 20 21 22. Upon S. Matthew Facund l. 3. c. 4. p. 43. l. 9. c. 2. p. 132. Concil 5. cap. 26. 40 51 52 55. Upon S. Luke Conc. 5. c. 58. Upon S. John Facund l. 9. c. 3. p. 135. Conc. 5. c. 13 14 15 33 34. Upon the Acts Conc. 5. c. 16. Upon the Epistle to the Romans l. 6. c. 3. p. 46. Upon the Epistle to the Hebrews Conc. 5. c. 32 46. Treatises against Hereticks THree Books of the Magick of the Persians Photius cod 81. Fifteen Books of the Incarnation The 13th is cited by Facund l. 3. c. 2. p. 38. The 5th the 6th the 10th the 12th the 15th l. 9. c. 3. p. 135 136 137 138 139. They are all cited l. 10. c. 1 c. The 6th p. 149. and 159. The 14th is cited Conc. 5. c. 17. 54. The 1st c. 25. c. 27. The 8th c. 29. the 7th c. 30. the 12th c. 43 47 48. The 2d cap. 49 50. The 13th in the 53. Gennad c. 12. Twenty-five Books against Eunomius The 10th is cited by Facund l. 9. c. 3. p. 139. Photius cod 4. Four Books against Apollinarius The 3d. is cited by Facundus l. 3. c. 2. p.
of the First Man's Sin committed with full liberty This first Sin deserved the following There remained yet a considerable Difficulty Why the Innocent Soul becometh subject unto Sin by it's Union with the Body To explain this St. Augustin mentions four several Opinions concerning the Original of Souls The First is That the Soul is formed from the Parents The Second is That God creates new ones at Mens Birth The Third is That Souls being created beforehand God causeth them to enter their respective Bodies The Fourth is That they come down into the Bodies of their own accord Now he judging all these Opinions equally probable and that it was as yet undecided he endeavoureth to prove that a Reason may be given for Original Sin what Opinion soever one holds of the Original of the Soul He cometh at last to that particular Difficulty concerning the Children that die as soon as they are born As for those that have received Baptism though without knowledge he saith That it is Piously and Justly believed for these are the terms he makes use of Satis pââ recteque Creditur that the Faith of those who present the Child to be baptized supplies for that of the Child As to the Pain and Sorrow which they suffer having not deserved them by their Sins St. Augustin saith That God hath his Ends in permitting their Sufferings and that perhaps he will recompence them for these Sufferings as the Church believeth of the holy Innocents killed by Herod who are reckoned among the Martyrs having thus salved these Difficulties he makes other useless Queries concerning the Sin of Adam St. Augustin observes in his Retractations that he designed nothing in these Books but to oppose their Opinion who deny the original of Evil to be from Free-Will pretending that if this were true God must be the Author of it introducing thereby an Eternal and Immutable Subsistency o Evil That he did not enlarge upon it nor treat of Predestination or Grace whereby God prepares the Wills of Men that they might make good use of their Liberty Yet when there was occasion to speak of it he says something by the by without making any stop to defend it Wherefore Pelagius and the Pelagians alledged several Expressions in favour of Free-Will which St. Augustin had used in his Books But St. Augustin shews That what he said of Free-Will is consistent enough with his System of Grace and that he established all the Principles of it This he proves by Passages taken out of these Books where he affirms That every good thing comes from God and that Man cannot be delivered from Ignorance and the necessity of Sinning but by God's help The two Books upon Genesis against the Manichees were composed by St. Augustin after his return into Africa about the Year 389. There he refuteth those impertinent Objections which the Manichees made concerning the Three first Chapters of Genesis by giving a reasonable Exposition of them He insists most upon the literal sence but sometimes he goes out of the way and only gives an Allegorical one As St. Augustin designed to benefit all Men by this Book and particularly to inform the common People that were abused by the Manichees so he writ it with all the clearness and simplicity he could In his Retractations he explaineth some Passages that were misconstrued by the Pelagians especially two one against the Necessity of Grace and the other against Original Sin The Books of the Manners of the Church and of the Manichees were composed at Rome by St. Augustin soon after his Baptism about the Year 387. as himself witnesseth in his Retractations It is very probable that he revised them after his return into Africa seeing he mentions them in the first of those Treatises lately named His design was to confound the Insolence and Vanity of the Manichees who gloried in a vain Temperance and under that Pretence exalted themselves above the Catholicks Wherefore in these two Books he shews the opposition of the true Christian's Manners to those of the Manichees proving how much the counterfeit Vertues which these made their boast of were inferior to the real Vertue of Christ's Disciples In the Book of the Manners of the Church he layeth down as the first ground of Morality That God alone is the Soveraign Good of our Souls from which truth he inferrs That all things must have respect to God and that we are to love him above all things and proves this first Principle of Christian Ethicks by Testimonies of the Old and New Testament He shews That all the Vertues are but so many different Expressions of this Love That Temperance is that love which keeps it self pure and uncorrupt for God Fortitude is a love that endureth all things with ease for God's sake Justice is a love that serveth God only and by reason of that procures Good to all Creatures that are subjected to him Prudence is a love which has a light to distinguish that which may help to bring us to God from that which may hinder us in that way even the love of our Neighbour is not a Vertue but so far as it relates to God He alone that loveth God is capable of loving himself and his Neighbour as he ought to do This Reflection giveth St. Augustin an Opportunity of speaking of the Duties of Society and of what Christians owe one to another Lastly as Examples do often affect more than Precepts so he produces several Precedents of vertuous Men in the Church that he may raise a higher Notion of the Manners of the Catholicks He sets forth the Examples of Hermits Monks and Nuns who have quite severed themselves from the World to spend their Lives in constant Abstinence and in Exercises of Piety He adds the Example of several vertuous Ecclesiasticks and of many holy Prelates who kept themselves pure in the midst of a corrupt Age and of an infinite Number of Christians that led most exemplary Lives He concludes this Book by shewing That the Examples of Evil Catholicks can be no pretence for Hereticks to separate from the Church and that the Notions of the Manichees touching Marriage are contrary to those of the Apostles He observeth much the same Method in his Book of the Manners of the Manichees He begins it by refuting their Doctrine about the Nature and Original of Good and Evil Afterwards he discovers their impious and superstitious Practices in such a manner as renders them ridiculous and abominable and then gives a relation of the Disorders whereof the greatest part of that Sect had been Convicted The Book of true Religion is the last of those which St. Augustin writ before he was a Priest He therefore made it about the Year 390. there he shews both the Excellencies and the Duties of the true Religion That the Christian Religion is the only true one and he refutes the Errors of other Religions and particularly of the Manichees concerning the two Natures He speaks of Jesus
Sence as in his other Treatises but makes very learned and judicious Remarks which serve very much to clear the Text of the Bible The Notes upon Job are a very imperfect VVork St. Augustin had writ them in the Margin of a Copy of the Book of Job from which some body took them and compiled them into a Book by themselves which makes him say That he knew not whether it was to be called his VVork or theirs who had thus collected and reduced them He findeth there much Obscurity proceeding from their great Brevity and because they added some Notes to those words of the Text to which they do not referr In one word He found so many Faults in that VVork that he had suppressed it had he not known that there were several Copies of it abroad This is the Account which he gives of it in the 13th Chapter of the Second Book of his Retractations Yet this Treatise is not so contemptible it is a kind of Paraphrase or literal Explication of the Book of Job which explains it and discovers such Notions as may be further improved The Looking-glass taken out of the Scripture is neither a Commentary nor a particular VVork upon the Scripture but barely a Collection of Passages out of the Old and New Testament containing Precepts and Instructions for Manners Possidius affirms That St. Augustin wrote a Book of this Nature and Cassiodorus recommends the reading of it It is not certain whether this is that which St. Augustin wrote The Preface is in his Style but in the Body of the Book the Scriptures are cited according to St. Jerom's Translation Perhaps the Text used by St. Augustin was changed and the more common Version was put in the room of it For I can hardly believe that St. Augustin would quit his Old Translation to make a constant use of St. Jerom's Father Vignier hath also published A Looking-glass taken out of Scripture attributed to St. Augustin But this relates to Doctrine more than to Manners which doth not agree with what Possidius saith of St. Augustin's These are all St. Augustin's Treatises upon the Old Testament which make up the First Part of the Third Tome The Second contains Treatises upon the New Testament and begins with a Harmony betwixt the Four Gospels divided into Four Books In the First having spoken of the Number Authority and of the Style of the Gospels he refuteth those who refuse to give Credit to the Gospel because it was not written by Jesus Christ himself but by his Disciples whom they suppose to have receded from their Master's Doctrine that so they might persuade the VVorld that he was God and thereby destroy the VVorship of the Gods He observes That Two of the Four Evangelists were Apostles St. Matthew and St. John and Two were not St. Mark and St. Luke that so none might say that there was a difference betwixt those who had seen with their Eyes Christ's Actions and those who wrote them upon the Relation of those who had seen them He addeth That other Men's VVorks who undertook to write the History of Christ were not received by the Church as Canonical because the Authors of these Histories were not to be believed having stufft their Works with false Relations and Errors contrary to the Rule of the Catholick and Apostolick Faith and to sound Doctrine He believes That the Four Gospels were composed in the same Order as we see them in at present That St. Matthew's Gospel was written in Hebrew and the others in Greek That each Evangelist hath observed a particular Order yet without obliging himself not to speak any thing that had been spoken by another That St. Matthew designed particularly to give an Account of Christ's Royal Descent and to represent him according to that Humane Life which he led among Men That St. Mark did little else but abridge St. Matthew That St. Luke apply'd himself to set forth Christ's Priesthood which is the reason why he doth not reckon his Genealogy from King David by Solomon as St. Matthew doth but by Nathan and for the same reason he takes notice That the Virgin Mary was a-Kin to Elizabeth who was of the Sacerdotal Race and Wife to Zacharias the Priest Lastly That St. John taketh his Subject above Christ's Humane Actions to speak of his Divinity and to discover the Equality of the Word with his Father So that it may be said that the Three First Evangelists are more for the Active Life and St. John for Contemplation After this St. Augustin makes Application of the Four Beasts in the Revelations to the Four Evangelists and having made these Remarks he answereth those who found fault that Christ had written nothing He proposes to them the Examples of Socrates Pythagoras and of the wisest Heathen who left to their Disciples the care of committing to Writing both their Doctrine and their Instructions He shews That Christ cannot be said to have written Magical Books or that he approved the Worship of False Deities He particularly enlargeth upon this last Head shewing That the Apostle's Doctrine touching the Worshipping of One only God is conformable to that of the Prophets who fore-told That the Messiah should preach the same upon Earth and that it should be published and received throughout the VVorld The Three other Books are a Harmony of the Evangelists In the Second and Third he followeth the Text of St. Matthew's Gospel and compareth the three other Gospels with that In the last he takes notice of what the three other Evangelists have peculiar to themselves He doth not only compare the Text of the Evangelists but makes them agree together and resolves the seeming Difficulties and Contrarieties that are betwixt them as to the Order and Manner of their relating both of the Words and Actions of Jesus Christ. This Work was very difficult and laborious and it was finished by St. Augustin with great exactness It was composed about the Year 400. After this Treatise we find in this Volume the two Books of St. Augustin upon the Sermon of Christ in the Mount written about the Year 393. They contain Moral Reflections with Instructions and Precepts contained in Christ's Sermon recorded by St. Matthew in the 5th 6th and 7th Chapters of his Gospel St. Augustin likewise clears the Difficulties that he meets with in the Letter of the Text. Among the Passages of this Treatise which he reviseth in his Retractations there are Two of Consequence The former is about the Divorce allow'd by Jesus Christ in case of Fornication He had extended what is said of Fornication to all those Crimes that set us at a distance from God Here he retracteth this Opinion and confesseth That this Notion is not very certain He saith also That it is a very hard Question VVhether a Man may Marry another VVife having been Divorced from a former The Second Point of any importance taken notice of in his Retractations is touching an Expression he had used when
are united in one only Person That there is but one Christ one Son But say they Theodoret in his last Dialogue rejects such Expressions as are consequent upon the Hypostatick Union for he is against the Phrases God hath suffered God is dead God is risen which are most true in the sence of the Orthodox It is then truly said That he opposes at least indirectly the Hypostatick Union But if they consider well Theodoret rejects not these Expressions but in the bad sence that they are capable of and as they understand them of the Divine Nature it self He opposes these Expressions in the Reduplicative sence God hath suffered as God and in the abstract Terms The Divine Nature the Divinity hath suffered But he owns That the Person who hath suffered was God altho' he could not suffer as God but as Man Jesus Christ saith he is not a meer Man he is both God and Man We have often made Profession of it but he hath suffered as Man not as God This is the Doctrine of Theodoret in his Dialogues It is so true that this Work was of Orthodox Principles that the most zealous of his Party found fault that he had cited Theophilus and S. Cyril but had not mentioned Diodorus and Theodorus of Mopsuesta so that âheodoret was obliged to justifie himself in this point which he did in his 16th Letter to Ireââ¦s wherein he tells us That he did it not because he was not willing to make use of any Witnesses suspected by his Adversaries Also Theodoret alledges that Book in his Letter to Dioscorus as a proof of the purity of his Faith and of the respect that he bore to the Memory of Theophilus and S. Cyril Had he been well advised to quote S. Cyril with so much Commendation if he had opposed his Opinions as Heretical In sum there never were any but Eutychians who have condemned this Work of Theodoret. 'T was by their Craft that Theodosius banished him by his Edict in which he approves the Doctrines and Outrages that Dioscorus and Eutyches had set on foot in the sham Council of Ephesus But the Emperor Marcian revoked that Decree and tho' afterwards they quarrelled with Theodoret upon the Account of the Writings which he composed against S. Cyril yet we never saw him attacked for his Dialogues The 5 Books of Heretical Fables * These Books have been printed alone in âreek at Rome in 1ââ8 are a no less Authentick Proof of the Learning than Faith of Theodoret. He composed them sometime after the Council of Chalcedon at the desire of Sporatius an Officer of the Emperor who was Consul in 452. He gives us in 5 Books an Abstract of the Doctrines of the Hereticks to which he opposes in the last an Abridgment of the Orthodox Doctrine of the Church The first Book contains an History of the Heresies which have opposed the Divinity by admitting many first Causes All the Hereticks believed That the Son of God took the Humane Nature in appearance only He begins with Simon and ends with the Manichees In the 2d he speaks of those who did truly acknowledge That there was but one first Cause but make Jesus Christ to pass for a meer Man This Sect of Hereticks begins with Ebion and ends with Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus The 3d. Book contains the History of those Hereticks who had other Errors such as the Nicolaitans Montanists and Novatians The 4th Book describes the new Heresies of Arius Eunomius and ends with those of Nestorius and Eutyches It is doubted Whether the Chapter which concerns Nestorius where that Heretick is so much inveighed against be really Theodoret's F. Garner believes That it is a forged Piece and brings many plausible Conjectures to prove it He saith first that if we compare what the Author of this Chapter says of Nestorius with what Theodoret hath written of him we shall be convinced that it can't be his for Theodoret hath always excused Nestorius he hath always spoken honourably of him he never condemns him but with regret On the contrary the Author of this Chapter declares himself against him and treats him with all possible Severity If you will believe him Nestorius was an Instrument of the Devil and the scourge of Aegypt he ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã of the Divinity and Humanity of the only begoâen Son of God ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã He was an Hypocrite who studied nothing ãâã to ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and get the Affections of the People by a shew of Religion He was ãâã sooner ãâã of the ãâã Power in the Imperâal City but he changed the ãâã ãâã into a ãâã Government and abusing his Power by an unbridled Liberty he made known the Iââiety of his Heart and pronounced publickly horriâ Blasphemies ãâã the Son of God In a word he was a Man who had blotted out of his Memory the ãâã of the Apostles and their Holy Successors Secondly the Author of this Chapter ãâã contrary to Theodoret not only touching the Doctrine of Nestorius but also about the ãâã of his Life The Author of this Fragment says That he knows not what was the ãâã of Nestorius Theodoret knew well that he had been the Scholar of Theodââus He saith further That Nestorius had changed his Abode before he came to Antioch Theodoret knew that he had lived in the Monastry of S. Euprepius and likewise That he had been baptized at ãâã He adds That Nestorius had shewn in the beginning of his Episcopacy after what manner he ought to manage himself and speaks of him as a contemptible Man Theodoret on the other side speaks of him always as a very Learned and Holy Personage Thirdly Theodoret having promised That all the Heresies of which he hath spoken in the former Books should be conâuted by him in the 5th doth not count the Nestorians among those Hereticks who were in an Error concerning the Incarnation Fourthly this Chapter seems not to be ãâã Style It is swelling figurative full of aggravations The beginning seems to be nothing to the purpose and disagreeable to the following part of the History Fifthly this Chapter is taken out of the Letter to Sporatius which contains besides this History a long refutation of the Doctrines of Nestoriââ Now this Letter is an evident piece of Forgery for 1. 'T is a Writing which hath no form of a Letter as being without beginning or end 2. Why should Theodoret write a Letter to Sporatius at that time when he dedicated a Book of Heresies to him 3. The Author of this piece directs his Speech to Nestorius but uses the Phrases of S. Gregory Naz. â4 'T is not Theodoret's Stile 5. 'T is quoted by no ancient Author 'T is then a forged piece from whence in all probability the whole History of Nestorius is taken and put into the Book of Heretical Fables where Theodoret has not spoken of that Heresie Some Person seeing that he ended his Work with the Heresie of Eutyches and that
These are the first which forbid Usury ãâã Lay Men. In the last Canon ãâã declares That those that will not Obey these Decrees shall be deprived of their Dignities and they that will not Conform to the Discipline of the Church of Rome shall have no part in her Communion Lastly He commands them to keep the ãâã and Ordinances of his ãâã but especially of Pope Innocent Those saith he which have been prâââlged about the Order of the Church and ãâã Disâipline Quâ de Ecclesiasticis ordinibus Canonum promulgata sunt disciplinâs For so it ought to be read as it is in the MSS. and noâ Ordiââââ as it is in some Editions Hinomaâus reads promulgata and mâth Amplifies this passage in Opusââââ 33. Ch. 10. This Letter was sent to the Bishops of It al subject to the Church of Rome as their Meââopolis and therefore 't is no wonder if S. Leo speaks to them with so much Authority The Fourth Letter to ãâã Bishop of Thessalonica is taken out of the Acts of the Council of Rome under ãâã II which is to be found in Hââââânius's Collection In this Letter S. Leo makes Anastasius his Deputy in Illyria imitating therein the Example of Sâââcius who had first granted that ãâã to ãâã and he exhorts him to imitate his Predecessor and âo have a ãâã of the Churches which he committed to his charge Above all he recommends to him That he cause the Canons about the Ordination of Bishops to be observed and that he oppose the Election of Persons who have been Twice Married especially when they have Married the first Wife before Baptism He would not have him suffer the Metropolitans of Illyria to Ordain any Bishop without his apprââation nor themselves to be ãâã but by himself He charges the Bishops to come to the Synods which he shall call to Judge in common what concerns the Discipline of the Church and deââres him That if there happen any cause of great consequence which they could not determine he would give him an account of it that the Holy See might decide it according to the Ancient Custom Whereupon he Observes That he entrusted him with his Authority in such manner nevertheless as that he reserved to himself those Causes which could not be ended in the Province or in which there should be an Appeal to the Holy See He Admonishes Anastasius to make known all these Orders to all the Bishops that they may have no ground of Excuse if they did not put them in practice and that he had written to the Metropolitans that they ought to acknowledge him the Deputy of the Holy See In the conclusion he reproves the fault of some Bishops who Ordain'd Priests and Deacons upon other Days than Sundays an Usage which he says was contrary to the Canons and Tradition of the Fathers This Letter is Dated January the 11th 444. The Fifth Letter which is directed to the Metropolitans of Iââyrin is that which he mentions in the foregoing S. Leo Exhorts them to take care that the Canons be not broken and tells them That he had made Anastasius Bishop of Thessalonica his Deputy that they might Obey him in those things which concern the Discipline of the Church He sends them at the same time some of the Rules which he wrote in the foregoing Letter and repeats them in this The Sixth Letter is superscribed to a Bishop of Aquilcia his Name is not found in any MSS. nor in the more Ancient Editions In the latter Editions the Name of Nicetas is put before it without any other reason but only because there is another Letter of S. Leo's that bears the Title of Nicetas Bishop of Aquileia But since there is also one to Januarius Bishop of the same See there is nothing that can determine to which of these Two this Letter belongs but only the time when it was written That which is directed to Nicetas bears Date in the Year 458 and that to Januarius in 447. This of which we are now speaking is not far from 447 for S. Leo therein speaks against the Pelagians whom he opposed in the beginning of his Pontificate at the same time when he attacked the Manichees as the Author of the Book of Predictions and Promises attributed to S. Prosper shews in Chap. 6. Now it is certain that it was in 444 that he set upon the Manichees And consequently it must be to Januarius and not Nicetas to whom this Letter was written In it S. Leo tells film That he had heard by the relation of Septimius that some Priests Deacons and other Ecclesiastical Persons who had been engaged in the Heresie of Pelagius or Coelestius had been admitted to the Communion of the Church in their Province without being required to condemn their Error expresly Insomuch that while the Shepherds slept the Wolves have entred into the Fold of Jesus Christ without laying aside their Cruel Disposition That they had likewise done a thing which the Canons and Constitutions of the Church do not allow the most Innocent in leaving the Church where they had been admitted Clerks to go to other Churches That their design was by this means to corrupt many Churches by hiding the Heresie with which they were infected under the shew of Communion to which they had been received without being obliged to any Profession of Faith To remedy this disorder he enjoins the Bishop to whom he wrote To call a Synod and to compel all his Clergy to Condemn openly the Authors of their Heresie and to make a Confession in writing That they do firmly hold all the Synodical Decrees made for the Extirpation of that Heresie and confirmed by the Authority of the Apostolick See He adds That great care ought to be had that they make use of no obscure or ambiguous Terms because he knows them to be so deceitful that if they can avoid the Condemning any Branch of their Errors by that means they will put themselves under any disguise That One of their principal Artifices is when they pretend to condemn all their Doctrines and renounce them sincerely to slide in this pernicious Maxim That Grace is given according to Deserts That that Opinion is contrary to the Apostles Doctrine who Teaches us That Grace which is not given without Merit is not Grace and that the disposition to Good-works is also an effect of the Grace of Jesus Christ which is the beginning of Righteousness the Source and Original of our Merits That when they say on the contrary that Natural Industry must go before it their design is to insinuate by it that our Nature hath not been impaired by Original Sin Then he Exhorts Januarius to beware least his People raise new Scandals by obliging them to purge themselves from all manner of suspicion upon pain of being driven out of the Church He Admonishes him also about the end That he should not suffer the Priests Deacons or other of the Clergy to pass from one Church to
which is a Synodical Letter of a French Council to Pope Leo to thank him for sending them his Letter to Flavian The name of Ravennius is in the beginning of it which may make us think That the Synod was held at Arles The Subscriptions shew That it was composed by 44 Bishops out of the 7 French Provinces These Bishops after they have excused themselves That they gave him an Answer no sooner because they could not meet together say That they received S. Leo's Letter as a sum of Faith That many of them acknowledged the Doctrine which they had received by Tradition to be contained in it and some of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã instâ⦠by ââ¦ing of it They ãâã S. Lâ⦠in the most obliging ãâã and ãâã ãâã toââ¦y That next to God the âaith ãâã are beholding to him for the ââ¦y of there Faith They Add That they had also ãâã to the Emperor upon the same Subject to testifie to him the Zeal which why ââ¦or the Faith by following the Example of the Pope but that having received News from ãâã ãâã they believed that it would be unprofitable They call the Emperor S. Lââ¦'s Son Fâ⦠ãâã ãâã In fine they write That they never cease to give God Thanks that he hath given a Bishop of so much Holiness and Faith to the Apostolick Church from whence comes the Origin and Source of our Religion Apostolicae Sedi unde ââ¦'s ãâã ãâã ãâã origâ⦠ãâã They pray to God to preserve him a long Time in that see They make an End by saying That although they come short of his Merit yet they have the same Faith ââ¦s ãâã pari side and that they are ready to defend it and die for it This Letter is full of Expressions very respectful to the Holy See and very obliging to the Person of S. Leo. S. Leo also answers them in a courteous Manner in Letter 77. He therein accepts their Excuse commends their Faith explain the Errore of the Nestorians and Eutyches He lets them know That ãâã ãâã Heretick hath been condemned in a Synod of 600 Bishops who confirm'd the Catholick and Apostolick Faith He ââ¦es That the Catholick Faith may not be changed That it may be assaulted by its Enemies but that such Opposition rendred it more illustrious He says That the Synod hath approved the Letter which he had written and had condemned Dioscorus Lastly ãâã earnestly intreats them to give God Thanks to pray for the happy Râ⦠of them who were gone to the Council And he desires them to let the Bishops of Spain know what had passed in the East This Letter is follow'd by a Letter of Eusebius Bishop of Milan to S. Leo in which that Bishop signifies to him the Joy that ãâã had for the Return of the Western Bishops who had been present at the Council of Chalcedon and assures S. Leo That his Letter to Flavian hath been read and approved in the Council of Milan where also the Error of Eutyches was condemned The following Letters are in the Council of Chalcedon In Letter 78. to Marcian after having congratuled the Council of Chalcedon he blames the Ambition of Anatolius Patriarch of Constantinople who ââ¦ted those Rights that did not belong to him He was willing That the City of Constantinople should be equal to Rome but he says It must not be so in the Churches That there is no solid Foundation but that Rock which Jesus Christ hath laid for the Foundation of his Church That Anatolius cannot prove That his Church is an Apostolick See That the Privileges of Churches cannot be overthrown by any other way being established by the Canons of the Fathers and fixed by the Decrees of the Council of Nice That he is obliged by his Office to see them executed and he should be much to blame if he should suffer them to be broken He then exhorts the Emperor to desire Anatolius to desist from the Right he pretends to and to which the Legates of the Holy See opposed themselves and if he will not to make use of his Authority to keep him in order and hinder him from encroaching upon the Rights of other Bishops This Letter is dated April 22. in the year 452. He repeats the same things in the 79th to the Empress Pulcheria which is of the same date In it he observes particularly That Anatolius had obtained the Bishoprick of Constantinople through the favour of the Empress and through his consent Pietatis vestrae beneficio pietatis meae assensu He had also said before in the precedent Letter That he owed his Bishoprick to the kindness of the Emperor Vestro beneficio He urges also the Canons of the Council of Nice against the pretences of Anatolius and declares That he doth cancel and make void by the Authority of S. Peter all the Constitutions which are contrary to the Laws established in the Council of Nice He represents the same things to Anatolius in the 80th Letter He therein commends his Faith but condemns his Pretensions He finds fault with him That he ordained the Bishop of Antioch and was willing to break the Decrees of the Council of Nice by making the Church of Alexandria to lose the second place and that of Antioch the third and by depriving the Metropolitans in his Jurisdiction of the Rights and Honours which they had He accuses him of endeavouring to make use of the Council which was called for the suppressing of Heresie to further his own Ambition He assures him That no Synod can hurt what the Council of Nice hath done and that the Legates of the Holy See had reason to oppose his Attempts He exhorts him at length to keep himself within the bounds of Humility and Christian Charity and not give any further occasion of Scandal in the Church of Jesus Christ. He tells him That he may not elevate himself upon the account of some pretended Constitutions of the Bishops made 60 years since which were never sent to the Holy See and have never been executed He forbids him disturbing the Metropolitans about their ancient Rights and he declares That he intends that the Churches of Alexandria and Antioch should remain in possession of their ancient Order This Letter is also dated the same day S. Leo hath not contented himself with writing so strongly against the pretensions of Anatolius but in his 81st Letter written some days after the former he commands Julian Bishop of Coos who had the charge of his Affairs in the East not to consent to Anatolius's pretences And since Julian had written to him in his Favour he tells him That tho' he had a very great respect for him yet he will never do any thing upon his Recommendation which is contrary to the Rules of the Church He adds That Anatolius ought to be throughly satisfied That by his Suffrage he had been raised to the Bishoprick of Constantinople without obliging him to break the Laws of the Church in favour of his Ambition He
which we cannot find a Parallel Case we must then consult the Judgments of the Ancients and compare together what those Authors have said at several times and in distinct places who being in the Communion of the Church may be esteemed Teachers worthy of Credit and not only to rely upon what one or two have said but what they all have held written and taught unanimously clearly and without contradicting themselves at any time To these Rules Vincentius Lirinensis had added these Examples The Example of the Donatists he uses to prove That we ought to keep to the Universality that of the Arians That we must cleave to Antiquity and reject Novelty The Opinion of S. Cyprian about the Rebaptization of Hereticks he makes use of to shew That we must not always follow the Sentiments of one particular Ancient but we may be Hereticks in maintaining the Doctrine which one Orthodox Doctor hath taught wherefore we must depend upon Consent and unanimous Agreement Photinus Apollinaris and Nestorius are also brought for Examples of Hereticks who were unfortunately mistaken by departing from the Tradition of the Catholick Church The Fall of Origen and Tertullian may be a Warning to all Christians how they lean upon the Authority or Reputation or Learning of any private Person and forsake the Doctrine of the Universal Church Vincentius Lirinensis after he hath enlarged as much as was possible upon these Examples returns to his Principles and maintains That we ought to keep our selves to the ancient Rule of Faith and ought not at any time to seek after or propagate any new Doctrine in the Church That they who suffer any new Doctrine hitherto unknown to be taught are Deceivers That Men may labour to explain and clear the Ancient Faith well but may not teach any thing new they may have a way of expressing Matters but no new Subjects Cum dicas ãâã non dicââ ãâã But may some say how is it that the Faith may not be improved or perfected Certainly it may be but it cannot be changed The Church grows in Knowledge Understanding and Wisdom but it always hoââs the same Doctrines neither taking from them nor adding to them Things may be made ãâã evident receive greater Light and be better distinguished but they remain always in the same Fulness Perfection and Nature Antiquity may be polished or perfected but we must always keep the sâme Foundation And truly the Church hath done nothing else in the Councils but maintain'd the ancient Faith against the Innovation of Hereticks It obliges us to believe more explicitely what we have already believed and teach that with more Power which we have heretofore taught and defend with greater care what we have already defended In fine it gives us an express definition in writing of that which it hath received from its Ancestors by Tradition The Hereticks on the contrary have broached new Doctrines and made use of the Holy Scripture to gain reception of them Vincentius Lirinensis brings several Examples In the next place he considers after what manner we ought to consult and compare the Opinions of the Ancient Fathers and brings for an Example in the 2d part of his Commentary the Proceedings of the Council of Ephesus against Nestorius but because that part was lost he contented himself in giving us an Abridgment making a Summary of the Principles which he had laid down in his Work But we must not forget that Vincentius Lirinensis owns That there are two occasions upon which these excellent Rules concerning Tradition are not of so great use 1. When Questions of very small Consequence which do not concern the Rule of Faith are under Debate or Questions which serve for the Foundation of Christian Doctrine 2. When we have to deal with Heresies which are of a long standing for saith he 't is not convenient to oppose all Heresies by Tradition only but only such as are newly risen up as soon as they appear and before they have corrupted the ancient Records for when they are once throughly setled and grown old this Argument becomes weak because they have had as I may say time to cover themselves with an appearance of Antiquity So that we must content our selves to confute them by Scripture or avoid them as Sects condemned and disproved by the ancient Councils of the Catholick Church It is very probable that this Author is the same with him who propounded the Objections or rather Questions against S. Austin's Doctrine concerning Grace which S. Prosper hath answered There are likewise some places in that little Treatise in which he seems to quarrel with the rigid Scholars of S. Austin But be that as it will he was in a Country and in a Monastery where he did not think himself obliged to addict himself to S. Austin's Opinions whatsoever esteem he had for him And perhaps it is for that reason that he hath laid it down so firâly that we ought not to submit to the Authority of one Father alone but to the unanimous consent of many Nevertheless he condemns Pelagius and Julian and there is no Objection to be made against the Rules which he gave to discern the Doctrines of Faith from Heresie Error and Opinion since they are the same which the Church hath always observed the Holy Fathers have laid down in their Writings and S. Austin himself hath given in many places Vincentius Lirinensis did no more but collect enlarge and put those Rules in order which he found in the Church and âe hath done it with much Faithfulness Clearness and Eloquence He composed this Treatise 3 years after the Council of Ephesus in 434. He died in the Reign of Theodosius and Valentinâ⦠he is acknowledged for a Saint in the Roman Martyrology and his Memory is celebrated ãâã the 24th of May. This little Tract hath been printed in the Bibliotheca Patrum Tome 7. and in several Collections of Authors at Basil in 1528. at Collen 1569. with Costerius's Notes at Paris in 1569. and in 1586. which Edition is reviewed by Peter Pitthaeus at Collen it was Reprinted with Costerius's Notes in 1613 Twelves Fillesachus hath ãâã on it and had it Printed 1619. in Quarto It was Printed at Lyons with a Controveââ¦l Treatise in 1622. Lastly M. Balusius published it with Salvian 1663. whose Edition was Reprinted at Paris 1669. in Octavo It was also Printed at Cambridge in 1687 Twelves S. EUCHERIUS ST EUCHERIUS after he had had two Sons called Salonius and Veranus * Veranius Cave with-drew himself into the Isle of Lerins and was afterward made Bishop of Lyons We have S. Eucherius some of his Works The first is a Book written in Praise of the Desart or of Solitude dedicated to S. Hilary afterward Bishop of Arles in the time that he left Honoratus to return to the Solitude of Lerins that is to say about the year 428. He hath collected in that little Treatise a great number of Arguments to raise Men's good Opinion of a
and that the whole Council should proceed to a new Judgment forbidding the Bishops to go from Ephesus till he had sent some of his Officers to the Synod to know how things had passed there This is the Subject of the Emperor's Letter dated June 19 brought to Ephesus by Palladius This was signified to the Bishops of both sides Saint Cyril and the Bishops of his Party answered that Candidian had not given a true Relation of things to the Emperor and desired him to send for him to Constantinople with five Bishops of the Council that he might be informed of the truth of all their Proceedings This Letter was not subscribed by all the Bishops because Palladius who was to carrry it was very urgent to be gone John Bishop of Antioch and the Bishops of his Party wrote also by this Palladius to the Emperor and having related all that had passed a second time they prayed him that only two Bishops out of every Province should be allowed to be at the Synod with their Metropolitan They also complained that the Church of S. John had been shut against them insomuch that they were forced to pray abroad and had been abused in their return Lastly They humbly implore the Emperor to remove Cyril and Memnon the heads of this Persecution from Ephesus A little after they sent Count Irenaeus to whom they give another Relation against Saint Cyril concerning the Violence which they pretend he had done them by keeping them out of S. Paul's Church by throwing of Stones at them They also gave him Letters to the Governor of Constantinople and to the Officers of the Emperor that they would maintain their Cause Nestorius wrote also in his own Name to an Eunuch of the Emperor that he did not refuse to call the Virgin Mary The Mother of God provided that they would condemn the Error of Apollinaris which is maintained by S. Cyril July 10. Philip and Arcadius Legats of the Church of Rome arrived at Ephesus and joyning themselves with S. Cyril and his Synod according to their Instructions by which they were ordered Act. 11. to act in conjunction with him they held a Session the same Day in which they read S. Coelestine's Letter dated May 8. first in Latin and after in Greek which shews us that 't was the Custom to read the Letters of the Holy See in the Tongue wherein they were written The Substance of it was this that the Holy Spirit is present in Synods and all Bishops being the Apostles Successors are obliged to maintain and defend the Doctrine which they have received from them and to imitate the Zeal and Vigilance of their Predecessors that they ought to have the same Spirit as they have but one Faith that the Question in hand obliges them to arm themselves with a fresh Zeal because the Person of Jesus Christ is endangered by it That he hopes that He who hath united the Synagogue and the Church will re-unite the Minds of Christians restore the Churches Peace and make the Truth and Ancient Faith to Triumph He exhorts them to continue in that Love so much commended by S. John whose Reliques they have among them that they Ought to pray to God with one Heart and Voice that he would direct them by the Light of his Holy Spirit and give them Courage to defend the Word of God zealously and procure the Peace of the Church Lastly He tells them that he sent them the Bishops Arcadius and Projectus and Philip a Priest to be present at all the transactions of the Council and put in execution what he had already ordained After this Letter was read the Legats of S. Caelestine demanded that they would communicate to them the Acts of what was already done which was granted them We find at the end of this Act two other Letters of S. Caelestine's the one of which is directed to Theodosius and the other to S. Cyril He exhorts the former to protect the ancient Faith and he answers to the Latter who had consulted him whether he might still receive Nestorius the time which he had fixed for his Retractation being passed He answers him I say That We must always receive a Sinner whensoever he returns and that We must endeavour to appease the troubles raised in the Church He tells him likewise that he earnestly desired that Nestorius might repent and that he may be again received These two Letters bear date the one May 7. and the other May 15. The next day they met to read over again the Acts of the first Session of Council to Caelestine's Act. III. Legats When they heard them they approved them gave their Judgment against Nestorius and subscribed his Condemnation When this was done they framed a Letter to the Emperor wherein they tell him that the Legats of the Bishop of Rome had assured them that all the Western Churches agreed with them in their Doctrine and had condemned with them the Doctrine and Person of Nestorius So that this Matter being thus ended as the Emperor desired it for the benefit of the Church and of the Faith they desired him to give them leave to withdraw to secure them from the Persecution they were threatned with and suffer them to ordain a Bishop at Constantinople in the room of Nestorius They wrote at the same time to the Clergy and People of Constantinople to exhort them to put some Person into the See of Constantinople in the place of Nestorius lately Deposed by the Council for his Impious Doctrine The Judgment of Nestorius being thus finished Cyril and Memnon cast about them how they Act IV. might provide against the Sentence of Deposition pronounced against them by the Eastern Bishops The Council therefore being assembled the fourth time on July 16th Cyril and Memnon presented a Petition against John Bishop of Antioch wherein they say That the Council being assembled in the City of Ephesus to confirm the Faith of the Church and to condemn the Heresie lately invented by Nestorius had acted Regularly and in the usual forms That they had cited Nestorius three times to render a Reason of his Doctrine but this Heretick refusing to appear the Council had attentively examined his Writings and had Condemned him according to the Rules of the Church-discipline That after this Judgment given and an Account of it sent to the Emperor John Bishop of Antioch had come to Ephesus where he Assembled himself with the Bishops of Nestorius's Opinion of whom some were Deposed and others were Bishops only in Name having no See and that in this Assembly which had no Authority to judge any Man he deliberately pronounced a Sentence of Deposition against them although he could not do it the Bishop whom he principally pretended to judge being in a See Superior to his own But yet although he might have undertaken this Judgment yet he ought to have followed the Canons and Rules of the Church to have admonished them and cited them before
Monks that Marry subjected to Penance 85. ought not to preach 98 99. no more than Lay-men ibid. Parents ought to give their Estates to those Children whom they have made Monks 147. the exemption of the Monks of Lerins determined by the Council of Arles 248. the condition of Monks and their Ceremonies of their Consecration 189. they are subject to their Bishops 241. ought not to leave their state ib. they are exempted from the Jurisdiction of the Bishops ib. ought not to have Cells by themselves 342. Morses Abbot of Scete his Discourses 11. Multitude their Judgment not always to be followed 44 45. Musaeus or Mussaeus a Priest of Marseille a censure upon his writings 149. N. NAture there are not two different Natures in Man 123. Nemesius his Opinion about the nature and duration of the Soul 187. Neonas Bishop of Ravenna S Leo's Letter to him 104 Nestorius Abbot his discourse about Spiritual knowledge and the Miracles of the Anchorites 13. Nestorius his Birth Baptism and Education 40. by whom ordained Priest ib. his Election and Ordination to the See of Constantinople ib. his first Sermon before the Emperor approved and disapproved ibid. he attempts to beat down the Church of the Arians who set it on Fire ib. he persecuted the Hereticks and caused the Emperor to make a Law against them 41. why he was condemned as an Heretick ib. his contest with Cyril ib. he went into his Monastery at Antioch after his Condemnation at the Council of Ephesus ib. he was banished to Oasis ibid. a Catalogue of his Works ib. his Doctrine 42. his Judgment upon his style and Character 43. the beginning of the Nestorian Heresie 191. the course of this Affair ib. Nestorius's Letters Writings and Sermons ib. his Condemnation at Rome 194. and at Ephesus 197. he defends himself ib. is forced to retire 204. is forsaken by John Bishop of Antioch 207. wherein his error consisted 215 217. Nice the Council of Nice was held under Silvester and not Julius 54. the coâtest of the City of Nice for the right of a Metropolis 239. Nicetas or Niceas Bishop of Aquileia S. Leo's Letter to him 103. S. Nilus his Life Writings and Death 17. and the Edition of his Works ib. his Genius 19. Nisibis by whom Besieged and by whom preserved 64 65. Nonnus a Christian Poet his Genius a description of his Works and the Edition of them 52. Novatus the Opinion of Novatus and the Novatians about the Pacification 2 3. Novatians Socrates judgment concerning them 54. O. ORange a Council held in that City in 441 the number and abridgment of its Canon 243 247. Ordinations the Qualifications of such a person as may be chosen Bishop 27. cautions to be observed in Ordinations 83. the condition of such as are ordain'd Bishops ib. Persons twice Married and Slaves ought not to be admitted into Holy Orders 86. Times for Ordination 91 at what time and on what day they ought to be celebrated ib. a Priest ought to say the Psalter by heart 156. Ceremonies of Ordination 189. S. Hilaries rules about Ordination 158. no Man may be ordain'd against his consent 159. the Penalties inflicted upon Bishops for ordaining against the Canons ib. the Qualifications of a Bishop 167. several Rules about Ordination made by Pope Gelasius 177. the Qualifications of Bishops and Ministers ib. Ordinations ought to be celebrated three Months after the Death of the Bishop 176. Ordinations without the Metropolitan by two Bishops only are unlawful 242 246. a Canon concerning Ordinations 247 248 249. Orders conditions necessary for entring into Holy Orders 83. Orestes Governour of Alexandria he quarrels with S. Cyril 27. is assaulted and wounded by the Monks ib. Origen his Opinion concerning the Pre-existence of the Soul from Eternity confuted 5. P. PEace the Bishop wisheth Peace in the Sacrament and all the People answer and unto thee also 6. Palladius a Monk ill used by S. Isidore 7. Panopolis a City of Thebais 41. Panople a City of Egypt 52. Pansophius the Arch-Deacon accused of many Crimes by S. Isidore 7. Paphnucius the Abbot 11 12. Pope his Judgment subject to correction but not the Judgment of a General Council 99. Paschasius a Deacon of Rome his Writings 182. Pastor his Writings upon the Creed 152. Patronage the Original of it 244. S. Paul an Explication of his words The Evil which I hate that do I 14. Paul Bishop of Emesa his Negotiations and Sermons 43 44. Paul Bishop of Pannonia a censure of his Writings and Style 146. Paulinus Bishop of Perigueux a censure of his Writings 149. Paulinus's several of that name in the same Age ib. Pelagius the History of his and his followers Condemnation 35 c. Pelagius a Patrician put to Death by the Emperor Zeno 143. a Work attributed to him ibid. Pelagians condemned and found out by the care of S. Leo 87. condemned also by Gelasuis I. 176. Penance the Properties of true Repentance 13. it ought not to be denied them that desire it 26. conditions required to perform it aright 72. Penance ought to be proportioned to the greatness of the Crime ib. Clergymen ought not to be put to publick Penance according to S. Leo but they may according to the Council of France 84. it ought not to be refused at the point of Death 85. yet may not be denied them that desire it ib. a Penitent ought not to plead nor trade ibid. they that die without being reconciled to the Church ought to be left to the Judgment of God but not be received into Communion ib. the Discipline of the Church concerning Penance 97. it ought to be proportioned to Devotion and Age c. 103. a custom concerning Penance 104. the Administration of Penance 184. publick Penance necessary for great Sinners 186. Clergymen may be put upon publick Penance if they deserve it 244. to what publick Penance obliges us The punishment of those that leave it 247. Penance granted to dying Persons that desire it and with what conditions 244 245 247. Persecution in matters of Doctrine condemned by Eutherius Bishop of Tyana 44. Petronius Author of some Lives of the Egyptian Fathers 144. Petronianus S. Leo's Letter to him dubious 95. Philip the Deacon and Apostle confounded often by many 5. Philip Sidetes a censure of his History 51. Philip a Scholar of S. Jerom his Moral Letters 144. Philostorgius an Historian his Impious Doctrine 52. the Falshoods he hath taught ib. the profitable observations he hath made ibid. a Character of his History ib. the Editions of his Works ibid. Photinus a Deacon of Cappadocia informs Serapion of his Error 12. Photius his Judgment upon Cassian's institutions 15. Photius Bishop of Tyre his Petition for the rights of his Bishoprick 138. his dispute with Eustathius in the Council of Chalcedon 234. Piammon an Abbot 13. Peter a Monk his Life and Miracles 65 66. S. Peter the Keys were given to all Bishops in the person of S. Peter 108. S. Petrus Chrysologus
of them These Deputies not finding that footing in the Church of Rome which they expected thought fit to consult the Bishops of Africk which were banish'd to the Isle of Sardinia And therefore in the Year 521 they address'd to them a Writing wherein they declar'd their Belief concerning the Incarnation and Grace and founded it upon the Testimonies of the Fathers As to the Incarnation they acknowledg'd two Natures in Jesus Christ united into one Person only without confusion and mixture They reject the Sentiment of those who professing to believe one Nature Incarnate in Jesus Christ do not receive the Decision of the Council of Chalcedon or who admitting two Natures would not say that there is but one Nature of the Word Incarnate From these Principles they conclude That the Virgin is truly the Mother of God That the Union of the two Natures is essential and natural That the Person of Jesus Christ is compos'd of two Natures without any change happening to him That the Trinity continues the Trinity still tho one of the Persons of this Trinity was Incarnate That his Flesh is not become a part of the Trinity but is become the Flesh of one Person of the Trinity From whence it comes to pass that one may say That one of the Trinity suffer'd and was crucified in his Flesh and not in his Divinity that it was not Man who was made God but God who was made Man They profess to receive the four first General Councils and the Letters of St. Leo and to condemn the Errors of Theodorus of Mopsuesta Nestorius Eutyches and Dioscorus and of all those whom the Apostolick See had regularly condemn'd As to Grace they follow the Principles of St. Austin and declare that they believe that the first Man was created without Concupiscence and with a perfect liberty to do good and evil and that by falling into sin he was chang'd both in his Body and his Soul that he lost his own Liberty and became a Slave to sin that since that time all men are born in sin that nothing but the Grace of Jesus Christ can deliver us from sin that without this we can neither think nor desire that which is good that Grace worketh in us to do not by any necessitating violence but by the sweet inspiration of the Holy Spirit that no Man can say 'T is in my power to believe if I will since Faith is the gift of God who worketh in us to believe and to will that the passage of the Apostle which says God would have all Mankind to be sav'd ought not to be objected against this Doctrine to prove that nothing hinders us to be sav'd if we will For if this were so there would be no necessity to have recourse to the unsearchable Judgments of God for explaining the reason why one is call'd and another not that if God would effectually have sav'd the whole World he should have wrought in Tyre and Sidon those Miracles which were done in Chorazin and Bethsaida since he knew that if they had been wrought in these two former Cities their Inhabitants would have repented that the beginning of good Thoughts the consent of the Will to do good cometh to us from God who produces them in us by his Holy Spirit They cite for proof of these Principles some passages of St. Basil of the Popes St. Innocent and St. Celestin and of the Council of Africk They conclude with Anathematizing Pelagius Celestius and Julianus and those who are of their Opinion together with the Books of Faustus about Predestination This Confession of Faith is sign'd by Peter a Deacon John and Leontius Monks and by another John a Reader They pray the Bishops of Afric to approve their Exposition of Faith that so being supported by their Authority they may be able to stop the mouth of those who disgrace them The Bishops of Afric employ'd St. Fulgentius to write them an Answer and their Letter bears the names of fifteen Bishops only who did not only approve in this Letter all the Points of the Confession of Faith which we have just now explain'd but did also enlarge and confirm them without excepting so much as that Proposition One Person of the Trinity did suffer They enlarged very much upon the Proofs of Original Sin the Necessity of Grace for the beginning of Faâth upon its Efficacy upon the Insufficiency of Free-will to do good They confess that Grace does not destroy our Free-will but they maintain that our Free-will which without Grace is not sufficient to do any thing but sin is deliver'd from this Bondage by Grace which sets us truly at liberty They confess also that in some sense it may be said that Nature has power to believe and to do good because Faith and Charity are proper for Human Nature and Man was created only to believe and do good but that since the Fall he cannot have Faith nor do good unless God give him the power as the Soul gives Life to the Body which is capable of being animated That when the Apostle says Therâ are some People who do by nature what the Law commands this is to be understood of Faithful People and such as were Converted That neither the knowledge of God nor Faith will avail us any thing without Charity that the Law of Nature does not deliver us from sin without Grace that it must be referr'd to the incomprehensible Judgments of God that he does not effectually will all Men to believe that it is sufficient for us to acknowledge with humility his Mercy wholly gratuitous in those who are sav'd and not to doubt his Justice as to those who are damned that those who understand this passage of St. Paul That God would have all Men to be sav'd so as to make a Man's Salvation depend upon his own Will are grosly mistaken that the example of Infants dying without Baptism who are condemn'd to Eternal Punishment for this is the term which Fulgentius uses without committing any voluntary sin does confound them That therefore the words of the Apostle are to be understood in this sense that no man is sav'd but by the Will of God because he cannot prevent the fulfilling of God's Will neither can the effect of it be hindred by the malice of Men and that 't is certain that all those whom God would have sav'd are infallibly sav'd that it may also be said that by all men are to be understood all men who are to be sav'd that often-times in Scripture all the World is taken for a part of Mankind Lastly That God who created Man hath provided for him by the Decree by which he predestin'd him Faith Justification Perseverance and Glory and whosoever does not acknowledge the Truth of this Predestination shall not be of the number of the Elect nor have any share in that Salvation That notwithstanding the Faithful ought constantly to pray and to have Charity for these Persons that God would give them
exalt Free-will above Grace the better to discover the power of this Grace which is not known when it is not received and the great struggle that arises then because without it no Truth can be known neither is there any Light to discover it After this Preface he proposes and maintains the following Propositions 1. That Predestination is purely gratuitous and that this Decree is not made upon foresight of Men's Merits 2. That Infants who die after they are baptiz'd are sav'd by the mere Mercy of Jesus Christ and that those who die without Baptism are condemn'd upon the account of Original Sin 3. That those who believe this Grace is given to all are not Catholicks in their Sentiments since not only all men have not Faith but there are even whole Nations who never heard of the Gospel 4. That it may be said that Man is sav'd by Grace and by his Good Works provided it be confess'd that the Grace and Mercy of God prevents the Will of Man and works in him to will 5. That all those whom God would have sav'd are predestin'd because the Almighty Will of God does always take effect his Power can never be defeated 6. That the Free-will which was sound and entire in the first Man is become weak by sin but is improv'd and strengthned by Grace 7. That the Question concerning the Origine of Souls must not be ventilated or it must be treated of without bitterness but that there is no doubt that Souls do contract Original Sin They cite at the end of this Letter a passage of Pope Hormisdas in favour of St. Austin and praise the Books of Fulgentius about Predestination and Grace and those which he wrote against Faustus We have nothing now remaining but some Fragments of the Ten Books of St. Fulgentius against a famous Arian call'd Fabianus The first Book was entitled Of the most High the Comforter of the Titles of Ambassador Doctor and Judge There he prov'd that these Titles agreed to the Father and the Son In the second Book he shew'd that the Functions of Sighing Desiring and Praying which are attributed to the Holy Spirit are not contrary to his Divinity In the third he prov'd that Immensity agreed to the three Divine Persons In the fourth that the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are equally adorable He distinguishes the Worship of Latria from that of Dulia the first agrees to God only and the second may be given to Creatures He speaks also of the Properties which belong to each Divine Person The fifth Book was about the Title of Image which is given to the Son of God where he proves that he is so the Image of God as to be also of the same Nature In the sixth he proves that the Son is eternal as well as the Father The seventh establishes the Divinity of the Holy Spirit The eighth was about the Mission of the Holy Spirit The ninth is concerning the Invocation of the three Divine Persons where he demonstrates that the Son and the Holy Spirit are to be Invocated as well as the Father That Sacrifices are to be offer'd to the Son and Holy Spirit as to the Father and that the like Thanksgiving is paid unto ââm The tenth was about a Writing upon the Apostle's Creed where he observes that it was so call'd either because it is a Compact or because it is an Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine After this he proves that what in the Creed is attributed to the Father agrees to the whole Trinity The Treatise address'd to Victor is upon the same Subject and written at the same time There he refutes the Discourse of a Priest nam'd Fastidiosus who having quitted a Religious Profession and the Priestly Office to lead a licentious Life had also abandon'd the Faith by turning Arian St. Fulgentius proves in this Treatise the Divinity of the Son and explains how it may be said That the Word only is Incarnate The time is not certainly known when the Treatise of the Faith was written which is address'd to a Lay-man call'd Peter who having a design to make a Journey to Jerusalem desir'd before his departure to have an Instruction containing the Articles of Faith that he might know what he ought to believe St. Fulgentius explain'd to him first what he ought to believe concerning the Mysteries of the Trinity and the Incarnation And then he told him that all Beings both Spiritual and Corporeal are the Work of God who created them that Spiritual and Intelligent Beings were to subsist eternally by the Will of God that the Angels being created free and having power by the Grace of God to merit their Happiness or else to fall from it by their sin one part of them had perish'd and the other part was confirm'd in the Love of God which they could never lose any more That the first Man who had been created perfectly free had fall'n into sin and so subjected all Mankind to death and sin That God had deliver'd many of them by his Grace by the help of which they were enabled to live well and to obtain eternal Life That there is no state wherein a Man can deserve well but only during the time of this Life but as long as a Man lives upon this Earth there is always space for Repentance That this Repentance is unprofitable to those that are out of the Church That all Men shall rise one day and those who shall die in a good state shall be happy for ever and others shall be condemned to eternal punishment That a Man comes to the Kingdom of Heaven by means of the Sacraments which Jesus Christ has instituted That none can obtain Salvation without the Sacrament of Baptism except those who shed their Blood in the Church for Jesus Christ That he who has receiv'd Baptism out of the Church has receiv'd this Sacrament and if he returns into the Church he ought not to be re-baptiz'd but his Baptism will profit him nothing if he continues out of the Church or if he lives ill after he has been receiv'd into the Church That those who live well ought continually to do Works of Mercy to expiate those sins which even the Just commit every day That to avoid them the humble Servants of Jesus Christ shun Marriage and abstain from eating Meat and drinking Wine Not that they think that 't is forbidden to use Marriage to eat Meat and drink Wine but because they are perswaded that Virginity is to be preferr'd before Marriage and that Abstinence restrains a Man from sin That neither second nor third Marriages are forbidden and that excess in the use of Marriage is a Venial sin but to those who have made a Vow of Continence Marriage is a great Crime Afterwards he reduces this Doctrine to forty Heads which he thinks are to be believ'd There was a long Article added at the end of this Treatise which is cut off by the Authority of some ancient
of Sophronius's for S. Basil against Eunomius he is more Learned and short than Theodorus he does not keep close to all that Eunomius hath said but undertakes to oppose and confute the principal points of Eunomius's Heresie his Character is to be Peremptory and Decisive his Stile is Free and Plain yet not Tedious altho' he be full of Logical Arguments There is a bad piece Intituled S. Peter's and S. Paul's Journeys tho' S. Peter's only be mentioned attributed to Sophronius of Jerusalem but 't is a ridiculous Forgery not worth mentioning We may more justly attribute to Sophronius of Jerusalem S. Mary the Aegyptian's Life Quoted in the 7th Council Act 4. by S. John Damascene in his l S. J. Damascene ' s Book of Images This Writer who is reckoned among the Fathers of the Church and much Quoted by Romish Authors in their Controversie with Protestants was a Credulous and Superstitious Person a great Patron of Images and a Zealous Defender of Image-Worship and the other Errors which sprang up about his time Insomuch that it is no wonder that we meet with Books of such Titles as this under his Name better becoming an Heathen than a Christian for which Reason his âas adv Bar. p. 83. Writings are of small Esteem with Judicious and Pious Men. Book of Images and by Nicephorus Calist. l. 7. c. 3. In the 7th Council are cited Two fragments of a Discouse of Sophronius's upon S. Cyrus and S. John for the Images of Saints A Book likewise called the Spiritual Meadow Limonarium or Pratum Spirituale is attributed to him He Died in 636. JOANNES MOSCHUS THE Author of The Spiritual Meadow is called Joannes Moschus * Surnamed Eviratus Presbyter and Monk Joannes Moschus who having run through the Monasteries of the East came to Rome with his Scholar Sophronius believed to be he we have now spoken of tho' without any certain proof He gathered into that Book what he had learned of the Life Actions Sentences and Miracles of the Monks of divers Countries There he relates many strange Stories and Miracles that deserve little Credit We shall not stand to relate them but shall only remark what may be useful to clear the Church-Discipline He observes in the Third Chapter There was a Presbyter who did Baptize and Anoint the Baptized with the Holy Chrism but that he would have left that Function because that when he Baptized Women he felt some Motions troublesome to him In the 25th he says That a Friar having pronounced the Words of Consecration upon some Loaves he had brought to Offer upon the Altar when the Priest offered them he did not see the Holy Ghost coming down as it used to do and that he was warned by an Angel that those Loaves had been Consecrated before because that Friar had pronounced in the way the Words of Consecration and that this Priest forbad them afterwards to suffer any other to learn them but such as were to offer the Holy Sacrifice and that no Body should pronounce them but in the time of the Consecration In the 26th he reports That a Monk to prove there was no Salvation to be had out of the Church had shewed to one of his Brethren engaged in Nostorius's Error Hereticks in a place full of Fire and Filth In the 27th he says A Priest would not say Mass unless he saw the Holy Ghost descending upon the Altar tho' the Hour of the Celebration of it ought always to be the same In the 29th he relates That a Stylite Monk of the Communion of the Catholicks sent to another Stylite of the Sect of the Severians for a share of his Communion Bread and that having thrown it into boiling Water it was presently dissolved but that having afterwards thrown a particle of the Eucharist of the Catholicks into it the Water cooled and the Eucharist remained intire without moistening it In the 30th he relates another m Miracle of the Eucharist c. It is really very strange to meet with so many Miracles in this Age in the Writers of it whereas in the Three precedent Centuries we find little or no mention of any Yea S. Chrysostom says Nos Miraculis nequaquam indigemus quae nunc non babemus c. As we have no Miracles so we want none The Faith having been sufficiently confirmed by Christ and his Apostles Miracles afterwards became useless and therefore ceased But when the Church began to Preach Alterum Evangelium another Gospel and such Doctrines Gal. 1. 8. were Imposed and Taught as neither Christ nor his Apostles had ever wrought any one Miracle in Confirmation of it was thought the readiest way to gain credit to the Imposture either to feign or outwardly do some Miracles which might extort Belief from the Vulgar To this Canus in loc Theol. l. 11. c. 6. end did not only Men but Devils conspire together in working Lying Wonders to confirm the Adoration of Images the Sacrament Saints Relicks and the like Strange things were done thro' the Artifices of Satan by the Martyr's Bones stranger related by the Preachers in their Sermons and by Historians in their Legends Many wholly feigned others in part or in shew only acted till Superstition and Idolatry at last was fully Established and by these Delusions are still upheld in the Church of Rome Indeed Aug. de Civ Dei l. 22. c. 10. S. Austin says That several Miracles were done in his time at the Martyrs Tombs and by their Relicks but as he something scrupled the Truth of them so he was willing to let them pass as such because the Faith was confirmed by them and there appeared no other end of them but to advance the same Worship that the Church professed Had they been made a Foundation of Saint-Worship as afterward they were he would certainly have rejected as forged or wrought for a false end and intention as it is commanded Deut. 13. 1 5. Miracle of the Eucharist That a Severian having forced his Wife a Catholick âto throw the Communion Bread away he did see it shining in the Mire and that Two Days after he had seen an Aethiopian saying to him We are both Condemned to the same Torment In the 44th he says That a Friar who had been negligent during his Life was after his Death seen by an Old Man in a great Fire up to the Neck and telling the Old Man he was beholden to his Prayers for the favour he enjoyed of not having his Head also in the Fire In the 45th he says A Recluse promised the Devil he would n Adore the Virgins Image Among the Images of Saints which were admitted into the Church in this Age and became Objects of Divine Worship the Image of the Virgin Mary the Mother of God had a chief place And tho' this Story were true That the Devil did Tempt a Monk to Abjure the Mede's Apost of lat times p. 10 24. Worship of the Virgin
greater others less some unto others not unto Death And though every the least Sin be offensive to God and deserving Damnation in its own Nature yet they say some are mortal others venial 1. Comparatively and by God's Favour as the Sins of the Elect being committed with Reluctancy and without consent are more pardonable than the Sins of wilful Offenders 2. Because some Sins exclude not Grace the Root of Remission and Pardon out of the Soul but others cannot stand with Grace and so leave the Persons in a state of Wrath and Damnation who are guilty of them Mortal Sins to watch over their Actions and Words to despise the World to repent continually and never to despair of Salvation c. It is observed in this Treatise that every Christian hath a good Angel to assist him and when he sins he drives away his good Angel to take a Devil There are Sixteen Homilies more bearing Eligius's Name but it is doubted whether they be really his because they are made up of Passages and Quotations of the Fathers as of S. Austin S. Leo S. Ambrose Caesarius of Arles and S. Gregory These Fathers are likewise cited there under the Name of Saints and Blessed S. Benedict is there called most Blessed and most Holy Father They say that these Citations are affected they add That there be even some Passages of Authors who wrote since Eligius's Time as of S. Isidore of Sevil of Alcuin of Haymo of Halberstat From whence they conclude That these Sermons are the Work of an Author of the Ninth Century Yet methinks he that composed them first was older than that Time and many things may easily have been added to them since However there are yet found in them some remainders of the Ancient Discipline not to be slighted This is an Extract of them In the First Sermon for Christmasday he shews the Happiness of the Peace which Christ brought to the Earth and exhorts his Hearers in the end to Almsgiving He relates the Story of a Gardner who being used to bestow what he earned upon the poor was tempted to keep back part of it in case he should fall sick that having thus gathered many Crown-pieces he got a running Sore in his Foot which fell into a Gangreen so that the Surgeon appointed a Day to cut off his Leg seeing there was no other Remedy but in the Night the Gardner coming to himself and having begged God's Forgiveness for his not having continued in his Almsgiving and promised to continue it hereafter he was miraculously cured and the Surgeon coming the next Day to cut off his Leg found him gone abroad The Second Sermon is upon the Purification After having uttered some Allegories upon that Ceremony of the Jews he speaks of the use of the Church to have on that Festival s Tapers light during the Mass upon the Feast of the Purification This Ceremony tho' not taken from the Sacrifices called Lustrum as this Author imagines being offered in the end of February yet was certainly instituted in imitation of a Festival celebrated at Rome either in remembrance of Ceres's search after Proserpinâ or in honour of Februâ the Mother of Mers which were both solemniz'd with Tapers burning in their Hands by the Romans These Superstitions the Bishops of the Church very much abhorred yet because it conduced greatly to the Conversion of the Gentiles to make as little Alterations in their Ceremonies as possible therefore did the Heads of the Church institute the same Ceremonies to be used by the Christians on the Feast of the Purification as had been used upon the Calends of February at Rome And this the learned and judicious Rhenanus on Tertul. l. 5. cont Mar. Tertullian confidently afferts Negari non potest Ardentium Cereorum quos bodie Christiani die Purificatâe Mariae ex more circumferunt a Februalibus Romanorum sacris Originem sumpsisse Pertinaci paganismo mutatione subvenâum est quem vei in totum sublatio potius irritasset Tapers light during the Mass and says That the Original of this Custom came from the Romans who having collected the Tribute every fifth Year offered solemn Sacrifices in the end of February and kindled Tapers and Torches in the Town which Ceremony was called Lustrum That the Church hath changed that Superstition into an Ecclesiastical Ceremony ordering Tapers to be kindled yearly in the beginning of February in the Time when S. Simeon took our Lord in his Arms. One must needs be very credulous to believe this Conjecture which hath neither Truth nor Likelihood in it The Third Sermon is upon the Fast of Lent therein he enlargeth upon the good Effects of Fasting The Fourth is on Holy Thursday He observeth That on that Day was made the Reconciliation of Publick Penitents guilty of Crimes which deserved that the Bishop should separate them from the Altar and then reconcile them Then he addresseth his Speech to those Penitents and exhorts them to examine themselves whether they be reconcil'd to God or not because it may happen that although they be reconciled by the Ministery of the Bishop yet they be not so with God who alone grants the true Reconciliation He shews them that to be truly reconciled they ought to be according to the Apostle new Creatures purged from the Crimes of the Old Man That they who continue in their sinful Habits should not imagine that they can throughly be reconcil'd before they have made t Made a Satisfaction proportionable to the greatness of their Sins Tho' these Words seem to come up to the Doctrine of Satisfaction held in the Church of Rome yet it does not appear that the Fathers of this Age had any other Notion of Satisfaction than that which was received in the Ages before which is much different from and much more Orthodox than the Popish We have a Definition of it p. 2. given by Isidore of Sevil to this effect Satisfaction is an Exclusion of the Causes and Occasions of Sin and a Cessation from Sinning which is almost the same with S. Austin's Satisfactio est peccatorum Aug. de dog Eccles. c. 54. causas excindere eorum suggestionibus nullum aditum indulgere This is the Nature of true Repentance which being proportion'd in some measure to the greatness of our Guilts the more pensive and hearty by how much our Sins are more heinous and aggravating is all the Satisfaction that God expects of us besides a firm Faith and Dependance on the Merits of Jesus Christ. The popish Satisfaction is a clear different thing as they Greg. de Val. to 4. d. 7. q. 14. So. Drido Tapper c. define it thus It is an equivalent Compensation made to the offended Justice of God for the Injury done unto him by Sin partly by our Actions and partly by our Sufferings whereby we deliver our selves from Divine Vengeance and save our selves from Punishment A Doctrine unknown to Antiquity Ambr. in Luc. Ser. 46. Of
Christ never commanded it and what can justify us to make that a part of Religion which Christ doth not All this did not yet so repress it but after that Image and Saint-worship was brought into the Church Pilgrimages to the Tombs of Saints and Martyrs became more frequent and at length were imposed and encouraged as Meritorious and procuring Pardon of Sins Innocent III. granted Pardon of all Sins to all that went in Pilgrimage to the Holy Land and Boniface VIII to all that went to Rome to visit S. Peter and S. Paul's Tomb. Clement VI. granted these Pilgrims to Rome a Power to free the Souls of four of their Relations or Friends out of Purgatory and gave commandment to all the Angels in Heaven to carry the Souls of such as dyed in Pilgrimage to Heaven immediately Thus Pilgrimages became a necessary part of Religion and because very gainful to the Popes and their Metropolis were much encouraged and practised till the Truth recovered strength again by the Reformation and by enlightning Men's Minds put out the Superstitious Conceits of the Flames of Purgatory Pilgrimages to the Tombs of S. Peter and S. Paul the Apostles Among the other ancient Forms of France which M. Bignon hath publish'd * At Paris in 1613. octavo and 1666. quarto together with those of Marculphus there are some more found concerning the Church as the 11th which is a Cession made to a Church the 12th which is a Form of a Commendatory Letter given to Clerks the 26th 27th and 28th which are Donations to Churches the 44th which is a Form of Exemption given by the King to a Monastery of Virgins the 45th is a Confirmation of that Privilege Among those which are according to the Roman Law there are Forms of Donation to a Church N. 1 34 35 36 37 and 38. and lastly in the last Forms published by M. Bignon there are also found Forms of Donations to Churches and Commendatory Letters of Clerks COSMA of Jerusalem SUidas says That in S. John Damascene's Time flourish'd COSMA of Jerusalem a witty ingenious Man very skilful in making Hymns and Spiritual Songs elegantly and learnedly Cosma and that they surpassed all that ever was done or shall be done in that kind We have yet Thirteen of those Hymns upon the principal Festivals of the Year which are so much the better because the Sence of them is taken out of the Holy Scripture and is nobly express'd In imitation of him one Mark made one upon Holy Saturday and Theophanes another on the Annunciation of the Virgin PANTALEO THE Name of Pantaleo a Deacon and afterwards Presbyter of the Church of Constantinople is found at the head of four Sermons The first of the Epiphany The second Pantaleo of the aa A Sermon upon the Exaltation of the Cross. Although it be very uncertain whether this Sermon do belong to Pantaleo tho' it bears his Name yet it is probable that the Feast of the Exaltation of the Cross had been instituted some Time before by the Emperor Heraclius I. anno 630. and so 't is likely enough such a Sermon might be made upon this Feast by this or some other Father of this Age and Time as well as others which were the common Subject of these Centuries Exaltation of the Cross and the other two upon the Tranfiguration The first is in the Bibliotheca Patrum printed at Colen The second was publish'd by Gretser and the other two by Combefis who durst not affirm them to be the same Author 's There is nothing remarkable in those Monuments Possevin says there were at Constantinople some Sermons of this Author for the whole Year S. JULIAN of Toledo S. JULIAN Disciple of Eugenius chosen Archbishop of Toledo in the Year 680. was President in several Councils held in that City and died in 690. His Successor Felix Julian of Toledo having praised his Vertues sets down the Catalogue of his Books He wrote saith he a Book of the Prognosticks of another Life directed to the Bishop Idatius in the beginning of which there is a Letter to that Bishop and a Prayer This Work is divided into three Books the first is of the Original of Man's Death The second of the State of the Souls of the Dead until the Resurrection The third is of the last Resurrection He made moreover a Book of Answers dedicated to the same Person in which he maintains the Canons and Laws whereby Christian Slaves are forbidden to serve Infidels We have also an Apology for the Faith dedicated to Pope Benedict and another Apology upon three Articles upon which the Bishop of Rome seemed to have had some Doubts a little Tract of the Remedies against Blasphemies with a Letter to Adrian the Abbot a Treatise of the Proof of the sixth Age or of the coming of Christ at the beginning thereof there is a Letter to King Ervigius with a Prayer This Work is divided into three Books the first contains the Texts of the Old Testament shewing without any need of supputation of Years that the Messias is come The second Book shews by the Apostle's Doctrine that Christ came in the fulness of Time The third proves that the sixth Age in which the Messias was to come is come There he distinguisheth the five Ages which went before not by the Years but by the Generations We have moreover a Collection of his Poetry containing Hymns Epitaphs and Epigrams in great number a Book of Letters a Collection of Sermons among which is found a little Writing of the Protection of the House of God and of those that retire into it a Book intituled Of the Contrarieties of the Scripture divided into two Parts the first whereof comprehends what relates to the Old Testament and the second to the New a Book of History of what happen'd in France in the Time of King Wamba a Collection of Sentences taken out of S. Austin upon the Psalms some Extracts of the same Father's Books against Julian a Treatise of Divine Judgments taken out of the Scripture with a Letter to King Ervigius a Treatise against the Persecutors of those who fly into Churches a Book of the Masses for the whole Year divided into four Parts in which he corrected some which were either corrupted or imperfect and made new ones a Book of Prayers for the Festivals of the Church of Toledo either reformed or newly made Of all those Works these only remain The Treatise of the Prognosticks directed to Idatius Bishop of Barcelona with the Letter and the Prayer The three Books to shew the sixth Age against the Jews And the History of the Acts of Wamba in France In the first Book of the Treatise of Prognosticks he treats of Men's Death he shews it is sin that subjected them to Death and affirms it is called Mors a Morsu because the first Man became Mortal by eating of the Forbidden Fruit. He believes that altho' Death be not good yet it is useful
the Bishops did think of vindicating him nor of maintaining him to have been of another mind But if he thinks it strange that the Legates should suffer Honorius's Memory to be condemned how much more strange must it seem to be that they should have suffered the Acts of the Council to be falsified to insert his condemnation in it Tho' Honorius had been excusable they may have had reasons not to oppose his condemnation the advantage of Peace and the fear to cause some trouble might have prevailed with them to acquiesce in the Judgment of the Council But no reason can be found to excuse their Treachery if they had corrupted the Acts of the Council to insert Honorius's condemnarion there I do not trouble my self to confute Baronius's other Reasons which are a mere begging of the Question having already said over-much on that Subject because now his Opinion of the corruption of the Acts of the 6th Council is wholly forsaken and it goes now for current that Honorius was condemned in the 6th Council This being supposed there remain Two Questions to be examined whether he was justly condemned or not and for what reason he was condemned To decide these Questions there needs no more than to read Sergius and Honorius's Letters and to remember the circumstances of the Fact Cyrus Patriarch of Alexandria that he might reunite the Theodosians approved this expression that there was but one Operation in Christ Sophronius opposed this Doctrine Sergius approved the Conduct and Doctrine of Cyrus but for Peace sake he did think it better not to debate this Question and neither to afâirm One nor Two Operations in Christ and only to say that the same person performed Divine and Humane Actions because they that use the expression of One Operation only seem to confound the Two Natures and when they say Two Operations they seem to assert Two contrary Wills in Christ which cannot be maintained by reason the Soul of Christ never had any motion of its own from it self or contrary to those of the Word but such as the Word pleased and when he pleased In a word that as our Body is governed and moved by our Soul so the Soul of Jesus Christ was led and governed by his Divinity Thus Sergius explains himself in his Letter to Honorius and asks him what was his Opinion about it What does this Pope answer to this He approves of Sergius's proceeding he commends his Letter he follows his Opinion he forbids speaking any more of One or Two Operations of Christ and orders that this Question be left to the Grammarians to be discussed yea and he declares that there is but One Will in Christ. Then he writes to Eulogius that he should maintain no longer Two Operations in Christ. He writes moreover a Second Letter to Sergius to command silence about that Question What did Sergius Pyrrhus Paul and the other Monothelites who were condemned in this Council do more They were in Two Errors 1. That we ought not to assert that there was One or Two Operations in Christ and that we should forbear debating that Question 2. That we should say that there is but One Will in Christ by reason the Soul of Christ was governed and led by his Divinity Honorius does plainly establish those Two Points therefore he cannot be excused without excusing also the Patriarchs of Constantinople You will say That when he said there was but One Will in Christ he said it to exclude the contrariety of Wills and that the reason he gives of it does evidently shew it We own saith he there is but One Will in Christ because he took upon him our Nature not our Sin and he had no other Law in his Members nor any contrary Will But if this reason may serve for the vindication of Honorius Sergius ought to be vindicated likewise as rendring the same reason and confessing in his Letter that the Soul of Christ had its proper motions directed and led by the Divinity Paul his Successor may with much more reason be excused for in his Letter to Theodorus he says That the only reason why he acknowledges but One Will in Christ is out of fear least he should admit a contrariety of Wills in Christ or should say That there be Two Persons with Two different Wills That he did admit but One Will not to annihilate the Humane Nature or any part of his Soul but to shew that Christ's Soul was filled with the gifts of the Deity and had no Will contrary to that of the Word By the same reason one may justifie the Ecthesis and the Type and all the Monothelites For they did not deny that the Body and Soul of Christ had all their Properties their Faculties and Motions but they affirmed they were so governed and led by the Will of the Word as to follow his direction and impression in all things And the only reason they gave why they would not have Men to say that there were Two Wills in Christ was for fear this expression should intimate Two contrary Wills in him Honorius therefore is no more excusable than Sergius Paul and the other Monothelites who did act and speak as he did and if they condemned these as Hereticks they might condemn Honorius likewise Wherefore not only the 6th Council always joined him with the other Monothelites and comprehended him in the same Anathema which they would not have done had they believed there was any difference to be made between him and the rest for it is expressly said They condemned him for delivering in his Letter things contrary to the Doctrine of the Apostles the Desinitions of the Councils and the Judgment of all the Fathers and for following the false Doctrine of Hereticks for approving in every thing the Impious Opinions of Sergius for writing a Letter tending to the same Impiety for Preaching Teaching and Spreading the Heresie of One Operation and One Will. In fine the Council having pronounced Anathema's against Theodorus Sergius Honorius Pyrrhus Paul Macarius and Stephen Polychronius adds Anathema to all these Hereticks They did then believe Honorius to be an Heretick as well as the rest and condemned him as such But say they in the Emperor's Edict he is called only a Favourer Helper and Confirmer of Heresie Pope Leo the Second in his Three Letters charges him only with Favouring the Error of the Monothelites and not suppressing it with a vigilancy becoming S. Peter's Successor But what maketh most for Honorius's vindication is that the Abbot John who writ his Letter S. Maximus and John IV do defend him and say that when he asserted but One Will in Christ he meant it of the Humane Will but he did not mean that there was but One Will of the Manhood and God-head That 's the most plausible thing can be said in the behalf of Honorius but all this doth not prove that he was not condemned as an Heretick and Favourer of Heresie Honorius was a Favourer of
Abbots who are not Priests upon pain of Expulsion from their Monasteries Nevertheless it permits those who are admitted into Monasteries or their Parents or Relations to give voluntary Gifts yet upon this condition That those Gifts shall belong to the Monasteries whether he that is Admitted stays or goes away unless the Emperor turn him out The 20th prohibits making double Monasteries that is for Men and Women and as for those that are Founded it ordains That the Monks and Nuns shall dwell in two several Houses that they shall not see one another nor have any Commerce together The 21st forbids Monks to quit their own Monastery to go to others The 22d forbids Monks to eat with Women unless it be needful for their Spiritual Good or upon a Journey yea though they be their Relations Moreover to the Acts of this Council is joyned a Panegyrick pronounced in Commendation of it by Epiphanius Deacon of Catana in Sicily a Letter of Tarasius to Pope Adrian about the Subject of the Council another Letter of the same Person against the Simonists in which he hath gathered together several Canons upon that Subject another Letter of his to John the Abbot upon the Definition of the 2d Nicene Council and against Simoniacal Ordinations The Acts of this Council being brought to Rome they sent Extracts of them into France where they had a different Practice about Image-worship They were indeed permitted to have them and to put them in their Churches but they could not endure that any Worship or Honour should be paid them whilst the Cross and Sacred Vessels were permitted to be honoured Charles who was then King of France and afterwards was Emperor caused these Extracts to be Examined by * Of whom Alcuin was the chief and R. Hoveden says He it was that composed the Caroline Books some Boshops of his Kingdom who composed a Treatise to vindicate their own Usage and to answer the Proofs alledged in the Council of Nice for the Worship of Images This Work was put out by Charles's Order and under his Name within three Years or thereabouts after the Nicene Council It is divided into four Books In the Preface having observed that the Church redeemed with the precious Blood of Christ her Spouse washed with the saving Water of Baptism fed with the precious Blood of her Saviour and anointed with Holy Oyl is sometimes assaulted by Hereticks and Infidels and sometimes vexed by the Quarrels of the Schismaticks and the Proud that she is an Ark containing those that are to be saved figured by that of Noah which undergoes the Storms of the Deluge of this World without any danger of Shipwrack which does not yield to the deep and deadly Whirlpools of this World and which cannot be overcome by the Hostile Powers wherewith she is surrounded by reason Christ does continually fight for her so that she does still withstand her Enemies and inviolably maintain the true Faith and Confession of the Trinity That she is a Holy Mother without Spot and Corruption always Fruitful and yet a Virgin that the more she is set on by the Contradictions of the World the more she encreases in Virtue the lower she is brought the higher she raiseth up her self After this Encomium of the Church they add in Charles's Name That seeing he hath taken the Reins of his Kingdom in his hands being in the Bosom of this Church he is obliged to endeavour her Vindication and Prosperity that not only the Princes but the Bishops also of the East puffed up with sinful Pride had swerved from the Holy Doctrine and the Apostolick Tradition and do cry up impertinent and ridiculous Synods to make themselves famous to Posterity that some years ago they had held in Greece a certain Synod full of Imprudence and Indiscretion in which they went about to abolish the use of Images which the Ancients have introduced as an Ornament and a Remembrance of Things past and to attribute to Images what God hath said of Idols though it cannot be said that all Images are Idols But it 's plain there 's a difference between an Image and an Idol because Images are for Ornament and Remembrance whereas Idols are made for destroying Souls by an impious Adoration and vain Superstition That the Bishops of this Council had been so blind as to Anathematize all those who had Images in Churches and so boast that their Emperor Constantine had freed them from Idols That besides this there was another Synod held about three years since composed of the Successors of those of the former Council yea and of those that had assisted at it which was not less Erroneous and Faulty than the former though it took a clean contrary way That the Bishops of this Synod order Images to be Adored which those of the former would not permit to be had or seen and that whenever these find Images to be spoken of whether in the Scripture or in the Writings of the Fathers they conclude from thence that they ought to be Worshipped That thus they both fall into contrary Absurdities those and confounding the Use and the Adoration of Images and the other believing Idols and Images to be one and the same thing As for us says he being content with what we find in the Gospels and the Apostle's Writings and instructed by the Works of the Fathers who have not swerved from him who is the Way and the Truth we receive the 6 first Councils and reject all the Novelties both of the first and the second Synod And as to the Acts of this latter which are destitute of Eloquence and common Sense being come to us we thought our selves bound to write against their Errors to the end that if their Writing should defile the Hands of those that shall hold it or the Ears of those that shall hear it the Poison which it might instill may be expell'd by our Treatise supported by the Authority of the Scripture and that this weak Enemy which is come from the East may be subdued in the West by the Sentiments of the Holy Fathers which we have produced In fine we have undertaken this Work with the consent of the Bishops of the Kingdom which God hath given us not out of any ambitious Design but animated with the Zeal of God's House and the Love of Truth because as it is a holy Thing to pursue good Things so it is a great Sin to consent to Evil. This is the Subject of his Preface In the first Book after having made some Cursory Observations upon some Terms of the Council he shews that the places of the Scripture alledged in that Council for Image-worship being explained in their genuine Sense and according to the Fathers do not at all prove what they pretend In the first Chapter he reproves this Expression in the Letter of Constantine and Irene By him that Reigns with us He says That it is a piece of intolerable Rashness in Princes to compare their Reign
he did busie himself about it in the West more than Irene had done in the East In the 15th Chapter he answers this Objection They Honour the Statues Medals and Pictures of Princess why shall they not Honour those of Christ and the Saints He answers it I say by maintaining that the former ought not to be Honoured In the 16th Chapter he answers another Reason of the Council that the Honour of the Image passeth to that which is represented by it He says first of all that he cannot apprehead how a Cloth and some Colours have any Relation to ãâã St. in Heaven that it is not so with Pictures as with Relicks which have a natural relation to the Saints that it depends upon the Painters Fancy to make folks believe that a Picture represents a Saint or a false God He asks whether those that have most resemblance deserve more Honour than those of a more precious matter He says that if the latter 't is then the matter that they Respect and if the former it seems an unjust thing to prefer them before those that are more valuable Lastly he confesses that the Learn'd may indeed Honour Images without any abuse by referring the Honour not to what they are but to what they signifie but he believes that they can be nothing else but a cause of Offence and a stumbling block to the ignorant who Reverence and Adore nothing but what they see from whence he concludes it 's better quite to Abolish the use of them This shews that the dispute between the Greeks and the French was not so much a dispute about Doctrine as practice In the 17th Ch. he condemns an expression of Constantiu's Bishop of Cyprus but it was badly Translated for whereas that Bishop had said that he Honoured Images and Adored the Trinity he maketh him say that he Honoured Images with the Honour due to the Trinity So it 's an Error of Fact In the following Chapters he reproves the Opinions of some Bishops In the 21st he derides the instance Polemon's of Picture The two next Chapters are against the Praises given to the Art of Painting In the 24th he pretends there 's no comparison to be made between the Relicks of Saints and their Images In the 25th he says That the Miracles done by Images are no Argument that they are to be Adored for then Thorn-Busnes should be Adored because God spake to Moses out of a burning Bush Fringes should be Adored because Jesus Christ healed the Woman with the bloody Flux by the Fringe of his Garment and shadows too because St. Peter's Shadow wrought Miracles In the 26th he Laughs at Theodâsius Bishop of Myra who had related his Arch-Deacons Dreams to Authorize Image-Worship In the 30th Ch. he confutes several Proofs alledged by the Cooncil because they were taken of Apocryhal Histories In the 31st He taxeth with Impiety and Folly the Answer of that Abbot who told a Monk it was better to frequent Bawdy-Houses than not to Adore the Images of Jesus Christ and the Virgin In the last Book he goes on to confute some Expressions of the Council and of particular Men in the Council He maintains no wax Candles ought to be Lighted nor Incense to be burnt before Images because they are senseless He cannot endure that the Council should compare those who do not Adore Images to Hereticks He taketh it ill that they should thus abuse their Predecessors confessing nevertheless that these last were to blame for burning and destroying Images He rejects the Story of Christ's Image sent to Abgarus as a mere Fable He makes no great reckoning of another Story of a Monk who had set up a Lamp before an Image which burnt several days He adds that tho' those Miracles were true it would not follow from thence that Images were to be Adored Lastly having deâided them for many of their Arguments he maintains that that Synod was to blame for assuming the Title of Universal because whatever is Universal ought to be conformable to the Tradition and Practice of all the Churches Thus says he if it fall out that the Bishops of two or three Provinces meet together and that according to the Authority of Tradition they Establish some Doctrine or make some Rule agreeable to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Ancient Church what they do is Catholick and their Council may be called Universal because thô it be not composed of the Bishops of all the parts of the World what it does is agreeable to the Faith and Tradition of the whole Church but contrarywise if they go about to Establish some Novelty what they do is not Catholic In a word whatsoever is Ecclesiastical is Catholick and whatsoever is Catholick is Universal all that is Universal is not New Thus the Synod we speak of being contrary to the Sentiments of the Universal Church we cannot own it for Universal These Books were brought to Rome and presented to Pope Adrian by Engilbert Charles's Ambassador The Pope who maintain'd the Council having received them thought himself bound to Answer them by a Writing directed to Charles the Great himself First of all he Vindicates the Expressions of Tarasius and the other Greeks about the Holy Ghost by some passages of the Fathers which have spoken after the same manner supposing those Greeks did not differ from the Roman Church about the Procession of the Holy Ghost Then he defends the passages of the Scripture the Reasons Authorities and Histories alledged by the Synod and censured in the Caroline Books but his Answers are but weak He pretends that St. Gregory taught in his Letter to Secundinus that Images deserved some Worship He cites some passages out of the Fathers upon almost every Article but he maketh such Applications of several of them that very few would approve of and he vindicates some Reasonings that some could hardly Relish But about the end having reported all the Testimonies of St. Gregory he expresseth himself about Image-Worship after a manner which cannot be possibly condemned for he says that Images are not Reverenced but so far forth as they raise up our mind to God and that whosoever Prostrate himself before Christ's Image 't is God whom he Adores that likewise we show our Love and Affection to the Saint by the means of his Images He adds that the Nicene Synod having Established this Doctrine and rejected the false Synod which would have quite abolished Images he had received it as a Legitimate and Catholic Synod that nevertheless he had not yet written an Answer to the Emperor lest he should relaps into the Error of his Predecessors which he fear'd so much the more because writing to him to Exhort him to restore Images he had also demanded of him the Restitution of the Diocesses of the Church of Rome and of the Patrimonies also belonging to it but had received no Answer from him Wherefore he says that if Charles will give him leave in his Answer to the Greek
He exhorts him firmly to adhere to the Faith and to joyn Vertues and Good Works to a Lively true Faith In short he lays before him the chief Duties of a Christian Prince the Vertues that are most necessary for him and the Manner how he ought to govern himself 'T is one of the best and compleatest Instructions that were ever given to a Prince and 't would be a hard matter to find a larger exacter or more solid Collection of Precepts The Second is the Circular Letter which he sent to all the Patriarchs of the East against the Roman Church in 866. Wherein he takes occasion to reproach her with what had passed in Bulgaria which was but newly Converted to the Christian Faith where some Persons were found come from the West who spread such Doctrines as were repugnant to the Purity of the Faith First by making the Bulgarians Fast on Saturdays against the Laws of the Church which forbid it Which might occasion a Contempt of the Doctrine because when Men take upon them to slight Tradition even in the least Things they are easily prevail'd with to slight the Doctrine it self Secondly by distinguishing the first Week in Lent from the rest and permitting them to eat in that Week Milk Butter Cheese c. Thirdly by detecting Married Priests Fourthly by causing them to be Anointed again with the Chrism that had been already Anointed with it by the Priests affirming That Unction ought not to be made by Priests He exclaims against the Prohibition affirming That there is no Law reserving that Unction to the Bishop or prohibiting the same to the Priests Lastly he charges the Latin Church with breach of Faith and falsifying of the Creed by Teaching that the Holy Ghost does not onely proceed from the Father but from the Father and the Son Upon this Article he doth inlarge very much and alledges many Objections against the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son Then he breaks out against those who had Taught the Bulgarians this Doctrine and does Excommunicate them by vertue of the Canons about the Saturdays Fast and the Celibacy of Priests He exhorts the Patriarchs to joyn with him in Banishing that Doctrine to send Bishops to Constantinople to have those new Tenets exploded and put a stop to those evils that the Bulgarians may receive the true Faith He acquaints them That he has received a Letter from Italy against the Tyranny of the Church of Rome He admonishes them to receive and cause to be received in all the Churches of their Patriarchates the Seventh General Council in the same manner and with the same Authority as the first Six In the Third Letter which is to Bardas he complains of what he was to suffer in the Place where he was and seems to speak much like a Christian. In the following Letters he also makes his Complaints of the Wrongs done him In the 18th he Writes to Michael the Emperour about the Death of Bardas He owns he deserved it if he had actually conspired to make himself sole Master of the Empire as he could not doubt of it upon the account of the Letters Michael had sent him But he laments his Death because he had not time to do Penance for his sins He very much flatters Michael and expresses to him the great desire he has to see him again shortly at Constantinople The same Thing he insinuates but in more flattering and pathetick Terms in the next Letter In the 20th he congratulates a Monk for having brought over a Bishop to his Party In the 27th he Writes against certain Monks who had took upon them to depose their Abbot and observes that Monks ought not to set up themselves as Judges of their own Abbots but that they ought to refer their Cause to their Superiours In the 30th he proves the Perpetual Virginity of the Blessed Virgin and explains that place of Scripture where it is said That she knew not Joseph till she had brought forth her first-born observing that the Particle Donec till doth not always imply that the contrary to that which had not hapned before doth happen afterwards In the 31st directed to Tarasius a Nobleman whom he calls his Brother he Treats of Providence and shews why Good Men suffer in this Life whilst the Wicked wallow in Prosperity In the 32d and the Seven next following directed to Theotictus the Abbot he explains in short the Faith of the Mysterious Trinity and of the Incarnation against Hereticks He also speaks smartly therein against the Iconoclasts The next Ten consist of Moral Exhortations to several Persons The Fiftieth is upon the Covenants of the Law and Gospel The next Three consist of Reprimands to a Collector of Taxes for his Covetousness In the 54th he proves that the Holy Mysteries ought not to be given to Infidels or Hereticks nor to Ill-Livers but onely to Orthodox Persons who live according to the Rules of Christianity The 55th is against a Liar In the 63d he gives the Reasons for the Darkness of Prophecies In the Sixty fourth he Confutes the Iconoclasts and Answers to some of their Objections In the 72d he shews how Contemptible our Temporal Life is In the 74th he pretends That Abraham made his Servant Swear by putting his hand under his Thigh in honour to the Circumcision and as a Figure of the Messias to come out of his Seed The 97th was Written to Basilius the Emperour after he had turned him out of his See of Constantinople He complains in this Letter of the Ill Treatment he had received and particularly That his Books were taken from him He gives a very pathetick Account of the Persecution he suffer'd and Writes smartly to the Emperour In the next Letters he continues to deplore his Misfortunes and speaks of the Earthquake that hapned at Constantinople upon his Expulsion In the 102d he examines how St. Paul could be both a Roman of Tarsis and a Jew The 111th is directed to Gregory of Syracuse his old and constant Friend Wherein he exhorts him to stand firm under his present Ill Circumstances and not to discontinue his Episcopal Functions In the 115th he says That the Council which he calls Heretical and which was made up of the Enemies to Image-Worship has Excommunicated him to raise a Man to the See of Constantinople who lay under an Anathema He speaks of the Eighth Council In the next Letters he Writes against that Council but chiefly in the 118th In the 125th he gives Mystical Reasons for the Tearing of the Veil of the Temple when our Saviour died In the 127th he explains that place of Scripture where it is said That the Sin against the Holy Ghost shall never be pardon'd In the following Letters he expounds some other places of Scripture for which he brings Mystical Reasons well invented and happily apply'd In the 137th he affirms That what is said in St. Luke's Gospel that our Saviour sweated drops of Blood is
extolled that Arch-bishop and Complimented him about the Deputy he had sent unto him he Argues against the Doctrine of the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son as an Error contrary to Tradition He says that the Popes Leo the I. and Leo the III. have rejected that Doctrine The first by saying in his Letter against Nestorius and Eutyââ¦jus that the Holy Ghost doth proceed from the Father and the last by disproving those that had added the Filioque to the Creed and causing it to be Ingraven on Plates without that Addition He afterwards brings in many Arguments grounded upon some places of Scripture against the Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Son He answers to the place alledged by the Latins The Holy Ghost shall receive from me and will declare it to you He objects to himself That S. Ambrose S. Austin S. Jerom and some other Fathers have said That the Holy Ghost proceeds from the Son He owns it to have been their opinion and that they ought not therefore to be called Hereticks But he pretends their Authority must not be preferred before that of a greater Number who spoke according to the Councils and the Holy Writ He adds that some Fathers of the Church may have swerved from the Truth but whatever respect we have for their persons we ought not to follow their Errors As for Instance though Dionysius of Alexandria be ranked amongst the Fathers the Arian Expressions he used are not to be approved as well as some Tenets of Methodius S. Irenaeus and Papias Lastly he dares affirm That if all the Men in the World should oppose us we ought still to adhere to our Saviour's Words and those of the Gospel and if we do seek after Proofs next to our Saviour we have the Suffrages of Oecumenical Councils the greatest Number of the Fathers the Bishops of Rome and amongst these S. Leo and Adrian the I. That the Legates themselves of the Holy See which lately have been in the East Three several times have alledged nothing contrary to that Doctrine and that in the Council held by him the Legates of Pope John had Subscribed unto and approved of the Creed without that Addition Thus much is alledged by Photius in his Letter to make good his Opinion His Work containing a compendious History of the first seven General Councils which has been several times published separately is nothing but part of the first Letter directed to Michael King of the Bulgarians But as Photius had skill in Composition so he was no less versed in Preaching We have many Photius's Sermons Manuscript Homilies of his whereof Father Combefis has printed the Titles and Beginnings in the last Addition to the Biblioth Patrum But there are only two whole ones extant one upon the Virgin 's Nativity inserted by the same Author into his first Continuation of the Biblioth Patrum and written with much Eloquence and Politeness The other containing the Description and Encomium of a new Church in the Emperour's Palace at Constantinople published by Codinus and Combefis in their Collections In fine Photius had joyned all the Subtilty of the most refined Schoolmen to his other sorts of Photius's Treatise concerning the Wills of Christ. Learning In Canisius's Collection we have some small Treatises of his in Latin which are a convincing proof of his great Ability in School-Learning The principal of which is that of our Saviour's Wills which are called Gnomical found in the Tome added by Stuart to Canisius's Collection It was in Greek in the Emperour and the Duke of Bavaria's Libraries out of which Turrian took it and put it into Latin The state of the Question is to know whether our Saviour had besides a general Will to do a Thing a particular Will to do it in such and such manner whether he has chosen and affected the one more than the other Photius in the first place says That this Question having been but slightly handled by the Fathers is the more difficult to solve but that 't is an easie matter to find out all that has been written upon it S. Maximus being the only Father that he found treating of this Question And to expound him he distinguishes many sorts of Wills The first a Natural Will which he calls ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã being nothing but a Desire of doing a Thing without any Reason for it The second a General Will by him called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã being an Effect of Reason The third called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is an Inclination to one Thing rather than another The fourth is the Choice one makes of one Thing rather than another The fifth is the Determination of the Will to do this or that Thing And lastly the Execution The Matter being thus stated he says that our Saviour had unquestionably a general Will attended with Reasoning but that he has not a Will of Choice nor of Deliberation or Design to do one Thing rather than another because having a perfect Knowledge of all Things by his Nature by reason of the Hypostatical Union and his humane Will being wholly subject to the divine Will he cannot deliberate upon what he must do nor will any Thing but what pleases the divine Will That there being two Natures in Christ there ought to be likewise two Wills that is to say two Faculties but by reason there is but one Hypostasis or but one person that wills he therefore wills but one Thing and has but one general Will that is but one sole Affection because the humane Will does in all Things concur with the divine Will This is the Opinion of Photius in this Matter which he backs with many Reasons and gives shrewd Answers to all Objections against it In the fifth Tome of Canisius we find moreover seven short Dissertations of Photius upon several Photius's Theological Treatises Scholastick Questions In the first he puts this Question How God is every where and answers the Objections made against his Omnipresence He shews that God is not in the World as created Beings are but in a more sublime manner that he is in every Thing and above all Things that he is in all Things by his Operation but that his Act being his Substance one may truly say he is both in Act and Substance every where that he is every where without being of the same Substance with the Things in which he is that he makes no part of them not being tied mingled confounded or any way changed by them In the second Dissertation he shews how we know God in this Life and says that we cannot perfectly define or know him but that he is known to us by a small beam of his Majesty shining upon his Creatures and by way of Negation that is by denying that he is any of those Things we see That all Men naturally know that there is a God because there ought to be an Eternal Being a Soveraign Lord of all Things and a
Imposition of Hands but only by receiving the Cover and Chalice from the Hands of the Bishop and the Christal Bottle and Napkin from the Arch-Deacon He says nothing particular of the lesser and inferiour Orders I shall pass by the Remarks he makes upon the likeness of our Ministers with those of the Old Testament and the Mystical significations he gives to the Bishops Habits To come to what he teaches concerning the Sacraments He says That Baptism Chrism and the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ are called Sacraments because that under the Vail of Corporal things the Divine Power produces Salvation and Grace after a secret manner by the power of the Holy Ghost which works this Effect insomuch that they are equally Efficatious whether they be Administred by the Good or the Bad. That Baptism is the first because it must be received before Confirmation and before the Receiving the Body and Blood of our Lord. That in this Sacrament Men are dipt in Water to denote that as Water outwardly purifies the Body so Grace inwardly does the Soul into which the Holy Ghost descends He relates afterwards the Order of Administration and the Ceremonies of Baptism and from thence passing to Confirmation he Remarks that the Bishop dispenses the Holy Ghost by Imposition of his Hands and that he Anoints the Believer a second time with the same Chrism the Priest had done before with this difference only that his Anointing is on the Forehead whereas the Priest's was on the Crown of the Head He attributes to this last Unction the Sanctification and Grace of the Holy Ghost At last speaking of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ which he considers as two different Sacraments He asks the Question Why Jesus Christ has comprehended the Mystery of his Body and Blood under things which we eat and drink And why of all the sorts of Food we eat he has made choice of Bread and Wine To which he Answers That Jesus Christ has given us his Body and Blood in the form of Nourishment because effectively his Flesh is such and his Blood Drink That he hath made use of the Fruits of Earth because he was upon Earth and that he has chosen Bread and Wine to accomplish the Sacrifice of Melchisidech and to show that as Bread and Wine consists of many Particles which together make but one Substance so we are all United into the same Church by the same Charity being all made Members of the same Body by this Sacrament He adds That this Sacrament serves for Nourishment to our Flesh and converts itself into our Substance and that by vertue of this Sacrament we are changed into Jesus Christ. That we participate of his Spirit and Grace and in a word that we become his very Members That the Bread which is made use of is without Leaven to denote that those which approach it ought to be exempt from all Impurities That Water is mixt with the Wine because we read in the Gospel That Blood and Water came out of the Side of our Saviour And that as it is good for them that are not separated from it by their Sins often to approach this Sacrament so it is very dangerous for such as have committed such Crimes as debar them from it to receive it before they have Repented After having treated of the Sacraments he speaks of the Celebration of Mass which he believes to have been so called because of the dismissing of the Catechumens with these words Ita Missa est He says That the Mass is a Sacrifice which the Priest offers to God instituted by Jesus Christ practised by the Apostles and used by all the Church He acknowledges that at first they did not Sing as they do at present but he believes they read the Gospel and the Epistles of the Apostles he ends this Book with a short Exposition of the Ceremonies and Prayers of the Mass. In the second Book after he hath spoken of the Hours for Divine Service and the different sorts of Prayer He treats of the Confession the Litanies or publick Prayers and the divers kinds of Fasts He distinguishes three sorts of Lent the first that which precedes Easter the second the Fast observed after Pentecost and the third that which begins in November and ends at Christmas-day He notes that the custom of his time was to Fast Friday and Saturday He does not forget to speak of the Fasts of the four Ember-weeks He approves of other Fasts ordered by the Bishop on any particular occasion or practis'd thrô Devotion by Christians In speaking of abstaining from Wine and Flesh he observes that Birds are allowed to those who are forbid to eat of any four-footed Creature because that 't is thought they were formed out of Water as well as Fish He distinguishes two different sorts of Alms and ranks amongst this Number the good Works we do for our Salvation which are as Alms we bestow upon our selves He defines Penance a Punishment by which a Man corrects himself for what he has done amiss He says that Penitents let their Hair and Beards grow wear Sack-cloth throw themselves on their Faces on the Ground and besprinkle their Bodies with Ashes That Repentance is a second remedy for our Sins after Baptism That to effect a true Repentance it does not suffice only to bewail ones Sins past but we must never commit them again That this is the satisfaction followed by Reconciliation That Penance and Reconciliation ought to be publick for publick Transgressions but as to those whose Sins are concealed and who have confest them secretly to a Priest or a Bishop they may do Private Penance such as the Priest or Bishop will order and afterwards be reconciled when they have performed their Penance That the ordinary time for Reconciliation is Holy-Thursday but Absolution may be granted at other times to those that are in danger of their Lives He afterwards Treats copiously of the Solemn Celebration of Feasts and Sundays He speaks by the by of the Oblation of the Sacrifice of the Mass for the Dead of the Dedicating of Churches the Prayers of Divine Service the Songs the Psalms Hymns Anthems Responses and Lessons He makes a Catalogue of Canonical Books which comprehends all that are at present acknowledged for such He tells you those that he believes to have been Authors of the greatest part of them He speaks of Ecclesiastical Benedictions viz. That of Oyl and that of Salt and Water which he says are made use of to comfort the Sick against the Illusions of the Devil to heal the Flock and to drive away Distempers At last having spoken of the Apostles Creed and given an Abridgment of the Doctrines agreeable to the Faith he sets down a very imperfect Catalogue of Heresies in which he forgets some and reckons others which are altogether unknown as the Canonians and Metangismonites The last Book is concerning the Learning of Clergy-Men He says they are not allowed to be ignorant of
he would have no Obsequies bestowed upon them nor any Sacrifice or Prayer offer'd for them In the 99th he permits such to be buried in the Church as have liv'd well The 100th approves of the Custom of carrying dead Bodies into their own Countries In the 101st he commends Alms. In the 102d he forbids doing violence to Pagans to convert them In the 103d he command them to burn the Books of the Sarazens The 104th is concerning the validity of Baptism administred by a Jew who had no Religion Nicholas the first answers That such ought not to be Re-baptized if he did confer it upon them in the name of the Trinity In the 105th he speaks of those that preach'd a Doctrine contrary to that of the Apostles He answers that they ought not to be heard But that it doth not belong to the Bulgarian Lay-men to judge whether the Doctrine be true or not In the last he exhorts them to take Instructions from none but the Church of Rome which always delivers the Truth to such as desire it These are the Decisions or Answers of Nicholas the first in this Work This Pope was a great Canonist He wrote readily and with Authority He often quoted the Canons and Decretals of the Popes He maintain'd the Grandeur of his See with vigour and manag'd the most difficult Matters he was concern'd in with Honour M. de Marca observes That he had done some Injuries to the Discipline and Liberties of the Church by maintaining that it was not lawful to assemble a National Synod without the consent of the Pope In attributing to himself the Appeals of the Clergies Cases determined in National Synods and also after a Review brought in Citing the Persons and Causes to Rome to be there determined anew instead of appointing Judges on the places and affirming that the Causes of Bishops wholly belong'd to his Cognizance But these Pretensions have not been acknowledg'd by the Church and particularly by that of France who have always kept to their Liberties without the least diminution of Respect and Submission due to the Holy See These Epistles are all put out in Tome VIII of the Councils After the death of Nicholas the first which hapned the 13th of November in the year 867. Adrian Adrian II. the second who was about 76 years of age was chosen in his place He was a Roman the Son of Talanius related to the Popes Stephen the fourth and Sergius the younger Gregory the fourth Ordained him Priest and gave him the Title of St. Mark His Liberality gained him a great repute in Rome and he was proposed to be chosen Pope after the death of Leo the fourth and Benedict the third And after the death of Nicholas he obtain'd it both by the Votes of the People who lov'd him and by the joynt consent of both Parties of Grandees Lewis the Emperour approved of his Election and he was Ordained the 14th of December He was at first suspected not to favour much the Memory of his Predecessor Nicholas the first because he seem'd not so severe towards Lotharius and Waldrada as he had been But he freed himself from this suspicion and re-united those to him that before had forsaken his Interest upon this account The beginning of his Pontificate was disturb'd by the Invasion of Rome which the Duke of Spoleto seiz'd on and harrass'd with Robberies and Plundering of his Soldiers But Rome was deliver'd both by the Authority of the Emperour who depriv'd the Duke of Spoleto of his own Dominions and the Thunderbolts of Excommunication which the Pope sent out against these Robbers A Peace was no sooner granted to the Church of Rome but the Affair of Photius was brought before Pope Adrian The Emperour Basilius having restored Ignatius sent some of his Officers to Rome to accompany the Deputies of Ignatius and Photius Those of Photius's side were drown'd for the most part and there appear'd in his behalf but one inconsiderable Monk call'd Methodius who durst not maintain his Cause and who suffer'd himself to be cited thrice and was at last condemn'd for Non-appearance But the Officer of the Greek Emperour and John Metropolitan of Caesaria in Cappadocia having presented to Pope Adrian the Transactions of the pretended Council which Photius had assembled against Pope Nicholas the first he caused them to be examined and condemned in a Council which pronounced an Anathema against Photius and had the Book burnt which he wrote against Pope Nicholas After this Adrian sent Legates to Constantinople to assist in his name at the eighth General Council They had at first all the satiââ¦ction they could wish but after the Council they enter'd upon the Affair of Bulgaria and after it was debated in their hearing judged that it ought to be subject to the Patriarch of Constantinople which troubled the Legates extreamly Wherefore having protested against and declared this Judgment null they immediately left the City dissatisfied And being but very meanly accompanied they fell into the hands of the Sclavonians who robbed them and took them Prisoners They soon after made an escape and came to Rome at the end of the year 870. There are five Letters of this Pope concerning the Affair of Ignatius and Photius in the Version of the Acts of the eighth Council done by Anastasius The three which follow relate to the Affairs of France and the Churches of Brittany to Lotharius and Weldrada Actardus Wulfadus and the other Clergy-men Ordained by Ebbo To the Kingdom of Lotharius on which Charles the Bald seiz'd after his death and which Adrian would have had been left to Lewis the Emperour To the pretended Privileges of Caroloman and to the Quarrel of Hincmarus Bishop of Laon with his Uncle It is not necessary to give any Extracts of these Letters in particular having spoken of them particularly elsewhere Adrian dyed the first of November in the year 872. He was naturally good and well temper'd zealous for Peace and for the welfare of the Catholick Church His Letters are written in a Style mixt with Gravity and Modesty Zeal and Humility he maintaining in every part of them his Authority without Affectation or Contempt of any Body He behaves himself towards those he had Business with according to the Rules of Honesty and Charity not Flattering them by a base Complaisance or Offending them by high Words nor Enraging them by his extraordinary Claims John the VIII was Arch-Deacon of Rome when he was rais'd to the Holy See it was in December 872. that he came to this Dignity at a time when all Italy began to be very much molested by the inroads of Barbarians and Divisions between the Dukes and Lords He was obliged to make a Treaty with the Sarazens to hinder their Invasions After the death of the Emperour Lewis the II. he set the Imperial Crown upon the Head of Charles the Bald in the year 875. and supported himself by his Protection as long as this Prince lived But having
understood that his Life was infamous and his Doctrine Heretical as Hildebert informs us in his 78th Letter All this happened about the Year 1110. Whilst Henry preach'd in France Peter of Bruis continued likewise to publish his Errors in Provence Peter the Venerable Abbot of Cluny who has refuted them makes mention of five 1. His denying The Errors of Peter of Bruis that Baptism was of any advantage to Infants and maintaining that only adult Persons ought to be Baptized a Doctrine which they put in practice by Re-baptizing all those who initiated themselves into their Sect. 2. His condemning the use of Churches Temples and Altars and beating them down 3. His rejecting the Worship of Crosses and breaking them 4. His believing that the Mass was useless and that none are oblig'd to celebrate it 5. His Teaching that Alms and Prayers for the Dead are of no avail and forbidding to sing the Praises of God He likewise takes Notice that a great many accus'd them of wholly rejecting all the Canonical Books of the Old and New Testament and of not believing either in Jesus Christ or the Prophets or the Apostles but he would not impute the Error to them which was only attributed to them by common Fame 'T is no hard matter to comprehend how much Trouble such a seditious Doctrine must needs raise both in Church and State In Provence there was nothing else to be seen but Christians Re-baptized Churches Prophan'd or Destroy'd Altars pull'd down and Crosses burnt The Laws of the Church were publickly violated the Priests beaten abus'd and forc'd to marry and all the most sacred Ceremonies of the Church abolish'd These Disorders excited the Zeal of the Bishops of that Country who with the assistance of the Princes drove out this Heretick and put a stop to the fury of his Followers But he went from thence into Languedoc where he vented the same Errors at Tholouse and in other Cities till he was apprehended and burnt alive at St. Giles's in Languedoc His Disciple Henry who was likewise returned to Languedoc after he had been driven out of Mons The Publication of the Errors of Henry and of Peter of Bruis preach'd there the same Doctrine and added thereto several new Errors so that within a short time that Country was so infested with those detestable Maxims that there were to be seen as St. Bernard says a great many Churches without People a great many People without Priests a great many Priests despised by their People and a great many Christians without Jesus Christ. The Churches there were become like so many Synagogues the Sanctuary was divested of its Sanctity the Sacraments looked upon as prophane things the Festivals lost their Solemnity Men dy'd in their Sins without Absolution and without receiving the Communion Baptism was deny'd to Infants they dirided the Prayer and Sacrifices for the Dead and the invocation of Saints the Excommunications of Bishops the Pilgrimages made for the sake of Devotion the Consecration of the Holy Chrism and of the Holy Oyls And in a Word a general Contempt was cast on all the Ceremonies and Customs of the Church St. Bernard brought into that Country by Alberic Cardinal Bishop of Ostia and Legat of the Holy See put a stop to those Disorders and undeceiv'd part of the People by his Preaching and his Miracles Henry thought of making his escape but was apprehended and carryed in Chains to Tholouse and put into the Bishop's Hands St. Bernard undertook the Journey in the Year 1147. 'T is very probable that the Hereticks of Perigueux were the Disciples of Peter de Bruis and of Henry We will give you an account which a Contemporary Monk nam'd Herbert has left us of them The Hereticks of Perigueux in a Letter address'd to all Christians wherein he admonishes them to beware of of these false Prophets There are says he in the Country of Perigueux a great many Hereticks who boast that they lead an Apostolical Life eat no Flesh and drink no Wine unless in a very little quantity and that from one three days end to another who fall upon their Knees an hundred times a day and receive no Money Their Sect is very Corrupt and Hyyocritical they do not say the Gloria Patri but instead of it say because yours is the Kingdom and you have a Power over all Creatures for ever and ever Amen They make no account of Alms-giving because they believe that no Man ought to possess any thing as his own Property They bear no regard to the Mass and teach that one ought not to receive the Communion but only a piece of Bread If any one of 'em out of Hypocrisie says Mass he never recites the Canon nor receives the Communion but throws the Host besides the Altar or into the Missal They do not adore Crosses or Crucifixes and condemn those of Idolatry who do them any Honour This Sect is mightily increased and not only a great many Persons of Quality leave their Estates to be of their Number but likewise a great many Ecclesiasticks and a great many Religious of both Sexes follow them The most stupid and senless among them within less than eight days time became very expert and fit to teach and be examplars to the rest 'T is a hard matter to take them for wherever they be apprehended the Devil helps them out of Prison again They do work some Miracles such as filling a Vessel with Wine by pouring some drops of Water into it The chief of this Sect is called Pontius St. Bernard in his Journey confronted likewise these Hereticks About the same time Tancheline vented the same Errors in Flanders He was a Laick who ventured to The Heresie of Tancheline preach and became so proud that he caus'd extraordinary Respects to be paid him and he carryed his extravagant Folly so far that if we may believe Abaelard in the Case he caus'd himself to be styled by the People the Son of God and a Temple to be built in Honour of him That which is more certain is that he taught that the Churches were only places of Prostitution that the Eucharist which the Priests consecrated signifyed nothing That the Sacraments were rather Abominations than sacred things that the efficacy of the Sacraments depended on the Sanctity of the Ministers The Bishop of Tournay established in the Church of St. Michael a Congregation of twelve Ecclesiasticks to oppose these Errors This Church was afterwards bestowed on St. Norbert Tanchelino went as far as Rome with a Priest nam'd Evervachier who was one of his principal Followers 'T is not known what became of him afterwards but for the Priest he returned to Utrecht where he made a great many Disciples The Bishop of Utrecht sent word thereof to Frederick Arch-Bishop of Cologne who oppos'd the Heresie in its very Birth which began to spread it self in his Diocess as is observ'd in the Letter of the Church of Utrecht to that Arch-Bishop
in the year 1160. This Prince order'd The Condemnation of the same in the synod of Oxford Their Condemnation in the Council of Tours The Council of Lambez to the Hereticks them to be branded with a Red hot Iron in their Cheek to be whip'd publickly to be driven out of the City half-naked and left them to be starv'd to Death The Council of Tours held in the year 1163. enjoyns that for the suppressing of that Heresy which spread it self in Gascogne and in other Provinces all those should be Anathematiz'd who held any Correspondence with those Hereticks That the Princes should confiscate their Goods and prevent their Meeting In the year 1176. A Solemn Sentence was pass'd in a synod held at Lombez against several of those Hereticks going then under the Name of Bons hommes who had been apprehended by the Inhabitants of that City The Judges pitch'd upon by both Parties were Girald Bishop of Albi Gaucelin of Lodeba the Abbot of Castro and three other Abbots and Judgment was passed in the presence of Pontius Arch-Bishop of Narbonne Arnulphus Bishop of Nismes the Arch-Bishop of Tolouse the Bishop of Agda several Abbots and Superiors of Monasteries who assisted at the Synod The Bishop of Lodeba by the Order of the Bishop of Albi interrogated those Bons hommes and in the first place ask'd them whether they receiv'd the Law of Moses the Prophets and the Books of the Old and New Testament They reply'd that they did not receive the Law of Moses nor the Prophets nor the Psalms nor any part of the Old Testament but only the Gospels the Epistles of Saint Paul the Seven Canonical Epistles the Acts of the Apostles and the Apocalypse In the Second place he demanded of them an Explanation of their Faith They return'd him Answer that they would not explain it unless they were constrain'd to do it The third Question was about Infant-Baptism They reply'd that they had nothing to say on that head The Fourth Question was about the Eucharist where and by whom it was Consecrated who were the persons who receiv'd it and whether it were better Consecrated by a Good than by a Wicked Priest They return'd him Answer that those who receiv'd it unworthily should be damned but withall averr'd that it might be Consecrated by any good man whether Priest or Laick The Fifth was about Marriage They declar'd that they had nothing else to reply to that than what Saint Paul has said viz. That a Man and Woman are joyn'd together to avoid Incontinence and Fornication The Sixth Question was whether Repentance at the hour of Death could save any man and whether one was oblig'd to confess ones Sins to the Priests or whether one might confess them to Laicks They reply'd that the Sick might confess them to whom they pleas'd As to others they were not willing to determine any thing because the Apostle Saint James speaks only of the Sick Then they were ask'd whether Contrition and Confession alone were sufficient to obtain Remission of Sins without thinking it necessary to make Satisfaction to observe Penances Fasts Almsgiving and other Austerities They reply'd that the Apostle Saint James had order'd nothing else beside Confession as necessary to Salvation They declar'd likewise without being ask'd that they believ'd that one ought not to take an Oath That all those who were ordain'd without having the Qualifications prescrib'd by Saint Paul for Bishops were Wolves and Devourers to whom no Obedience ought to be paid Those Errors were refuted by Pontius Arch-Bishop of Narbonne by Arnulphus Bishop of Nismes and by two Abbots which serv'd only as Testimonies of the New Testament Afterwards the Judges declar'd these Bons hommes Heretical condemn'd Oliver and his Followers and all who were of the same Opinion with the Hereticks of Lombez and authoriz'd their Judgment by several Passages out of the Holy Scripture oppos'd to the Errors which we have been relating This Sentence was pronounc'd by the Bishop of Lodeba Those Hereticks protested against it by saying that the Bishop who had pronounc'd it was an Heretick an Hypocrite their Enemy their Persecutor and that they were ready to demonstrate by the Testimony of the Gospel and the Apostles that neither he nor any of the Bishops were Pastors but Mercenaries and Hirelings The Bishop reply'd upon them that his Sentence was Juridical and that he was ready to demonstrate in the Court of Pope Alexandor in the Court of Lewis King of France and in that of the Count of Tolouse or of the Countess his present Wise and of the Lord Trencavelle who was likewise there present That those whom they had condemn'd were Hereticks Upon this they being thus convinc'd turn'd about to the People and declar'd that they would make a Profession of their Faith out of Charity and for the Honour of the Assistants The Bishop bid them observe that they did not say for the Honor of God but for the Honor of the Assistants They made profession of all the Articles of the Creed and added that they acknowledg'd that they ought to confess with their Mouth the Faith which they conceiv'd in their Hearts That they believ'd that no person was sav'd unless he receiv'd the Body of Jesus Christ which is not preserv'd but in the true Church that none else beside Priests had Power of Consecrating it and that the Bad consecrated it as well as the Good that no Body could be sav'd without Baptism and that Infants are sav'd by this Sacrament That Men and Women may be sav'd thô in a Married State That every one ought to receive with Heart and Mouth Repentance from the Priest and to be baptiz'd into the Church and that Lastly they were ready to acknowlege all that could be demonstrated to them by the Authority of the Evangelists and the Epistles of the Apostles The Bishop urg'd them to swear that they would keep to the Doctrine and to declare whether they ever had any other Opinions They reply'd that they could not swear because the Gospel had prohibited all Oaths The Bishop determin'd that they ought to swear if they would be credited and prov'd by several Instances taken out of the New Testament that Oaths were not absolutely forbidden They reply'd that the Bishop of Albi had promis'd them that they should not be oblig'd to swear at all The Bishop of Albi deny'd that he had made them any such promise and confirm'd the Sentence pronounc'd by the Bishop of Lodeba which was sign'd by all the Assistants Some time after this there appear'd a great many of those Hereticks in Tolouse The Pope's Legate went thither in the year 1178. attended by several Bishops They constrain'd them to The Hereticks condem'd at Toulouse submit to publick Penance raz'd the Forts wherein they met Excommunicated and Banish'd those Hereticks who retir'd into Albigensis where they were secure For Roger Count of Albi Countenanc'd and made use of them in detaining the Bishop of
with Two Letters of this Author viz. One written to the People of Antioch about the Fasts they ought to observe and the other to Theodosius Superiour of Papicius's Monasteries concerning the Custom of Shaving Admitting and Investing with the Habit such Persons as present themselves to embrace the Monastick Life a little while after their appearance without obliging them to submit to a Probation of Three Years The First of these Letters is inserted in the end of the Second Tome of the Monuments of the Greek Church and the Second in the Third Tome of the same Work Balsamon without doubt is the most able Canonist that appear'd among the Greeks in these later Times JOANNES CAMATERUS Chartophylax and afterward Patriarch of Constantinople in the Joannes Camatetus end of this Century wrote in the Year 1199. a Letter to Pope Innocent in which he declares that he caââ¦t but admire that the Church of Rome shou'd assume the Title of the Catholick or Universal Church There is also in the Collection call'd Jus Graeco-Romanum a Statute of this Patriarch about the Marriages of Cosin Germans He died A. D. 1206. CHAP. XV. Of the Original of Scholastical Divinity and of the first Divines of that Faculty who flourished in the Twelfth Century THE Manner of treating of the Christian Religion and of its Mysteries has not been Of the Original of Scholastical Divinity and of the first School-men always uniform in the several Ages of the Church but has been chang'd at several times according to the various Occasions or the different Inclinations of Men. The Apostles contented themselves only to teach with much simplicity the Doctrine they receiv'd from Jesus Christ to propose it to Believers as the Object of their Faith and to render it credible by the Means of Authority by the Testimony of the Prophets by our Saviour's Resurrection and by Miracles They never observ'd the difficult Points that might be form'd from the sacred Mysteries neither did they take any Pains to make a thorough search into them nor to discover all the Consequences arising from them much less to explain them according to the Principles of Philosophy and human Reason Neither were the holy Fathers nor Ecclesiastical Writers who liv'd in the First Ages of the Church more careful to insist on the Explication of these Mysteries nor did they make use of Philosophy but only to extirpate the Errors of the Pagans relating to their Gods Idols and false Worship which might be easily confuted by the Light of Reason and the Authority of the Philosophers As for the Jews and Primitive Hereticks they only alledg'd to convince them the Authority of the holy Scriptures and of Tradition and the general Belief of all the Churches in the World and in the Disputes they had with them they never undertook to give particular Reasons for the several Mysteries but only to prove that they ought to be believ'd It is true indeed that in Process of time the Heresies gave occasion more thoroughly to examine the Doctrines and to fix the Terms that ought to be us'd in explaining them and to draw Consequences from the Articles of Faith which were formally reveal'd but the Fathers enter'd upon the Discussion of those Points being only incited by a kind of necessity Neither were they so bold as to start a great number of new Questions relating to the Mysteries nor to resolve them according to Philosophical Principles Upon the whole as they did not commit to writing any Speculations about Doctrinal Points but only with respect to the Heretical Opinions so neither did they compose any particular Theological Treatise concerning the Doctrines of the Christian Religion of set purpose but they treated of them whenever there was occasion to refure some new Heresy Origen was the first who undertook to compile as it were a Body of Divinity in his Work call'd The Principles But this new Undertaking did not at all prove successful insomuch that the Author relying too much upon his own knowledge and being desirous to accommodate the Doctrines of Christianity to the Maxims of Plato's Philosophy had the misfortune to fall into many Errors which have fullied his Memory But such Inconveniences did not happen to those Divines who contented themselves only to teach with the simplicity of Catechists the principal Mysteries of our Religion contain'd in the Apostles Creed and to prove them by Passages taken out of the holy Scriptures In the Ages following the great Heresies of the Arians Nestorians Eutychians c. the Reverend Fathers were oblig'd to treat at large of the Mysteries of the Trinity and of the Incarnation but the holy Scriptures and Tradition were the only Principles on which they grounded their Proofs and they only made use of Argumentations to discover the Sense of the Passages of Scripture and of the Ancient Fathers The same thing was done with respect to other Heresies and we do not find any other Arguments alledg'd to refute them nor any other Rules made use of in the Councils to condemn them But by little and little an over-weaning Curiosity induced Men to start divers new Questions relating to Theological Matters particularly the Mysteries and other difficult Points of the Christian Religion Indeed at first the Authority of holy Scriptures and of Tradition was only brought to decide them but afterwards Philosophy was also call'd in to their assistance more especially the Platonick that was then most in vogue and which seem'd most conformable to the Rules of Christianity The Author of the Works ascrib'd to St. Dionysius the Areopagite who wrote in the end of the Fifth Century follow'd this Method and treated in his Books of the Divine Attributes and Hierarchy of divers Theological Questions according to the Principles of the Platonick Philosophers Some time after Boethius a Man well versed in Aristotle's Philosophy made use of his Maxims to explain the Mysteries of the Trinity and of the Incarnation which engag'd him in Debates about some very subtil and intricate Questions But St. Joannes Damascenus is the first who undertook methodically to discuss all sorts of Theological Questions and to reduce them into an entire Body In the Ninth Century Joannes Scotus Erigena apply'd Aristotle's Method and Principles to the resolution of several Questions relating to Points of Divinity but his subtil Notions having lead him into divers Errors his Doctrine and Method were rejected by the Divines of his Time The study of the most necessary and most obvious Points being neglected in the Tenth Century it is not to be admir'd that no application was made to those abstruse and difficult Questions so that Aristotle's Philosophy was not begun to be taught in the Publick Schools according to the Method of the Arabians till the beginning of the Eleventh Century neither was there any use of it made at first in Theological Matters But in process of time Men whose Heads were fill'd with those Notions insensibly introduced them into Divinity and apply'd
that they took the Fancy upon them not only of imitating the voluntary Poverty of the Apostles but also of Preaching and Teaching tho' they were Laicks and had no Mission The Clergy of Lions having reprov'd them for it they began to declaim against the Ecclesiasticks and against their Irregularities giving out with a great deal of Haughtiness That the only Reason why they oppos'd their Preachings was because they envy'd the Sanctity of their Morals and the Purity of their Doctrine The Pope enjoin'd them Silence judging that it did not belong to Laicks who had but very little Learning to Preach the Word of God but they did not hearken to the Voice of his Holiness and continu'd to Preach boldly Pope Lucius III. Excommunicated and Condemn'd them with other Hereticks His Bulls only serv'd to Exasperate them to Confirm them in their Obstinacy to put them upon shaking off entirely the Yoke of Obedience and to engage them to maintain divers Errors Their Sect spread it self in several Places which oblig'd Alphonso King of Arragon to Condemn them in the Year 1194. Bernard Arch-Bishop of Narbonne Proscrib'd them and some time after Held a Conference with them wherein they were Convicted of several Errors Notwithstanding these Condemnations some among them apply'd themselves to the Pope to obtain from the Holy See the Confirmation of their Institution but the Pope having learn'd that there was Superstition in their Conduct rejected them and in their stead Approv'd of the Order of the Franciscans who tho' they were not guilty of those Superstitious Practices yet went bare-foot and made a Vow of Voluntary Poverty The Waldenses or Vaudois in their first Rise were not guilty of any great Errors but they fell into The Errors of the Waldenses or Vaudois them by Degrees We may find out the Progress of them from the Authors who have Treated of them The Design of Valdo was not to establish a New Sect nor to maintain new Tenets but to set up a Society of Persons who should Practise according to the Letter the Advices of the Gospel and who should revive the Apostles way of Living There was nothing to be blam'd in all this if they had not made an Ostentation of Voluntary Poverty and adher'd to such Superstitious Practices such as cutting their Shoes to shew their naked Feet the wearing of particular Habits and never cutting the Hair of their Heads They afterwards assum'd to themselves the Power of Preaching tho' Laicks and without a Mission At first they only Exhorted others to imitate their way of Living but the Clergy opposing their Preaching they began to Rebel against the Prelates and to shake off the Yoke of Obedience They Declaim'd against the Manners of the Ecclesiasticks and maintain'd That their Unworthiness rendred them incapable of their Ministery that they were not oblig'd to Obey them and that Laicks may Preach without their Permission But going still farther they Taught That the Ministers whose Manners were Irregular could neither Consecrate nor Grant Absolution because they did not lead an Apostolical Life and they Usurp'd that Right to themselves even tho' they were only Laicks They likewise maintain'd That all Pastors were oblig'd to embrace a Life of Poverty by entirely renouncing all their Estates That it was not Lawful to Swear upon any Account whatever nor to put Men to Death tho' for an Offence They afterwards oppugn'd the Doctrine of the Church about the Worshipping of Saints their Relicks the Indulgencies and Ceremonies of the Church the Sacraments and Purgatory This was the State and Condition of the Sect of the Waldenses or Vaudois about the Year 1250 as we are inform'd by Rainerius Sacho who reduc'd their Errors to Three Heads The First contains the Blasphemies which they utter'd against the Church its Institutes and against the whole Body of the Clergy The Second Comprehends the Errors which they advanc'd against the Sacraments of the Church and against the Saints and the Third the Declamations which they made against the Laudable Customs approv'd by the Church A particular Account of those Errors we here give you as they are related by Rainerius In the First place they say That the Church of Rome is not the Church of Christ but a Church of Wicked Men and that it has ceas'd from being so ever since the time of St. Sylvester when the Poison of Temporalities enter'd the Church They add That they are the Church of Jesus Christ because they follow the Doctrine of Jesus Christ and the Apostles in their Words and Actions The Second Error which they Teach is That the Church is full of Vices and Sins and that they are the only Persons who live holily The Third That scarce any besides them hold the Doctrine of the Gospel The Fourth That they are the truly poor in Spirit who suffer Persecution for Righteousness sake and for the Faith The Fifth That they are the True Church of Jesus Christ. The Sixth That the Roman Church is that Harlot mention'd in the Apoclypse because of its superfluous Ornaments of which the Eastern Church is not so nice Seventhly They despise the Laws of the Church as being too many and too burdensome Their Eighth Error is That the Pope is the Author of all Errors The Ninth That the Prelates are the Scribes and the Monks are the Pharisees The Tenth That the Pope and all the Bishops are Homicides because of the Wars which they tolerate The Eleventh That they ought not to obey the Prelates but only God The Twelfth That all the Members of the Church are equal The Thirteenth That no Person ought to bow the Knee before a Priest The Fourteenth That they ought not to pay Tithes The Fifteenth That Clerks ought not to have Estates in Land The Sixteenth That neither Clerks nor Regulars ought to have Prebends The Seventeenth That the Bishops and Abbots ought not to have any Royalties The Eighteenth That one ought not to divide the Land and the People The Nineteenth That 't is ill done to Found and Endow Churches The Twentieth That nothing ought to be beqneathed to Churches by Last Wills and Testaments They likewise maintain'd That no Person ought to pay any Rent to the Church They condemn'd the Ecclesiasticks for their Idleness and pretended that they ought to work with their Hands as the Apostles did They rejected the Titles of Prelacies of Pope of Bishops c. They consider'd all the Ecclesiastical Benefices as Null and Void They had no regard to the Privileges of the Church They despis'd the Exemptions of Church-goods and Church-men They valu'd not Councile and Synods They pretended That all the Privileges of Curates were of Humane Invention and that the Rules made by the Monks are Pharisaical Traditions In the Second place They condemn'd all the Sacraments of the Church and First about Baptism they say That the preliminary Admonition is worth nothing that the Washing of Infants is oâ no avail to them That the Sureties do not
Bishop of Lucca who caused him to be carried to Avignon where he humbly confessed his Fault before the Pope and Consistory on the 25th of the same Month and acknowledged that Lewis of Bavaria was an Heretick and that it went against him to Acknowledge him for Emperor That he had suffered himself to be chosen and consecrated Anti-Pope That he had created Cardinals and made Bulls That he had approved of the Doctrine of Michael de Cesenna General of the Order of Grey-Friars consented to the Deposition of John XXII Persecuted Deposed Interdicted and Excommunicated those who were of his Party disposed of the Goods of the Church of Rome c. Promised and Swore to obey the Pope and desired Absolution The Pope granted his Desire with reservation of imposing Penance on him and caused him to be strictly Guarded in a Chamber of his Palace where he died three Years after in his Pious and Penitential Sentiments The Departure of Lewis of Bavaria was followed with new Troubles in Italy John King of The Death of John XXII Bohemia being invited thither seized upon several Cities which held Intelligence with the Pope The Romans sent to Lewis of Bavaria to pray him to return but his Affairs kept him in Germany and in the midst of these Matters Pope John XXII died at Avignon Dec. 24. 1334. in the 19th Year of his Papacy But now to return to the Affairs of the Church which happened under this Pope the Course The Contest of the Grey Friars about their Habit. of which we have interrupted to relate the Transaction of the Empire we will begin with the History of the Contest which he had with the Grey-Friars all his Papacy Some Persons of that Order had for a long time differed about the Sense and Practice of some Things or Points belonging to their Rule and particularly about the form of their Habits Some would wear an Hood and short Gown strait and of very course Stuff and called themselves Spiritual Brethren Others who called themselves The Brethren of the Community wore a loose Garb long and of finer Stuff The Popes used their Endeavour to regulate and decide these Differences among these Monks and to that end ordered them to referr the Controversie of their Habits to their Superiors and to submit to the form and manner that they prescribe Nicholas IV. and Clement V. put out some Bulls upon this Subject but the Spiritual Brethren being intent upon the Practice would not desist from it separated themselves from the Community made a Body by themselves and betook themselves into Languedoc where the Convents of Beziers Narbonne and some other Cities were made up of these Spiritual Brethren Pope John XXII to extinguish this Schism in the First Year of his Pontificate Summoned the Brethren of this Faction who sent their Deputies to Avignon of whom the Chief was Bernard Delitiosi de Mompelier The Conrest was debated before the Pope who gave Judgment in favour of the Brethren of the Community by his Bull Quorundam in which he leaves it in the Power of the Superiors to determine of what length and largeness courseness or fineness form or figure the Habits of the Grey-Friars should be as well as to their Hood as Gown and thereupon orders them to follow the Will of their General their Provincials and Guardians as also declares That they may have Granaries and Cellars and keep their Corn and Wine if their Superiors judge it convenient leaving the Ordering of them to the Guardian and grave Persons of every Convent and enjoyning all the Grey-Friars to leave their short and ill-shapen Habit and conform themselves to the Usage of the Brethren of the Community This Sentence did but enrage the Spirituals and confirm them in their Obstinacy They set themselves to Preach arrogantly that they ought not to obey any Superior who should order them who professed the Rule of St. Francis to leave their short and strait Habit to assume the Habit of the Community contrary to their Rule and consequently to the Gospel and to the Faith because their Rule made use of the Gospel That to oppose this Practice and to oblige those who wore the short Habit to leave it and to persecute them was contrary to the Truth of the Gospel and the Faith That the Pope had no Power to make such a Constitution as that called Quorundam That they ought neither to obey him nor their Superiors as to the Contents of that Constitution because it was contrary to the Counsel of JESUS CHRIST and their Rule which the Pope could not destroy The Pope gave a Commission to Friar Michael Inquisitor in Provence and Languedoc to proceed against these Stubborn Friars This Commission is dated Nov. 1317. This Inquisitor according to his Commission Prosecuted Four Grey-Friars named John Barani of Tholouse Deodate de S. Michael and William Sauton Priests and Poncius Roche a Deacon and some others who being Arrested maintained That Pope John XXII had no Power to make these Declarations which he had published in his Decretal called Quorundam concerning the Habit and manner of Living of the Grey-Friars because such Declarations were contrary to the Rule of St. Francis and derogated from the perfect Poverty that JESUS CHRIST and his Apostles had practised These Four Grey-Friars being question'd obstinately persisted in that Opinion Notwithstanding the Requests of the Inquisitor and Bishop of Marseilles insomuch that the Inquisitor having taken Advice of several Divines who declared the Doctrine of these Grey-Friars to be Heretical being assisted by the Bishop of Marseilles and several other Persons of Ecclesiastical Dignity condemned them as Hereticks degraded them from their Orders and delivered them to the Secular Power which Condemned them to be Burnt and the Sentence was executed upon them at Marseilles A Fifth who had asserted the same Doctrine as the others but declared his Repentance for it was Degraded and Condemned to be kept immured the rest of his Life and to wear two yellow Crosses the one on his Breast and the other on his Back These Punishments were not sufficient to repress the Boldness of these Monks so obstinate were they They gave themselves greater Liberty to declaim with more violence against the Pope and publickly Preached That he was the Mystical Antichrist or the fore-runner of Anti-christ That the Church of Rome was the Synagogue of Satan That they ought not to obey John XXII nor look upon him as Pope That the Grey-Friars who were Burnt were true Martyrs and that they were ready to suffer the same Punishment and some of them were such Fools as to go and offer themselves to the Stake Bernard Delitiosi who was as is abovesaid the Chief of the Deputies sent by the Grey-Friars of Languedoc to Pope John XXII was Apprehended a little after his Arrival at Avignon upon the Information of the Inquisitors of his Country who accused him for a Design to procure the Death of Pope Benedict XI Clement's
we must distinguish the two Ways of having any thing The one Civil and Worldly by which they had right to defend what they had and recover it from any that had taken it The other Civil and Natural by a Right of Common Charity That Jesus Christ and his Apostles had nothing in the first sense but in the second they had all things necessary for Life This Answer being read in the Consistory was approved by the Pope and Ubertinus de Cassalis defended it again in 1330. These two Treatises are published by Mr. Baluzius in the First Tome of his Miscellanies There are two other Books attributed to Ubertinus the one intituled The Tree of a Crucified Life printed at Venice in 1485. and the other The Seven Estates of the Church printed in the same place 1516. Michael Caesenas who was chosen General of the Grey-Friars in 1316. undertook a Defence Michael Caesenas of the Opinion of the Divines of his Order concerning the Poverty of Jesus Christ against John XXII and caused it to be determined in a General Chapter held 1322. at Paris That neither Jesus Christ nor his Apostles had any thing in Proper But maintaining the same Doctrine obstinately before the Pope at Avignon in 1327. he was Arrested and put in Prison but while he was proceeding further against him he escaped and appealed from all that John XXII had done or should do against him and published his Appeal at Perusia but notwithstanding this Appeal the Pope published a Bull against him by which he deposes him and orders a General Chapter to be called by Bertrandus de la Tour the Vicar-General of that Order which was held at Paris and in it the Deposition of Michael de Caesenas he was approved and confirmed In the Year 1331. he caused another Chapter to be held about the same Subject at Perpignan to choose another General and to reject the Common Opinion of that Order concerning the Poverty of Jesus Christ. Michael Caesenas wrote a Treatise which he addressed to this Assembly to turn them from that Resolution in which he accuses John XXII of Twelve Errors He also sent another Treatise to all the Monks of his Order to engage them to maintain his Opinion and presented a Petition to the Emperor and the Princes of the Empire against John XXII in which he delivers and confutes the Twelve Errors of which he accused that Pope These three Treatises are published in the Second Tome of Goldastus's Monarchy Michael flying to the Protection of the Emperor Lewis of Bavaria valued not the Pope's Curses but kept the Title of General of the Grey-Friars till the Day of his Death which happened at Munick in 1343. Joannes de Janduno or John of Gaunt so called from his Native Country was one of the Divines John of Gaunt or de Janduno who were of the Party of Lewis of Bavaria He Composed a Treatise of the Ecclesiastical Power Goldastus at first believed that that was the Treatise which bore this Title An Information of the Nullity of the Processes made by John XXII against the Emperor Lewis of Bavaria Composed in 1338. which he therefore Published under his Name in the First Tome of his Collection but he has since owned as he declares in his Preface that it is a different Work He also observes That Marsilius Ficinus hath published a Commentary of John of Gaunt upon the Sentences and some Quodlibetical Questions but we cannot find that Edition We have only several Philosophical Commentaries of that Author printed in several places Bernardus Guido a Native of Limoges was Born in 1260. and entred into the Order of Bernardus Guido Friars-Preachers in 1280. and after he had been Prior of the Abbies of Albi Carcassone Castres and Limoges was appointed Inquisitor against the Albigenses in 1305. and Procurator-General of his Order in 1312. Four Years after he was sent into Italy by John XXII and received as a Reward for his Labour in 1323. the Bishoprick of Tuy in Gallaecia from whence he was translated in the following Year to the Bishoprick of Lodeve He died Dec. 13. 1331. He Composed several Works of which these are in the Library of Mr. Colbert viz. A Catalogue of the Roman Popes Roman Emperors Bishops of Tholouse and Limoges and Earls of Tholouse A Chronicle or Genealogy of the Kings of France A Description of the Gauls A Book of the Names of the Apostles Another of the Names of the Disciples The Names of the Saints of the Diocess of Limoges A Book of the Foundation of the Monks of Grandmont Another of the Monks of Artigia and a third of the Foundation of the Monastery of S. Augustine of Limoges A Treatise of the Times and Years of the Councils and several Tracts of the Articles of Faith and Sacraments of the Church On the Ten Commandments Original Sin The Office of the Mass and of the Accidents that may happen in the Celebration of it A Part of his Sanctorale or the Mirrour of Saints There are Five other Treatises in the Library of the Friars-Preachers at Tholouse viz. A Treatise of the Advantages of the Blessed Two Volumes of Sermons and a Work intituled The Practice of the Office of an Inquisitor He also continued and augmented the Book of Stephen de Salagnac's History of the Establishment of the Order of Friars-Preachers The Mirrour of Popes Emperors and Kings of France to the Year 1322. dedicated to Pope John XXII which is in the Library of the Friars-Preachers at Avignon Such of these Works as have been printed are as follow Two Lives of Clement V. and two other Lives of John XXII published by Mr. Bosquet and Mr. Baluzius in his Collection of the Lives of the Popes of Avignon The Life of S. Fulchran printed by Bollandus Feb. 13. The Life of S. Glodesindis by Surius July 25. An History of the Monks of Grandmont and the Monastery of S. Austin at Limoges to the Year 1313. by F. Labbé in his Bibliothecâ The Epistle Dedicatory and Preface to his Mirrour of Saints by the same Person and the Acts of the Earls of Tholouse by Catellus Guido de Terrend de Perpiniano a Native of Rousillon a Doctor of Paris and a Carmelite was Guido de Perpiniano made General of his Order in 1318. and afterward appointed Inquisitor-General by Pope John XXII who made him Bishop of Majorca in 1321. from whence he was translated to the Bishoprick of Elne He died Aug. 21. 1342. He Composed a Summ of Heresies with the Confutation of them dedicated to Goncelin Cardinal-Bishop of Albania printed at Paris in 1528. and at Cologne in 1631. with an Harmony of the Four Evangelists There is in the French King's Library a Commentary of this Author upon Gratian's Decrees and a Treatise of the Perfection of Life in Mr. Colbert's where he treats of the Poverty of Jesus Christ and his Apostles He made this Treatise at Paris Mr. Baluzius hath published the Synodal Decrees
People Secondly the Book of the Doctrine of the Apostles contained only Two hundred Verses according to the Stichometria of Nicephorus which cannot agree with the Constitutions that are more voluminous Thirdly in the Index of Scripture made by Anastasius Nicenas ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã are mentioned as distinct Books and in some Manuscripts the Constitutions are Entituled ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Fourthly in the Epitome of S. Athanasius ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã are distinguished therefore this Work was not attributed to S. Clement Fifthly when Eusâbius Discourses of the Writings of S. Clement he takes no notice of the Apostolical Constitutions neither have the Ancients mentioned them The Arians might have objected them in Vindication of their Heresie and the Orthodox would have been obliged to make a Reply but this is not done by either Party therefore they are of a later Daâe than the Doctrine of the Apostles that was known to Eusebius and S. Athanasius These Reasons howsoever probable they may seem to be are not altogether Irreprehensible to the First it is replyed that the Constitutions were made for the use of all Christians as appears from the first Words thereof that the last Canon might perhaps be of a later Date that S. Athânasius observes only that this Book was useful for the instructing of Catechumens in the Discipline and Faith of the Church tho' it was not Canonical which may be very safely affirmed of these Constitutions In Answer to the Second it is alledged that there were two Editions of the Constitutions one more large being that which is now extant and another that was an Epitome thereof and perhaps Nicephorus makes mention of this last under the Name of The Doctrine of the Apostles Besides that there are some Manuscripts wherein there are 6000 Verses and besides the Length of every particular Verse is not known Thirdly that the Distinction of ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã and ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã is nothing to the purpose the one possibly was an Abridgment of the other neither is it certain whether The Constitutions be the Books now called ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã Fourthly the Clementinae are a Work different from the Constitutions as well as The Doctrine of the Apostles Lastly the ancient Writers have not cited every thing that occured to them the Arians have not made all the Objections that were obvious and the Orthodox have not replyed to every particular Circumstance that might be objected against them These are the Answers that are propounded to those that distinguish this Book of The Doctrine of the Apostles from The Constitutions and I shall leave it to the Determination of the Reader whether they do not cause greater Difficulties for my part I believe the formet Opinion to be more probable It is therefore extremely difficult to determine when the Constitutions ascribed to the Apostles first appeared since the Author of them is absolutely unknown neither can it be proved whether they were at first the same as they are now We can only conjecture that it is most probable that the Constitutions ascribed to the Apostles or St. Clement belong to the third or rather the fourth Century and that they have been from time to time corrected altered and augmented according to the various Customs of different Ages and Countries p That they have been from time to time Corrected c. according to the various Customs of different Ages and Countries It is on this Account that the Ethiopians have certain Constitutions different from Ours which are cited by Anastasius Nicenus Cod. 189. in the King's Library and in his Questions Q. 160. where they are much commended Those that we have at present are not in Greek Crabb gives us a Latin Epitome of them in his second Edition of the Councils Pinted Anno 1557. The first entire Version that ever appeared was made by Bovius and inserted by Surius in the Collection of Councils which he set forth in the years 1567 and 1585. Nicolinus published another Translation of the Constitutions composed by Turrianus together with the Annotations of the same Author this was Printed at Venice in 1563 and at Antwerp in 1578. Afterwards Binius caused it to be Re-printed in his first Edition of the Councils Anno Dom. 1606. but he did not think fit to allow it a place in his second Edition of the year 1608. Fronto Ducaeus a Jesuit is the first that published a Greek and Latin Edition of those Constitutions at the end of Zonaras which was annexed to the new Collection of Councils They are divided into eight Books containing a great number of Precepts relating to Christian Duties especially to those of Pastors and concerning the Ceremonies and Discipline of the Church of all which it would be too tedious to give a particular account They that are desirous to be further informed may have recourse to the Titles of the Chapters that are prefixed to these Tracts The last Work attributed to S. Clement is a Collection of divers Pieces Entituled Clementinae and there hath been a Book under this Title for some time The Author of the Epitome of the H. Scriptures attributed to S. Athanasius mentions them and after him the Chronicle of Alexandria Nicephorus Callistus in the third Book of his History chap. 18. S. John Damascen and some others q 8. John Damascen and some others S. Epiphanius seems to quote Haeres 26. n. 16. as also Anastasius Q. 20. p. 242. Maximus in Homil. 53. and 55. Cedrânus in Compând Hist. p. 170 and 171. Moreover it is cited in a Collection of the Works of the Fathers which is in the Library of the Jesuits College at Clermont and by Nicon in his Pandect Perhaps this is the second Part of the Recognitions cited by Ruffinus for it is a Continuation of the Preachings and Acts of S. Peter The Greek and Latin Collection published by Cotelerius under this Name contains divers Tracts full of Errors in Philosophy as also of the Heresie of the Ebionites and is such another Book as the Recognitions There must needs have happened some Alteration in these Clementinae as well because they do not agree with that which is cited from them by Maximus and by the Author of the Chronicle of Alexandria as because they are infected with the Errors of Eunomius besides there is a Passage cited by an Author in the Library of the College of Clermont which is not to be found there and we are informed by Nicephorus that the Clementinae are an Orthodox Work whereas this as we have already shewn abounds with Errors It contains first two Apocryphal Letters one of which is attributed to S. Peter as written to S. James wherein he adviseth him not to deliver the Book of his Preachings to the Gentiles which is followed by a Protestation of S. James The other is a Letter of S. Clement to S. James which tho' it be ancient and translated