onely over some one arme of that great Ocean not doubting but the ice being once broken and the passage through these straits opened many other will with more facilitie and felicitie also performe the like in the rest untill the whole journey through every part of these seas be at length fully accomplished 3. Among all the Councils I have for sundry reasons made choice of the fift held at Constantinople in the time of the Emperor Iustinian and Pope Vigilius for authoritie equall to the former it being as well as they approved by the consenting judgement of the Catholike Church for antiquitie venerable being held within 600. yeares after Christ even in those times while as yet the drosse had not prevailed and got the predominancie above the gold as in the second Nicene Synod and succeding ages it did for varietie of weighty and important matters more delightfull then any of the rest and which I most respected of them all most apt to make manifest the truth and true Iudgement of the ancient and Catholike Church touching those Controversies of the Popes supremacy of authority and infallibility of judgement which are of all other most ventilated in these dayes 4. The occasion of this Councill were those Tria capitula as they were called which bred exceeding much and long trouble to the whole Church to wit The person and writings of Theodorus B. of Mopsvestia long before dead the writings of Theodoret B. of Cyrus against Cyril and the Epistle of Ibas B. of Edessa unto Maris al which three Chapters were mentioned in the Councill at b Act. 8 9 10. Chalcedon 5. The Nestorians whose heresie was condemned in the third generall Councill when they could no longer under the name of Nestorius countenance their heresie very subtilly indevored to c Nestorij sequace propriam impietateÌ„ applicà re volentes sanctae Dei Ecclesiae non potentes hoc per NestoriuÌ„ facere festinaverunt eam introducere per Theodorum Mopsvestenum nec non per impiae scripta Theodoreti persceleratam Epistolam quae dicitur Jbae ad Marin Iust Ep. ad Syn. 5. Col. 1. pa. 519. b. IdeÌ„habet â—oncilium ipsum in sua sententia definitiva Col. 8. pa. 584. Lib. c. 10 revive the same by commending Theodorus B. of Mopsvestia and his writings as also the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill and the Epistle of Ibas unto Maris This after the Councill of Chalcedon they more earnestly applyed then before pretending d Theodori et Nestorij sequaâ—es conan tur dicere susceptam esse eam Epistolam Iba à 5. Chalcedonensi Conc. nomine ejus Theodorum Nestorium condemnatione liberare festinantes Iust Edict §. Tali Et iterum Epist Iust ad Synod Col. 1. pa 519 b. Et Dicebant istam impiam Epistolam quae laudat et defendit Theodorum et Nestorium et eorum impietatem susceptam esse à Synodo Chalc. Conc. 5. Col. 8 pa. 585. b. that not onely the persons of Theodoret and Ibas who both had sometimes beene very earnest for Nestorius and his heresies but that the writings also of Theodoret and the Epistle of Ibas which is full fraught with Nestorianisme and wherein Theodorus with his hereticall writings are greatly extolled were received and approved in that famous Councill And in truth the Nestorians little lesse then triumphed herein and insulted over Catholikes thinking by this meanes either to disgrace and utterly overthrow the Councill of Chalcedon if their doctrine were rejected or if that Council were imbraced together with it and under the colour and authoritie of it to renew and establish the doctrine of Nestorius which as they boasted that councill had certainly confirmed by their approving that Epistle of Ibas 6. By occasion hereof many who were weake in faith began to doubt of the credit and authority of that most holy councill and those as Leontius e Lib. de sect act 6. sheweth were called Haesitantes waverers or Doubters Many others who for other causes distasted that Councill were hereby incouraged pertinaciously to reject the same as f Illi Acephali hoc offenduntur in Syn. Chalced quod laudes suscepit Theodori Mopsvest Epistolam que Ibae quae per omnia Nestoriana esse cognoscitur lib. Brev ca. 24. Liberatus declareth Such were the Agnoites Gainites Theodosians Themistians and other like Sectaries called all by the common name of Acephali because they had no one head by whom to be directed All these though being at mortall wars one with another yet herein conspired to oppugne the faith and the holy Councill of Chalcedon taking now advantage of that which the Nestorians every where boasted and these men gladly beleeved that in it the Epistle of Ibas which maintaineth all the blasphemies of Nestorius was approved Thus the Church was by contrary enemies on every side assailed and so extremely disturbed that as the Emperor g Sacerdotes sanctarum Dei Ecclesiarum ab Oriente usque ad Occidentem dâ—visi Just Epist ad Synod pa 519. b. testifieth it was in a manner rent even from East to West yea the East h Ob tria Capitula inter se invicem tam in oriente quam in occidente sideles sucrunt scissi atque schismate separatâ— Bar. an 547. nu 29. Vniversus fere orbis occident alis ab orientali ecclesia divisus erat Bin not in 5. Conc. § Concitium was rent from the West 7. Iustinian the religious Emperor knowing i Initium et fundamentum nostri imperij fecimus conjungere divisos Sacerdotes Epist ad Synod Col. 1. how much it was available not onely for his honor and the tranquillitie of his empire but for the good of the whole Church and glory of God to appease all those broiles and knowing further that the holy Councill of Chalcedon though it received the persons of Theodoret and Ibas after that they had publickly renounced the heresie of Nestorius yet did utterly condemne both that Impious Epistle of Ibas as also the person and doctrines of Theodorus of Mopsvestia both which that Epistle defendeth together with the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill he knowing and that exactly all these particulars that he might draw all the subjects of his Empire to the unitie of that most holy faith which was decreed at Chalcedon set forth an k Extat apud Bin. tom 2. Conc. pa. 492. Imperiall Edict containing a most orthodoxall religious and holy profession or rather an ample Declaration of his nay not his but of the Catholike Faith Among many other things the Emperor in that Edict did particularly and expresly condemne Theodorus of Mopsvestia with his doctrines the writings of Theodoret against Cyril and that most impious Epistle of Ibas accursing l Si quis desendit Theodorum c. anathema sit Edict pa. 496. all these as hereticall and all those who either had heretofore or should therafter maintaine or defend them or any one of them 8. But notwithstanding all
all who are members of the present Romane Church and so continue till their death nay they not onely accurse all such but further also even all who doe not accurse such And because the decree of this fift Councill is approved by them to the least iôta it in the last place followeth that the condemning and accursing for hereticall that doctrine of the Popes infallibilitie in causes of faith and accursing for heretikes all who either by word or writing have or doe at any time hereafter defend the same and so presist till they dye nay not onely the accursing of all such but of all who doe not accurse them is warranted by Scriptures by Fathers by all generall Councils by all Popes and Bishops that have beene for more then 14. hundred yeares after Christ 30. This Vniforme consent continued in the Church untill the time of Leo the 10 and his Laterane Councill Till then neither was the Popes authoritie held for supreme nor his judiciall sentence in causes of faith held for infallible nay to hold these was judged and defined to be hereticall and the maintainers of them to be heretikes For besides that they all till that time approved this fift Councill wherein these truths were decreed the same was expresly decreed by two generall Councils the one at Constance the other at Basil not long before m Conc. Basil sinitum est an 1442. id est an 74. ante concil Later that Laterane Synod In both which it was defined that not the Popes sentence but the Iudgement of a generall Councill n Concil Basil in Decreto quinq conclus pa. 96. a. is supremum in terris the highest judgement in earth for rooting out of errors and preserving the true faith unto which judgement every one even the Pope o Cui quilibet etiamsi papalis status existat obedire tenetur Conc. Constant sess 4. et Bas sess 2. himselfe is subject and ought to obey it or if he will not is punishable p Debitè puniatur Conc. Const ses 5. Basil ses 3. by the same Consider beside many other that one testimony of the Councill of Basil and you shall see they beleeved and professed this as a Catholike truth which in all ages of the Church had beene and still ought to be embraced They having recited that Decree of the Councill at Constance for the supreme authority of a Councill to which the Pope is subject say q Sess 33. thus Licet has esse veritates fidei catholicae satis constet although it is sufficiently evident by many declarations made both at Constance here at Basil that these are truths of the Catholike faith yet for the better confirming of all Catholikes herein This holy Synod doth define as followeth The verity of the power of a generall Councill above the Pope declared in the generall Councill at Constance and in this at Basil est veritas fidei Catholicae is a veritie of the Catholike faith and after a second conclusion like to this they adjoyne a third which concernes them both He who pertinaciously gainsayeth these two verities est censendus haereticus is to be accounted an heretike Thus the Councill at Basil cleerly witnessing that till this time of the Councill the defending of the Popes authority to be supreme or his judgement to be infallible was esteemed an Heresie by the Catholike Church and the maintainers of that doctrine to be heretikes which their decrees were not as some falsly pretend rejected by the Popes of those times but ratified and confirmed and that r Per Concilia generalia quae summi Pontifices Consistorialiter declaraverunt esse legitima etiam pro eo tempore quo ejusmodi declarationes ediderunt Conc. Basil pa. 144. a. Consistorialiter judicially and cathedrally by the indubitate Popes that then were for so the Councill of Basil witnesseth who hearing that Eugenius would dissolve the Councill say s Epist Conc. Basil pa. 100. b. thus It is not likely that Eugenius will any way thinke to dissolve this sacred Council especially seeing that it is against the decrees of the Councill at Constance per praedecessorem suum et seipsum approbata which both his predecessor Pope Martine the fift and himselfe also hath approved Besides this that Eugenius confirmed the Councill at Basil there are other evident proofes His owne Bull or embossed letters wherein he saith t Literae bullatae Eugenij lectae sunt in Conc. Bas Ses 16. of this Councill purè simpliciter ac cum effectu et omni devotione prosequimur we embrace sincerely absolutely and with all affection and devotion the generall Councill at Basil The Councill often mention his adhesion v Jn sua adhaesione sess 16. his maximā adhaesionem x Decreto quinque Concl. pa. 96. b. to the Council by which Adhesion as they teach y Sess 29. pa. 96. b. Decreta corroborata sunt the Decrees of the Council at Basil made for the superiority of a Council above the Pope were cōfirmed Further yet the Orators which Pope Eug. sent to the council did not only promise but z Jurabant ejus decreta defendere c. Sess 16. corporally sweare before the whole Councill that they would defend the decrees therof particularly that which was made at Constance was now renewed at Basil Such an Harmonie there was in beleeving and professing this doctrine that the Popes judgement in causes of faith is neither supreme nor infallible that generall Councils at this time decreed it the indubitate Popes confirmed it the Popes Orators solemnly sware unto it the Vniversall a Haec veritas toties et tam solenniter per universam ecclesiam declarata est Epist Conc. Bas pa. 144. a. and Catholike Church untill then embraced it and that with such constancy and uniforme consent that as the Council of b Jn decreto quinque conclus pa. 96. Basil saith and their saying is worthy to be remembred nunquam aliquis peritorum dubitavit never any learned and skilfull man doubted therof It may be some illiterate Gnatho hath soothed the Pope in his Hildebrandicall pride vaunting c Hildebrandum sic gloriari solitum testatur Avent lib. 5. Annal. pa. 455. Se quasi deus sit errare non posse I sit in the temple of God as God I cannot erre but for any that was truly judicious or learned never any such man in all the ages of the Church untill then as the Councill witnesseth so much as doubted thereof but constantly beleeved the Popes authoritie not to be supreme and his judgement not to be infallible 31. After the Councill of Basil the same truth was still embraced in the Church though with far greater opposition then before it had witnesse hereof Nich. Cusanus a Bishop d Poss Biblic in Nic. Cusano a Cardinall a man scientijs pene omnibus excultus who lived 20 e Obijt ann 1464. Poss Conc. autem finitum
10. and his Laterane Synod are ample witnesses that this Sanction was never repealed before that Synod for they f Conc. Later ses 11 complaine that by reason of the malignitie of those times or else because they could not helpe it his predecessors tolerasse visi sunt seemed to have tolerated that pragmaticall Sanction and that for all which either they did or could doe the same Sanction retroactis temporibus viguisse et adhuc vigere had in former times and did even to that very day of their eleventh Session stand in force and full vigor Now seeing that Sanction condemneth as hereticall as did the Council also of Basil that assertion of the Popes Supremacie of authoritie and infallibilitie of judgment in defining causes of faith which the present Romane Church defendeth it is now cleerly demonstrated that the same Assertion was taught professed and beleeved to be an heresie and the obstinate defenders thereof to be heretikes by the consenting judgement of Councils Popes Bishops and the Catholike Church even from the Apostles time unto that very day of their Laterane Session which was the 19. of December in the yeare 1516. after Christ 33 On that day a day never to be forgotten by the present Romane Church it being the birth-day thereof Leo the tenth with his Laterane Councill or as the learned Divines of Paris g Leo 10. in quedam caetu nescimus qualiter tamen non in Spiritu Domini congregato App. Vniv Paris account it Conspiracie they being not assembled in Gods name abolished as much as in them lay the old and Catholike doctrine which in all ages of the Church had beene beleeved and professed untill that day and instead thereof erect a new faith yea a new foundation of the faith and with it a new Church also Hee and his Synod then reprobated h Quae de authoritate Concilij supra Pontificem constituerunt sententia CoÌ„c Lateranensis plane reprobata sunt Bin. Not. in Conc. Const § Ex parte the Decree of Constance for the superioritie of a Councill above the Pope they reprobated i Reprobarunt decre tum Concilij Basiliensis Bel. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 17. § Denique also the Councill of Basil and the same Decree renewed by them That Councill they condemne as Conciliabulum or k Conc. Lat. sess 11. Conventiculam quae nullum robur habere potuerit As a Conspiracie and Conventicle which could have no force at all They reprobated the l Ibid. Pragmaticall Sanction wherein the Decree of Constance and Basil was for ever confirmed Now that Decree being consonant to that catholike Faith which for 1500 yeares together had beene imbraced and beleeved by the whole catholike Church untill that day in reprobating it they rejected and reprobated the old and catholike Faith of the whole Church In stead hereof they decreed the Popes authoritie to be m Hujus sanctae sedis suprema authoritate Ibid. pa. 640. supreme that it is de n Ibid. necessitate salutis a thing necessary to salvation for all Christians to be subject to the Pope and that not onely as they are severally considered but even as they assembled together in a generall Councill for they define Solum o Jbid. pa. 639. Romanum Pontificem authoritatem super omnia Concilia habere The Pope alone to have authoritie above all Generall Councills This the Councill at Laterane diserte ex professo docuit taught cleerly and purposely as Bellarmine tells p Lib. 2. de Concil ca. 17. § Denique us nay they did not onely teach it but expressissimè definiunt q Lib. cod ca. 13. § Deinde they did most expresly define it And that their Definition is no other then a Decree of Faith as the same Cardinall assures us Decrees of faith saith he r Lib. â—â—d ca. 17. § Ad hunc are immutable neyther may ever be repealed after they are once set downe Tale autem est hoc de quo agimus and such is this Decree for the Popes supreme authoritie over all even Generall Councils made in their Laterane Synod And what meane they thinke you by that supreme authoritie Truly the same which Bellarmine explaineth That because his authoritie is supreme therefore his judgement s Proinde ultimum judicium summi poÌ„tificis esse lib. 4. de Rom. pontif ca. 1. § Sed nec in causes of Faith is the last and highest and because it is the last and highest therefore it is t Restat igitur ut Papa sit Index ultimus et proinde noÌ„ possit errare Lib. 4. de Pont. Rom. ca. 3. § Contra. Et DicuÌ„t Concilij sententiam esse ultimuÌ„ judicium Hinc autem apertissimè sequitur non errare Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 3. § Accedat infallible So by their Decree together with supremacie of authority they have given infallibilitie of judgement to the Pope and defined that to be a catholike truth and doctrine of Faith which the whole Church in all ages untill then taught professed and defined to be an heresie and all who maintaine it to be Heretikes and for such condemned both it and them 34 Now because this is not onely a doctrine of their faith but the very foundation on which all their other doctrines of faith doe relie by decreeing this they have quite altered not onely the faith but the whole frame and fabricke of the church erecting a new Romane church consisting of them and them onely who maintaine the Popes Infallibilitie and supremacie decreed on that memorable day in their Laterane Synod a church truly new and but of yesterday not so old as Luther a church in faith and communion severed from all former generall Councils Popes and Bishops that is from the whole catholike Church of Christ which was from the Apostles times untill that day And if their Popes continue as it is to be presumed they doe to make that profession which by the Councils of Constance and Basil they are bound to doe to hold among other this fift Councill ad unum iôta this certainly is but a verball no cordiall profession there neither is nor can be any truth therein it being impossible to beleeve both the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to be hereticall as the fift Councill defined and the Popes Cathedrall sentence in such causes to be infallible as their Laterane Councill decreed So by that profession is demonstrated that their doctrine of faith is both contradictory to it selfe such as none can possibly beleeve and withall new such as is repugnant to that faith which the whole Catholike Church of Christ embraced untill that very day of their Laterane Session 35 Yea and even then was not this holy truth abolished Foure moneths did not passe after that Laterane Decree was made but it was condemned by the whole Vniversitie of v In Appel à Leon. 10. quae facta est 21 die Mart. an 1517. Decret
whence it doth clearly ensue that as the former who were ready to embrace the truth had it beene manifested unto them erred not of pertinacy but as Austen saith of humane infirmitie so the latter who reject the truth being manifested unto them and withstand the knowne judgement of the whole catholike Church even that judgement which is testified by all those witnesses to be consonant to the Scriptures and Apostolicall doctrine can no way be excused from most wilfull and pertinacious obstinacy seeing they adhere to that opinion which themselves or their particular church hath chosen though they see and know the same to be repugnant to Scripture the consenting judgement of all generall and holy Councels that is of the whole catholike Church So the errour of the former though it was in a point of faith yet was but materially to be called heresie as being a doctrine repugnant to faith yet being not joyned in them with pertinacie which is essentially as Canus p Quod haeresis esse sine pertinacia nequeat non est difficile ostendere cōmuni omnium Theologorum sententia c. Canus lib. 12. Loc. Theol. ca. 9. § Quod. sheweth required in an heretike could neither make nor denominate them to be heretikes The errour of the latter is not onely an errour in a point of faith but is formally to bee called heresie such as being both a doctrine repugnant to faith and being in them joyned with pertinacy doth both make and truly denominate them who so erre to be heretikes and shew them to hold it heretically not onely as an errour but as a most proper heresie 9. The second difference is in the manner of their errour The former held their opinions as probable collections not as undoubted doctrines of faith and so long as those errours were so held the Church suspended q Sancta Ecclesia aliquandiu de ea re supersedit judiciumque suspendit Bar. notis in Martyr in Febr. 22. voce Papiae her judgement both concerning the doctrines and the persons And this was at least untill the time of Ierome touching the millenary opinion for he mentioning the same saith r Hier. in cap. 19. Ieremia thus Haec licet non sequantur tamen damnare non possumus quia multi Ecclesiasticorum virorum martyrum ista dixerunt These things concerning the raigne of Christ for one thousand yeares upon earth in a terrestriall but yet a golden Ierusalem although we doe not our selves follow yet wee cannot condemne them because many of the Ecclesiasticall writers and Martyrs have said the same whereby it is evident that in Ieromes s Hieronimi tempore nihil adhuc ab Ecclesia de eâ re fuit definitum Bar. notis in Martyr loc cit time nothing was defined herein by the Church for then Ierome might and would constantly have condemned that errour by the warrant of the Churches authoritie which then hee held to bee a probable and disputable matter In which regard also Austen calleth it a tolerable t Quae opinio esset utcunque tolerabilis si c. Aug lib. 20. de Civit. Dei. ca 7. opinion and such as himselfe had sometimes held if the delights of the Saints in that time be supposed to be spirituall Baronius tels u Bar. an 118. nu 2. et an 373. nu 14 us how rightly I will not now examine that when Apollinarius renewed this opinion and urged it ut dogma Catholicum no longer as a matter of probabilitie but as a Catholike doctrine of faith It was then condemned by Pope Damasus about the time of Ierome and so being condemned by the Church it was ever after that held for an heresie and the defenders of it for heretikes 10. Did Baronius and the rest of the Romane Church in like sort as those millenary Fathers commend their Popes infallibility no otherwise then as a probable a topicall or disputable matter the like favourable censure would not be denyed unto them but that they also notwithstanding that error in faith might die in the communion of the Church But when Pope Vigilius published his Apostolicall Constitution as a doctrine with such x Statuimus nulli licere quicquam contrarium his conscribere vel proferre Vig. Const in fine necessitie to be received of all that none either by word or writing might contradict the same when the chiefe Pillers of their Church urge the Popes Cathedrall definitions in causes of faith for such as wherein nullo y Bell. lib. 4. de Pōt ca. 3. et Gretz def ca. 2. lib. 1. de Pont. pa. 652. et alij casu errare potest he can by no possibilitie bee deceived or teach amisse when they urge this not onely as Apollinarius did the other ut dogma Catholicum as a doctrine of faith but as the foundation of all the doctrines of faith It was high time for the Catholike Church as soone as they espied this to creepe into the hearts of men to give some soveraigne antidote against such poyson and to prevent that deluge of heresies which they knew if this Cataract were set open would at once rush in and overwhelme the Church of God And therefore the fift generall and holy Councell to preserve for ever the faith of the Church against this heresie did not onely condemne it decreeing the Apostolicall and cathedrall sentence of Pope Vigilius to be hereticall but decreed all the defenders of it to be accursed and separated from God and Gods Church so that whosoever after this sentence and decree of the holy Synod approved by the whole Catholike Church shall defend the Popes Cathedrall judgements as infallible and dye in that opinion they are so farre from dying as Papias and Irene did in the peace of the Church that by the whole catholike Church they are declared and decreed to dye out of the peace and communion of the whole catholike Church 11. A third dissimilitude ariseth from the persons who erre The former for all their errour held z Cyprianus ita dixit quid ei videretur ut in pace unitatis esse volucrit etiam cum eis qui de hac re diversa sentirent Aug. lib. 2. de baptis ca. 1 fast the unity with the Church even with those who contradicted and cōdemned their errours and we doubt not but that was verified of very many of them which Austen a Lib. 1. de baptis ca. 18. affirmeth of Cyprian that they kept this unitie of the Church humiliter fideliter fortiter ad martyrij usque coronam kept it with humility with fidelitie with constancy even to the crowne of martyrdome By reason of which their charity they were not onely fast linked and as I may say glued to the communion of the Church both in their life and death but all their other errours as Austen b Charitate praesenti quaedam veritates venialiter non habentur Aug. ibid. saith became veniall unto them for
is his usurped authority and defend it contra omnes homines against all that should wag their tongues against it The Emperours and Kings saw how Hildebrand had used and in most indigne manner misused Henry the 4. how Alexander y Alexander Imperatori jussit ut se humi prosterneret et Imperatoris collum pede comprimens ait Scriptum est Super Aspidem et Basiliscum ambulabis Naucl. an 1177 the third had insolently trodden on the necke of Fredericke what could they nay what durst they doe but either willingly stoop and prostrate themselves or else be forced to lye downe at the Popes feet and say unto him Tread on us O thou Lion of the Tribe of Iudah and according as it is written Set thy foot super Aspidem Basiliscum Could there possibly be any freedome or order in such Synods where the onely meanes of preserving freedome and order was banished Might not the Pope in such Councels doe and decree whatsoever either himselfe his will or faction would suggest unto him Say they had neither swords nor clubs nor other like instruments of violence in those Synods they needed none of them This Papall presidency was in stead of them all It was like the club of Hercules the very shaking of it was able and did affright all that none no not Emperours durst deale against it The removing of the Imperiall presidency made such a calme in their Synods that without resistance without any need of other further violence the Pope might oversway whatsoever he desired 31. And truly it may bee easily observed by such as attentively reade the Ecclesiasticall stories that together with the standing or fall of the Empire either the ancient faith or heresies prevailed in the Church So long as the Emperour being Christian retained his dignity and Imperiall authority no heresie could long take place but was by the Synodall judgement of Oecumenicall Councels maturely suppressed the faction of no Bishop no not of the Pope being able to prevaile against that soveraigne remedy But when once z Ab an 730. ad an 800. Gregorie the second Zachary and their succeeding Popes to Leo the third had by most admirable and unexplicable fraud subtilty clipt the wings and cut the sinewes of the Easterne Empire themselves first seizing upon the greatest part of Italy by the meanes of Pipin and then erecting a new Empire in the West the Imperiall authority being thus infringed the Easterne Emperour not daring the Westerne in regard of the late curtesie received from the Pope being not willing and neither of them both being able now to match and justle with the Pope this which was the great let and impediment to the Popes faction and the discovering of the man of sinne being now removed there was no meanes to keepe out of the Church the heresies which the Pope affected then the Cataracts of heresies being set open and the depths of the earth nay of the infernall pit being burst up heresies rusht in and came with a strong hand into the Church and those hereticall doctrines which in six hundred yeares and more could never get head passing as doubtfull and private opinions among a few and falling but as a few little drops of raine grew now unto such an height and outrage that they became the publike and decreed doctrines in the Westerne Church The Pope once having found his strength in the cause of Images wherein the first triall was made thereof no fancie nor dotage was so absurd for which he could not after that command when he listed the judgement of a generall Councell Transubstantiation Proper Sacrifice the Idoll of the Masse to which not Moloch nor Baal is to be compared their Purgatorian fire their five new-found proper Sacraments condignity of workes yea Supererogation and an armie of like heresies assayled and prevailed against the truth The Imperiall authority being laid in the dust and trampled under the sole of the Popes foot no meanes was left to restraine his enormous designes or hinder him in Councels to doe and define even what he listed And as the Imperiall authority which he so long time had oppressed is in any kingdome more or lesse restored and freed from his vassalage the other heresies which arose from the ruine and decay thereof are more or lesse expurged out of that Kingdome and the ancient truth restored therein Yea and still though but by insensible degrees shall hee and his authority wast a 2 Thess 2.8 and consume till not onely all the ten b Apoc. 17.12.16 hornes of the Beast that is all the Kings whose authority he hath usurped and used as his hornes to push at Gods Saints shall hate the Whore that Romish Babylon and make her desolate and naked and burne her with fire but till himselfe also being despised and contemned of his owne lovers shall together with his adherents be utterly abolished and cast into that Lake of Gods wrath 32. You see now how unlawfull those Synods are by reason of the defect of Imperiall presidency you will perhaps demand whether by the want thereof there happened any particular disorder in them or ought contrary to freedome and synodall order whereunto I might in a word answer that there neither was nor could there bee ought at all done in any of those ten Synods with freedome and synodall order For though otherwise their proceedings had beene never so milde temperate and equall yet even for that one defect of Imperiall presidency and excluding the same whatsoever they did was disorderly and they all nothing but synods of disorder But yet for further satisfaction of that question let us omitting all the rest consider among very many some few particulars concerning their youngest and dearest baby of Trent Was that equall dealing in Paul the 3. at the beginning of his Trent assembly to conspire c Cum Conciliū jam haberi inciperet Imperator et Pontifex clanculum unâ de armis ad Protestantes domandos suscipiendis concilium inter se inierunt Gen. Exam. Trident. Conc. sess 3. nu 5 and take secret counsell with the Emperour to make warre against the Protestants and root them out of the world The Italian Franciscan in his Sermon before Ferdinand stirring up both him and others to this butchery Exere vires tuas plucke up your spirit and strength and root out that pestiferous kinde of men nefas enim est for it is unlawfull to suffer them any longer to looke upon the light neither say that you will doe it it must be done even now at this present and without any delay d Ioh. Sleid. Comment lib. 16. an 1545. Thus did he give the watchword and sound an alarme to their intended Massacre whereupon there ensued bellum e Gent. loc cit nu 6. cruentum calamitosum a bloody and cruell warre against the Protestants concerning which divers of the Princes of Germanie said in their Letters to the Emperour Wee
f Sleid. Comm. lib. 17. an 1546 shall so answer that every man may understand both that injury is done to us and that you doe undertake this warre Romani Antichristi impij Concilij Tridentini impulsu at the instigation of the Romane Antichrist and the impious Councell at Trent that the doctrine of the Gospell and the liberty of Germany may bee oppressed Was this Concilium pacis or rather Concilium sanguinis a conspiracie not onely against the faith but against the life of Catholikes Was it fit his Holinesse should play Iudas part pretend love and emendation of the faith when he entended murder and an utter extirpation of the servants of God Could there be freedome for them at Trent in the Popes dominion g Tridentum libera aut Imperij civitas non est sed membrum praecipuum Pontificiae factionis Grav oppos Trid Conc. pa. 37. when they might not be suffered to breathe or live at home in their owne free Cities and States Was not this a stratagem unknowne in the time of the Councell at Millane and Arimine to invite Catholikes to the Synod and promise liberty and free accesse but provide that they shall have no leisure not so much as come to the Councell 33. What equity or freedome could there either be or be expected in that Councell wherein the Pope who is the capitall enemy of the Catholikes took upon him to be their Iudge yea when himselfe who was reus guilty of heresie besides other crimes and who should have beene judged first of all tooke upon him to bee supreme Iudge in his owne cause Let Catiline be held for such a Iudge betwixt the Senate and himselfe it is not to bee doubted but Tully and all who stood for the liberty of their City and Country shall be proscribed and condemned as rebels and Catiline with his faction decreed to be the onely true Citizens the onely men fit to rule the Empire It was the just exception h Athanas Apol 2. §. Non arbitramur p. 216 which those 47. Catholike Bishops that stood for Athanasius tooke against the Councell at Tyre wherein hee was condemned that Eusebius and Theogius the mortall enemies of Athanasius were his Iudges in that Synod Lex autem Dei inimicum neque testem neque judicem esse vult but the law of God prohibits a mans enemy to be a witnesse much more to be his Iudge The very same exception took i Chrys Epist ad Jnnocent Papam to 1. Conc. post Epi. Inn. 27. Chrysostome against Theophilus and the Synod with him Theophilus saith he hath called us unto judgement before hee hath purged himselfe of the crimes objected against him quod contra omnes Canones Leges est which is against all lawes and Canons and againe it is not sit that Theophilus should judge us qui ipse reus est inimicus hostis who is himselfe guilty or accused of crimes and is also our enemy Thus Chrysostome A matter of such equity that both Pope Nicholas k Quia suspecti et inimici judices esse non debeant et ipsa ratio dictat et plurimis probatur exemplis Epist 8. Nich. 1. §. Igitur quia the first and l Ipsa ratio dictat quia suspecti et inimici judices esse non debeant Extr. de Appel ca. Secundo requiris Celestine the third say Ipsa ratio dictat Common reason doth teach that those who are ones enemies ought not to be their Iudges The Pope then being a professed enemie of Protestants can be no lawfull or competent Iudge of them and being himselfe reus called into question for heresies can be no lawfull Iudge in his owne cause and in those very heresies whereof he is accused And truly the answer whereby Bellarmine thought to avoid this most just exception against their Trent Councell and the rest doth much more confirme the equity thereof He confesseth that this holds m Quod dicunt non debere eundem esse Iudicē et partē dico habere locum in privatis hominibus non in principe supremo Ille enim semper est summus Iudex etiamsi cum ipso litigetur Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 21. §. Tertia in all save onely in the supreme Iudge He onely may be Iudge in his owne cause and against his enemies also all else must stand to the judgement of others The interpretation is true but in the application of this to the Pope there he faileth for hee intends the Pope to be that supreme Iudge than which there cannot be devised a more base begging of the question and most speciall controversie That he is not supreme we unavoydably prove by the words of Christ n Matth. 18.17 Hoc quod Christus dixit Dic Ecclesiae omnes homines comprehendit quod Petrus ejus successores illa authoritate comprehendātur ostendit Paulus qui in faciem restitit Cephae probat etiam hoc authoritas universalis Ecclesiae c. Responsio Synodalis Concil Basil pa. 105. a. Dic Ecclesiae by the judgement of this fift Councell which judged and condemned both the Popes Cathedrall Constitution for hereticall and Vigilius himselfe for an heretike and in saying the fift Councell it is as much as if I said by the judgement of the whole Catholike Church all the former Councels consenting in faith with this fift and all that follow it approving the judgement thereof untill their Laterane Synod The same is further proved by the sixt o Conc. 6. act 13 Epistolas Honoril omnimodo abijcimus tanquam animae noxias execramur pa. 67. a. Exclamaverunt universi Honorio haeretico Anathema Conc. 6. act 26. pa. 79. a. generall Councell which judged and condemned Pope Honorius for an Heretike by that which they call the seventh which p Detestamur Sergium Honorium c. Conc. Nic. 2. Act. 7. p. 386. b. also condemned Honorius by the next which they account the eighth wherein it is decreed that in the case q Quamvis Honorius post mortem anathemato sit affectus manifestum tamen est illum de haeresi fuisse accusatum qua sola in causa licet inferioribus de superioribus judicare Conc. 8. Act. 7. pa. 891. b of heresie the Pope may be judged and that is the very case whereof the Pope is now accused by the Councels of Constance r Potestati Ecclesiae quilibet cajuscunque dignitatis etiamsi papalis existat obedire tenetur in his quae pertinent ad fidem Conc. Constant sess 4. and Basil ſ Veritas haec quod Concilium est supra Papam est veritas fidei Catholicae Conc. Basil sess 33. in both which it is decreed to be a doctrine of the Catholike faith that the Pope hath a superiour Iudge in the case both of heresie schisme and scandalous life by the practice t Peccata eorum Paparum saepe dicta fuerunt Ecclesiae et ab Ecclesia punita
definition of a Father for saith he he is a father of the Church who feeds and nourisheth the Church with wholesome doctrine who being set over the Lords houshold gives them their measure of Corne in due season now if in stead of wholesome food and good Corne hee give them Cockle and Tares he becomes no father but a stepfather no Doctor but a seducer To instance in some particular Eusebius Caesariensis when hee seemes to favour Popery hee is highly extolled by Lindane u Lindan Panoplia lib. 1. ca. 17. Senensis x Senensis Bib. â— titulo Eusebius and Possevine y Possevinus in apparatu sacro hee is then a most famous writer of the Church most learned worthy to bee a Bishop not of one City onely but of the whole world but when the same Eusebius lookes awry upon Rome then hee is branded by Canus z Canus locorum Theol. lib. 7. ca. 3 Costerus a Coster in Apolog contra Greuinc ca. 8. and Baronius b Baron ad annum 340. Lindan panoplia lib. 1. cap. 23. for a stickler for Arrius an Arrian heretike a ringleader of the Arrian faction whose memory is accursed in the second Synod of Nice Tertullian likewise is guilded by Lindanus c and Rehing d Rehing in muris Civitatis sanctae fund 2. et 12. with the glorious titles of a very noble author the chiefe of all the Latine Fathers the great light of Africa a most ancient Writer and Doctour most learned most skilfull most acute where hee hath some passages which may bee detorted to give countenance to some Romish superstitions But elsewhere when in expresse words he oppugneth some doctrines defined now for Articles of faith in the Church of Rome he is as much besmeared with foule imputations by Azorius e Azorius moral lib. 8. cap. 16. Maldonate f Maldon in Math. cap. 16. vers 19. p. 340. and Bellarmine g Bell. de sanctorum beat lib. 1. cap. 5. p. 1938. Bell. de Sacram. Euchar. lib. 3. cap. 6. p. 698. An hereticall author an Arch-heretike an enemy to the Catholike and like to the Calvinists a maÌ„ whose authority is not much to be set by because he was no man of the Church and as Euseb Tertull. so also Origen hath had contrary testimonials from the Church of Rome when he pleaseth them hee is h Lind. Panopl el. l. 3 c. 24. et 26 a famous light of the Church of Alexandria whom S. Hier. cals another Mr of the Churches after the Apostles a i Dumus contra Whitâ—â— fol. 109. witnesse beyond all exception But when hee fits not their humour then he is a Schismatike k Canus loc The. lib. 7. c. 3. Maldon in Ioan. cap. 1. vers 3. pag. 399. a father of the Arrians and Eunomians a bold l Ribera in Malach Prophet proemium and rash man an obstinate lover of his owne errours In Councels the case is yet clearer for the Cardinall sticks not in most plaine termes to hang all them upon the Popes sleeve The m Bell. de Rom. Pont. lib. 4. ca. 3 Tota firmitas legitimorum Conciliorum est à Pontifice Romano et cap. 1. whole strength authority saith he of lawfull Councels is from the Pope their n Conciliorum iudicium tum demuÌ„ sirmum est cum accesserit Rom. Pontificis confirmatio judgment then begins to be of force after the Pope shall ratifie them And what Councels will he ratifie you may bee sure not the Councell in Trulio for that taxeth the Romane Church by name for inforcing single life upon the Clergy not the Councell at o An. Do. 681. Constantinople under Constantine Pogonate for that he accurseth Honorius the Pope for an heretike not the Councell held at Frankfort p An. Do. 794. in the time of Pope Adrian for that condemneth their Image-worship not the Synod of Pisa q An. Do. 1409. for in that Gregory and Benedict Popes were deposed not the Synod r An. Do. 1430. of Basil wherein Engenius was unpoped nor the Councell of Constance Å¿ An. Do. 1414. for in it a generall Councel is set aboue the Pope and three Popes were cashiered by their Authority I except the later Sessions of the same condemned Councell which are Gospell with them because they Anathematize the Wicliffists and Hussites But the t An. 787. second Synod of Nice shall be held for a generall Councell because it defendeth and commandeth the worship of Images though it be full of blasphemous absurdities and was called by an insolent woman domineering Irene over her husband and devoted wholly to superstition The Councell u An. Do. 1517. of Laterane though consisting of none in a manner but the Popes creatures shall in despight of the Oecumenicall Councels of Pisa Constance and Basil bee held a holy and generall Councell because it defines that the Pope is above generall Councels and for greater reason will the Pope advance the small Conventicle of Trent to the honour of a sacred Oecumenicall Councell because it is throughly for them in all points though as a learned Bishop present at that Councell truely affirmes that matters in it came to that passe through the wickednesse of those hungry x Dudithius quinque Eccles Epist ad Maximilianum secundum Caesar Bishops that hung upon the Popes sleeve and were created on the sudden by the Pope for the purpose that that Councell seemed to bee an assembly not of Bishops but of Hobgoblins not of men but of Images moved like the statues of Daedalus by the sinewes of others Lastly for their pretended title of Catholike Church it may be said of it as it was of Pompeius y Lucan de bello â—iu l. 1. Sirname in his declining age and fame Stat magni nominis umbra 't is but the shadow of a great name for by it they meane nothing but their particular Church of Rome or the Pope himselfe Thus Bellarmine glosseth upon the words of our Saviour Matth. 16. the Pope Peters successor is bid to z Bell de Concil author l. 2. c. 19. Dicere Ecclesiae id est sibi ipsi ut praesidi et Ecclesiae cui ipse praeest tell the Church that is to tell himselfe as Governour and the Church which hee governs Gretzer a Gretz desen Bell. lib. 3. de verbo Dei Ais tertiò interpretantur Ecclesiam Patam non abnuo quid tum comes off more roundly Thou wilt say they interpret the Church the Pope I grant it what then And b 2 a. 2ae disput. 1. q. 1. Greg de Valent. By the name of the Church wee understand the Head of the Church the Pope and Bozius c Boz lib. 2. de signis Eccl. ca. 21. See farther in this Treatise cap. 13. p. 174. declares this mysterie more explicitely The Pope sustaineth the person of all Bishops of all Councels
how Pope Vigilius three or foure times changed his judgment in this cause of faith Pag. 213. Cap. 16. That the Decree Pope of Vigil for Taciturnity touching the Three Chapters and the Councell wherein it is supposed to bee made and all the Consequents upon that Decree painted out by Baronius are all fictions and Poeticall Pag. 225. Cap. 17. That Vigilius neither by his Pontificall Decree nor so much as by a personall profession consented to or confirmed the fift Councell after the end thereof or after his supposed exile Pag. 240. Cap. 18. The fourth and last Exception of Baronius in defence of Vigilius pretending That the fift Councell wherein the Decree of Vigilius was condemned was neither a generall nor a lawfull Councell till Vigilius confirmed the same refuted Pag. 266. Cap. 19. The true notes to know which are Generall and lawfull which either are not Generall or being Generall are no lawfull Councels with divers examples of both kindes and that none of those which the Romanists doe reckon after the sixt are Generall lawfull Councels Pag. 291. Cap. 20. How Cardinall Baronius revileth the Emperour Iustinian and a refutation of the same Pag. 324. Cap. 21. How Baronius revileth Theodora the Empresse and a refutation of the same Pag. 355. Cap. 22. How Baronius declameth against the Cause it selfe of the Three Chapter and a refutation of the same Pag. 361. Cap. 23. How Baronius revileth both the Imperiall Edict of Iustinian and Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea and a refutation of the same Pag. 363. Cap. 24. How Baronius carpeth at the Synodall Acts of the fift Councell as corrupted and a refutation in generall of the same Pag. 377. Cap. 25. The 1. Alteration of the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius For that the Text of the Councell at Chalcedon is changed therein refuted Pag. 381. Cap. 26. The 2. Alteration of the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius For that Ibas is said therein to have denyed the Epistle writen to Maris to be his refuted Pag. 386. Cap. 27. The 3. Alteration of the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius For that the Councell of Chalcedon is said therein to condemne the Epistle of Ibas refuted Pag. 389. Cap. 28. The Three first Defects in the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius For that the Acts against the Origenists The Edict of Iustinian And his Epistle touching that cause are wanting therein refuted Pag. 391. Cap. 29. The 4. Defect in the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius For that the Emperours Epistle to the fift Councell is wanting therein refuted Pag. 398. Cap. 30. The 5. Defect in the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius For that the Costitution of Pope Vigilius concerning the Three Chapters is wanting therein refuted Pag. 399. Cap. 31. The 6. Defect in the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius For that the Decree which advanced Ierusalem to a Patriarchall dignity is wanting therein refuted Pag. 403. Cap. 32. The two first Additions to the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius For that the Epistle of Mennas to Vigilius And the two lawes of Theodosius are falsly inserted therein refuted Pag. 408. Cap. 33. The 3. Addition to the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius For that the Epistle of Theodoret written to Nestorius after the Vnion is falsly inserted therein refuted Pag. 413. Cap. 34. The 4. Addition to the Synodall Acts pretended by Baronius For that the Epistle of Theodoret to Iohn Bishop of Antioch is falsly inserted therein refuted Pag. 422. Cap. 35. That Baronius himselfe followeth many forged writings in handling this cause of the fift Councell as particularly the Excommunication ascribed to Vigilius and the Confession ascribed to Mennas Theodorus and others Pag. 440. Cap. 36. That Baronius reproveth Pope Vigilius for his comming to Constantinople and a refutation thereof with a Description of the life of the same Vigilius Pag. 462. A TREATISE OF THE FIFT GENERALL COVNCILL held at Constantinople under Justinian in the time of Pope Vigilius Wherein the exceeding fraud and falshoods of Cardinall Baronius are clearely discovered CAP. I. That the Emperour IVSTINIAN assembled the Fift Generall Councill to define a doubt of Faith about The three Chapters CONCILIA generalia mea sunt primum ultimum media saith their Romane a Camp Raâ— 4. Thraso Generall Councils are all ours the first the last the middle All 's mine as said the Devill to the Collier A vaunt too vaine too Thrasonicall Divide the Councils aright and let each have his own due part and portion and then all the five first and so much as they account the sixt that is all which were held for 600. yeares and more All the golden Councils and of the golden ages of the Church are ours onely and not theirs in many and even in the maine points of Religion repugnant to them and their doctrines but in every Decree Canon and Constitution of faith so consonant to us that we not onely embrace but earnestly defend them all as the rightfull and proper inheritance left unto us by those holy Fathers of the ancient and Catholike Church The middle ranke beginning at the second Nicene unto the Councill of Florence which were held in those ages of the mingled and confused Church none of them are either wholly ours or wholly theirs those miscellane Councils are neither thine nor mine but they must all be divided The two last the one at Laterane the other at Trent which are the very lees and dreggs of Councills held onely by such as were the drosse of the Church quite severed from the gold wee willingly yeeld unto them they and they onely are wholly theirs let them have let them enjoy their Helenaes we envy not such refuse Councils unto them 2. When first I set my selfe to the handling of this argument concerning the Councils it was my purpose besides those other generall questions concerning the right of calling generall Councils the right of Presidencie in them and the right of confirming them to have made manifest those three severall points touching those three rankes of Councils every one of which is not onely true but even demonstrable in it selfe And though with a delightfull kind of toile I have made no small progresse therein yet alas how unequall am I to such an Herculean labour whose time whose strength of body or industry of minde is able to accomplish a worke of such amplitude and of so vast extent for which not Nestors age would suffice Wherefore turning my sailes from this so long and tedious a voyage which I could not so much as hope to end which beside many dangerous rockes hidden Syrtes and sands is every where beset by many Romane enemies specially by Baronius the Archpirate of this and former ages with whom at every turne almost one shall be sure to have an hot encounter I thought a shorter course far more fit for my small and unfurnisht barke and despairing of more or longer voyages I shall be glad if God will enable me to make but a cut
at Chalcedon The other that by this Epistle they judged Ibas to be a Catholike to which purpose Vigilius writeth thus Iuvenalis would never have said that Ibas was a Catholike nisi ex verbis epistolae ejus confessionem fidei orthodoxam comprobaret Vnles by the words of his Epistle he had proved his faith to be orthodoxall which words evidently shew that Vigilius thought in like sort all the Bishops at Chalcedon to have judged the same by the words of that Epistle for it is certaine that they all embraced Ibas himselfe for a Catholike 13. Hereupon now ensueth the Definitive sentence of Vigilius touching this Chapter in this manner m Ibid. nu 196. We following the judgement of the holy Fathers in all things seeing it is a most cleare and shining truth ex verbis Epistolae venerabilis Ibae by the words of the Epistle of the reverend B. Ibas being taken in their most right and godly sense and by the acts of Photius and Eustathius and by the meaning of Ibas being present that the Fathers at Chalcedon did most justly pronounce the faith of this most reverend Bishop Ibas to be orthodoxall we decree by the authoritie of this our present sentence that the Iudgement of the Fathers at Chalcedon ought to remaine inviolable both in all other things and in this Epistle of Ibas so often mentioned Thus Vigilius decreeing both that this Epistle of Ibas is Catholike that by it by the words thereof Ibas ought to be judged a Catholike both which he decreeth upon this ground that the Councill of Chalcedon as he supposeth had judged the same 14. In the end to ratifie and confirme all that concernes any of these Three Chapters in the Popes Decree he addeth this very remarkable conclusion n Ibid. nu 208. His igitur à nobis cum omni undique cautela atque diligentia dispositis These things being now with all diligence care and circumspection disposed Statuimus et decernimus we ordaine and decree that it shall be lawfull for none pertaining to Orders and ecclesiasticall dignities either to write or speake or teach any thing touching these three Chapters contrary to these things which by this our present Constitution we have taught and decreed aut aliquam post praesentem definitionem movere ulterius quaestionē neither shall it be lawfull for any after this our present definition to move any question touching these Three Chapters But if any thing concerning these Chapters be either done said or written or shall hereafter be done said or written contrary to that which we have here taught and decreed hoc modis omnibus ex authoritate sedis Apostolicae refutamus we by all meanes do reject it by the Authority of the Apostolike See whereof by Gods grace we have now the government So Vigilius 15. Thinke ye not now that any Papist considering this so advised elaborate and Apostolicall decree of Pope Vigilius will be of opinion that there was now a finall end of this matter and that all doubt concerning these Three Chapters was for ever now removed seeing the supreme Iudge had published for a direction to the whole Church his definitive Apostolicall and infallible sentence in this cause what needeth the Councill either to judge or so much as debate this matter after this Decree To define the same was needlesse more then to light a candle when the Sunne shineth in his strength To define the contrary were Hereticall yea after such an authenticall decision and determination to be doubtfull o Dubius in fide infidelis est lib. 5. Dec. tit 7. de haereticis onely what to beleeve hath the censure of an Infidell But thrice happy was it for the Church of God that this doctrine of the Popes supreme authoritie and infallible Iudgement was not then either knowne or beleeved Had it beene the Nestorians and their heresie had for ever prevailed the Catholike faith had beene utterly extinguished and that without all hope or possibility ever after this to have beene revived seeing Vigilius by his Apostolicall authoritie had stopt all mens mouthes from speaking tyed their hands from writing yea and their very hearts from beleeving or thinking ought contrary to his Constitution made in defence of the Three Chapters wherein he hath confirmed all the Blasphemies of Nestorius and that by a Decree more irrevocable then those of the Medes and Persians Had the holy Council at that time assembled beleeved or knowne that doctrine of the Popes supremacie and infallible Iudgement they would not have proceeded one inch further in that businesse but shaking hands with Heretickes they and the whole Church with them had beene led in triumph by the Nestorians at that time under the conduct of Pope Vigilius 16. And by this you may conjecture that Binius had great reason to conceale the later part of the Popes decree for he might well thinke as any papist will that it were a foule incongruitie to set downe three intire Sessions of an holy and generall Council not onely debating this controversie of faith about the Three Chapters but directly also contradicting the Popes definitive sentence in them all notwithstanding they knew the Pope by his Apostolicall authoritie to have delivered his Iudgement and by the same authoritie to have forbidden all men either to write or speak or to move any doubt to the contrary of that which he had now decreed But let us see by a view of the particulars and of their following Sessions how this Cathedrall sentence of the Pope was entertained by the holy generall Councill CAP. 4. That the holy generall Councill in their Synodall Iudgement contradicted the Popes Apostolicall Constitution and definitive sentence in that cause of faith made knowne unto them 1. IN the sixt which was the very next Sessions after they had knowne the Popes will and pleasure contrary to the Apostolicall authoritie and command of Vigilius the Holy Synod began to examine the Epistle of Ibas for the causes of Theodorus and of Theodoret were sufficiently discussed in their former Collations And first of all alledging a saying of the Emperour to which themselves doe assent they thus say which being well observed gives light to the whole cause and openeth both the error of Vigilius and the ground thereof Because a Col. 6. pa. 561. a. the most holy Emperor added among those things which he writ unto us that some indevouring to defend the Epistle of Ibas presume to say that it was approved by the holy Councill of Chalcedon using the words of one or two most religious Bishops who were in that Councill as spoken for that Epistle cum alij omne◠whereas all the rest were of another minde we thinke it needfull this question being proposed to recite the Epistle of Ibas Thus said the Synod even at the first calling the Popes judgement Presumption and checking him both for pretending the Councill of Chalcedon and for alledging the Interlocutions of one or two
such a milde and mercifull disposition that though they dislike and condemne those assertions of the Popes supremacy of authoritie and infallibility of judgement yet are they so charitably affected to the Defenders of those assertions that they dare not themselves nor can indure that others should call them heretickes or accursed Durus est hic sermo this is too harsh and hard See here the fervour and zeale of this holy Councill They first say Cursed be the defenders of this Epistle or any part thereof As much in effect as if they had said Cursed be Vigilius Baronius Bellarmine and all who defend the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is all that are members of the present Church of Rome Cursed be they all And not contenting themselves herewith they adde Cursed be he who doth not accurse the defenders of that Epistle or of any part thereof As much in effect as if they had said Cursed be every one who doth not accurse Vigilius Baronius Bellarmine and all that defend the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is all that are members of the present Romane Church Cursed be he who doth not accurse them all The holy Council no doubt had an eye k Nos timenâ—es maledictionem quae imminet his qui negligenter opera Domini faciunt Col. 8. pa. 584. a. to the words of the Prophet Ieremy l Ier. 48.10 Cursed be he that doth the worke of the Lord negligently Cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood To spare when God commands and whom he commands to curse or kill is neither pitty nor piety but meere rebellion against the Lord and pulls downe that judgement which God himselfe threatned m 1 King 20.42 to Ahab Because thou hast let goe out of thine hand a man whom I appointed to dye thy life shall goe for his life 23. What then is there no meanes no hope of such that they may be saved God forbid Far be it from my heart once to thinke or my tongue to utter so hard a sentence There is a meanes and that after the Scripture the Councill expresly and often sets downe even were they denounce all those Anathemaes for thus they say n Col. 8. saept They who defend Theodorus the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill the impious Epistle of Ibas or the defenders of them et in his vsque ad mortem permanent and continue in this defence untill they dye let such be accursed Renounce the defence of these Chapters and of the Defenders of them that is forsake and renounce that position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in defining causes of faith renounce the defence of all that defend it that is of the whole present Romane Church Come o Apoc. 18.2.3.4 out of Babylon the habitation of devils the hold of all vncleane spirits which hath made all nations drunke with the wine of her fornication which themselves p Iohannes in Apocalypsi passim Roma vocal Babylonem Bell lib. 2. de poâ—t Rom. cap. 2. § Praterea Babylon quae casura â—radicitur Roma quidem est Râ—ber in cae 14. in Apoc. pa. 377. Et. Roma qualis in fine saeculi futura est ib. pa. 378. Iohannes loquitur de Roma qualo sub fineÌ„ mundi futura est Gretz Def. ca. 13. lib. 3. de Rom. pont pa. 927. Babylon quam esse Romam ait lib 7. pa. 228. sedes et civitas antichristi est Sand. lib. 8. de visib Monar ca. 48. cannot but acknowledge to be meant of Rome This doe and then Come q Isa 55.7 unto the Lord and he will have mercy and to our God for he is very ready to forgive All your former impieties heresies and blasphemies shall not be mentioned unto you but in the righteousnes and Catholike truths which ye then embrace you shall live If this they will not doe we accuse them not we accurse them not they have one who doth both accuse and accurse them even this holy general Council whose just Anathemaes shal as firmely binde them before God in heaven as they were truly denounced by the Synod here on earth for he hath sealed theirs and all like censures with his owne signet who r Matth. 18.18 said Whatsoever ye binde upon earth shall be bound in heaven 24. After all these just Anathemaes denounced as well in generall as in particular by the Councill against the defenders of these Three Chapters or any one of them the holy Synod sets downe in the last place one other point as memorable as any of the former And that is by what authority they decreed all these things of which they thus say s Col. 8. pa. 588. a. we have rightly confessed these things quae tradita sunt nobis tam à divinis scripturis which are delivered unto us both in the divine scriptures and in the doctrines of the holy Fathers and in the definitions of faith made by the foure former Councils So the holy Councill Whence it doth evidently ensue that to teach and affirme that the Pope in his judiciall and cathedrall sentence of faith may erre and define heresie and that Vigilius in his constitution de facto did so is a truth consonant to Scriptures fathers and the foure first general Councils But on the other side to maintaine or affirme as do all who are members of the present Romane Church that the Popes cathedrall sentence in causes of faith is infallible is an hereticall position repugnant to Scriptures Fathers and the 4. first Councils and condemned by them all So at once the Holy Councill judicially defineth both our faith to be truly ancient Apostolical the selfe same which the Holy Fathers generall Councills and the Catholike Church professed for 600 yeares and the doctrine of the present Romane Church even that fundamentall position on which all the rest doe relye to be not onely new but hereticall such as none can maintaine but even thereby he oppugneth and contradicteth both the Scriptures Fathers the foure first general Councils and the Catholike Church for 600 yeares after Christ 25. Further yet because one part of their sentence is the accursing of all who defend the Three Chapters either expresly as did Vigilius or implicitè and by consequent as do all who maintaine the Popes judgement in causes of faith to be infallible that is al who are members of the present Romane Church and so die it cleerely ensueth from that last clause of the Councill that to condemne and accusse as heretikes all these yea all which doe not accurse these is by the judgement of this whole generall Council warranted by Scriptures by Fathers by the foure first generall Councils and by the Caholike Church for 600 yeares after Christ The judgement of this fifth Council being consonant to them all and warranted by them all 26. Neither is their Decree consonant onely to precedent Fathers and Councils but approved and
confirmed by succeeding generall Councils by Popes and other Bishops in the following ages of the Church By the sixt Councill which professeth t Act. 15. pa. 80. a. of it selfe that in omnibus consonuit it in all points agreeth with the fifth By the second Nicene which they account for the seaventh which reckneth v Act. 6. pa. 357. a this fift for one of the golden Councils which are glorious by the words of the holy Spirit and which all being inlightned by the same spirit decreed those things which are profitable professing that themselves did condemne all whom those Councils and among them whom this fift did condemne By other following Councils in every one of which the 2 Nicene and by consequent this fift Councill is approved as by the acts is cleare and Baronius confesseth x An. 553. nu 229. that this fift in alijs Oecumenicis Synodis postea celebratis cognita est atque probata was acknowledged and approved by the other generall Councils which were held after it 27. It was likewise approved by succeeding Popes and Bishops By Pelagius the second who writ an whole Epistle y Epist 7. Pelag. 2. to perswade the Bishops of Istria to condemne the Three Chapters telling z Pa. 687. them that though Pope Vigilius resisted the condemnation of them yet others his predecessours which followed Vigilius did consent thereunto By Gregory who professing a Lib. 1. Epist 24. to embrace reverence the 4 first Councils as the 4 Euangelists addeth of this fift Quintū quoque cōcilium pariter veneror I do in like manner reverence the fift Councill wherin the impious Epistle of Ibas is rejected the writings of Theodoret with Theodorus his writings And then of them all he saith Cunctas personas whatsoever persons the foresaid five venerable Councils doe condemne those also doe I condemne whom they reverence I embrace because seeing they are decreed by an universall consent whosoever presumeth to loose whom they bind or bind whom they loose se et non illa destruit he destroyeth himselfe but not those Councils and whosoever thinketh otherwise let him be accursed Thus Pope Gregory the great ratifying all the former anathemaes of the Councill and accursing all that labour to unty those bands By Agatho b In Cont. 6. Act. 4. pa. 16. a. by Leo c Epist ad Constan Imp. the second who both call this an holy Synod and not to stay in particulars All d Bar. an 869. nu 58 59. their Popes after the the time of Gregorie were accustomed at their election to make profession of this fift as of the former Councils and that in such solemne and exact manner after the time of Hadrian the second that they professed as their forme it selfe set downe by Anton. Augustinus e In manuscripto codice ex quo eum citat Bar. loco citate doth witnesse to embrace the eight generall Councils whereof this was one to hold them pari honore et veneratione in equal honor and esteeme to keepe them intirely usque ad unum apicem to the least iôta to follow and teach whatsoever they decreed and whatsoever they condemned to condemne both with their mouth and heart A like forme of profession is set downe in the Councill at Constance f Ses 39. pa. 1644. where the Councill having first decreed g Ses 4. pa. 1560. the power and authoritie of the Pope to be inferiour and subject to the Councill and that he ought to be obedient to them both in matters of faith and orders of reformation by this their superior authoritie ordaineth That every Pope at the time of his election shall professe that corde et ore both in words and in his heart hee doth embrace and firmely beleeve the doctrines delivered by the holy Fathers and by the eleven generall Councils this fift being reckned for one and that he will keepe defend and teach the same faith with them usque ad unum apicem even to the least syllable To goe no further Baronius confesseth h An. 553. nu 229. that not onely Gregory and his predecessors unto Vigilius sed successores omnes but all the successors of Gregory are knowne to have received and confirmed this fift Councill 28. Neither onely did the Popes approve it but all orthodoxal Bishops in the world it being a custome as Baronius sheweth i An. 869. nu 58. that they did professe to embrace the seven generall Councills which forme of faith Orthodoxi omnes ex more profiteri deberent all orthodoxall Bishops by custome were bound to professe And this as it seemeth they did in those Literae Formatae or Communicatoriae or Pacificae so they were called k Cum quo totus orbis commercio formatarum concordat Opt. lib. 2. p. 40. Quaerebam utrum epistolas communicatorias quas Formatas dicimus possent quo vellent dare Aug. Epist 163. Sub probatione Epistolij sine Pacificis quae dicuntur Ecclesiastica Conc. Chalc. can 11. which from ancient time they used to give and receive For by that forme of letters they testified their communion in faith and peaceable agreemēt with the whole Catholike Church Such an Vniforme consent there was in approving this fift Council in all succeeding Councills Popes and Bishops almost to these dayes 29. From whence it evidently and unavoidably ensueth that as this fift Synod so all succeeding Councils Popes and Bishops to the time of the Councill of Constance l Celebratum est an 1414. that is for more then fourteene hundred yeares together after Christ doe all with this fift Councill condemne and accurse as hereticall the judiciall and definitive sentence of Pope Vigilius delivered by his Apostolical authority for instruction of the whole Church in this cause of faith therfore they al with an uniforme consent did in heart beleeve and in words professe and teach that the Popes Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith may be and de facto hath been hereticall that is they all did beleeve and teach that doctrine which the reformed Churches maintaine to be truly ancient orthodoxall and catholike such as the whole Church of Christ for more then 14 hundred yeares beleeved and taught but the doctrine even the Fundamentall position whereon all their doctrines doe relie and which is vertually included in them all which the present Church of Rome maintaineth to be new hereticall and accursed such as the whole Church for so many hundred yeares together with one consent beleeved and taught to be accursed and hereticall It hence further ensueth that as this fift Councill did so all the fore-mentioned generall Councils Popes and Bishops doe with it condemne and accurse for heretikes not onely Vigilius but all who either have or doe hereafter defend him and his Constitution even all who either by word or writing have or shall maintaine that the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith is infallible that is
Later fact 19 Decemb. 1517. Paris as being contra fidem Catholicam against the catholike Faith and the authority of holy Councils And even to these dayes the French Church doth not onely distaste that x A Relation of Religion in the West parts published an 1605. pa. 129. Laterane Decree and hold a Generall Councill to be superiour to the Pope but their Councill also of y Gentil Exam. CoÌ„c Trid. Sess 13. Car. Mol. dec Conc. Trid. decret pa. 3. Trent wherein that Laterane Decree is confirmed is by them rejected And what speake I of them Behold while Leo with his Laterane Councill strives to quench this catholike truth it bursts out with farre more glorious and resplendent beauty This stone which was rejected by those builders of Babylon was laid againe in the foundations of Sion by those EZra's Nehemiah's Zorobabel's and holy Servants of the Lord who at the voyce of the Angell came out of Babylon and repaired the ruines of Ierusalem And even as certaine rivers are said to runne z Alpheum fama est huc Elidis amnem Occultas egisse vias subter mare Virg lib. 3. Aeâ—eid under or through the salt Sea and yet to receive no salt or bitter taste from it but at length to burst out send forth their owne sweet and delightfull waters Right so it fell out with this and some other doctrines of Faith This Catholike truth that the Popes judgement and Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith is not infallible borne in the first age of the Church and springing from the Scriptures and Apostles as from the holy mountaines of God for the space of 600 yeares and more passed with a most faire and spatious current like Tygris Euphrates watering on each side the Garden of the Lord or like Pactolus with golden streames inriching and beautifying the Church of God after that time it fell into the corrupted waters of succeeding ages brackish I confesse before their second Nycene Synod but after it and the next unto it extremely salt and unpleasant more bitter then the waters of Mara And although the nearer it came to the streets of Babylon it was still more mingled with the slime or mud of their Babylonish ditches yet for all that dangerous and long mixture continuing about the space of a Tot anni intersunt à Conc. Nic. 2. quod habituus est an 787. ad annum quo Lutherus se primum opposuit IndulgeÌ„tijs papalibus pontifici qui fuit an 1517 Cocl in vita Luther 730. yeares this truth all that time kept her native and primitive sweetnesse by the constant and successive professions of the whole Church throughout all those ages Now after that long passage through all those salt waves like Alpheus or Arethusa it bursts out againe not as they did in Sicily nor neare the Italian shores but as the Cardinall tells b Brevi occupavit Lutheri haeresis multa regna Bel. l. 3. de pontif ca. 23. § Similitudo Et Romanasedes amisit nostris temporibus magnam Germaniae partem Suetiam Gethians Norvegiam Daniam universam bonam Anglia Gallia Helvetia Polonia Bohemia ac Pannonia partem lib. eod ca. 21. § Ac postea us in Germanie in England in Scotland in France in Helvetia in Polonia in Bohemia in Pannonia in Sueveland in Denmarke in Norway in all the Reformed Churches and being by the power and goodnesse of God purified from all that mud and corruption wherewith it was mingled all which is now left in it owne proper that is in the Romane channels it is now preserved in the faire current of those Orthodoxall Churches wherein both it and other holy doctrines of Faith are with no lesse sinceritie professed theÌ„ they were in those ancient times before they were mingled with any bitter or brackish waters 36 You see now the whole judgement of the Fift Generall Councill how in every point it contradicteth the Apostolicall Constitution of Pope Vigilius condemning and accursing both it for hereticall and all who defend it for heretikes which their sentence you see is consonant to the Scriptures and the whole Catholike Church of all ages excepting none but such as adhere to their new Laterane decree and faith An example so ancient so authenticall and so pregnant to demonstrate the truth which wee teach and they oppugne that it may justly cause any Papist in the world to stagger and stand in doubt even of the maine ground and foundation whereon all his faith relyeth For the full clearing of which matter being of so great importance and consequence I have thought it needful to rip up every veine and sinew in this whole cause concerning these Three Chapters and the Constitution of Vigilius in defence of the same and withall examine the weight of every doubt evasion excuse which eyther Cardinall Baronius who is instar omnium or Binius or any other moveth or pretendeth herein not willingly nor with my knowledge omitting any one reason or circumstance which either they urge or which may seeme to advantage or help them to decline the inevitable force of our former Demonstration CAP. V. The first Exception of Baronius pretending that the cause of the Three Chapters was no cause of faith refuted 1 THere is not as I thinke any one cause which Card. Baronius in all the Volumes of his Annalls hath with more art or industry handled then this concerning Pope Vigilius and the Fift Generall Councill In this hee hath strained all his wits moved and removed every stone under which hee imagined any help might be found eyther wholly to excuse or any way lessen the errour of Vigilius All the Cardinalls forces may be ranked into foure severall troupes In the first do march all his Shifts and Evasions which are drawne from the Matter of the Three Chapters In the second those which are drawne from the Popes Constitution In the third those which respect a subsequent Act of Vigilius In the fourth last those which concerne the fift General Councill After all these wherin coÌ„sisteth the whole pith of the Cause the Cardinall brings forth another band of certaine subsidiary but most disorderly souldiers nay not souldiers they never tooke the Military oath nor may they by the Law of armes nor ever were by any worthy Generall admitted into any lawfull fight or so much as to set footing in the field meere theeves and robbers they are whom the Cardinall hath set in an ambush not to fight in the cause but onely like so many Shimei's that they might raile at and revile whomsoever the Cardinall takes a spleene at or with whatsoever hee shall be moved in the heat of his choler At the Emperour Iustinian at Theodora the Empresse at the cause it selfe of the Three Chapters at the Imperiall Edict at Theodorus Bishop of Cesarea at the Synodal acts yea at Pope Vigilius himselfe we wil first encounter the just forces of the Cardinall which onely are his lawfull
condemnationem and the condemning of Heretikes So by the second marke of Bellarmine it is undoubted that the Councels Decree herein is a Decree of faith 12. The third note is more than demonstrative For the Holy Councell denounceth not once or twice but more I thinke than an hundred times an Anathema to them that teach contrary to their sentence Anathema f Coll. 4. pa. 537. a. Coll. 8. pa. 586. et 587. to Theodorus anathema to him that doth not anathematize Theodorus we all anathematize Theodorus and his writings Anathema g Coll. 8. pa. 587. b. to the impious writing of Theodoret against Cyril Anathema to all that doe not anathematize them we h Coll. 6. pa. 576. b. all anathematize the impious Epistle of Ibas If i Coll. 8. pa. 587. b. any defend this Epistle or any part of it if any doe not anathematize it and the defenders of it let him be an Anathema 13. So by all the notes of Cardinall Bellarmine it is evident not onely that this question about the Three Chapters is a question of faith but which is more that the holy generall Councell proposed their Decree herein tanquam de fide as a Decree of faith Now because every Christian is bound to beleeve certitudine fidei cui falsum subesse non potest with certainty of faith which cannot be deceived every doctrine and position of faith then especially when it is published and declared by a Decree of the Church to bee a doctrine of faith Seeing by this Decree of faith which the Councell now made not onely the Popes Apostolicall sentence in a cause of faith is condemned to bee hereticall but all they also who defend it to be Heretikes and accursed and seeing all defend it who maintaine the Popes cathedrall sentence to be infallible that is all who are members of the present Church of Rome it hence inevitably ensueth that every Christian is bound to beleeve certitudine fidei cui falsum subesse non potest not onely the doctrine even the fundamentall doctrine of the present Church of Rome to be hereticall but all that maintaine it that is all that are members of that Church to be heretikes and accursed unlesse disclaiming that heresie they forsake all communion with that Church Baronius perceiving all those Anathemaes to fall inevitably upon himselfe and their whole Church if this cause of the Three Chapters which Vigilius defended and defined by his Apostolicall Constitution that they must be defended if this I say were admitted to be a cause of faith that hee might shuffle off those Anathemaes which like the leprosie of Gehazi doth cleave unto them thought it the safest as indeed it was the shortest way to deny this to be a cause of faith which not onely by all the precedent witnesses but by the judgement of their owne Cardinall and all the three notes set downe by him is undeniably proved to bee a cause of faith and that the Decree of the Holy Councell concerning it is proposed as a Decree of faith 14. I might further adde their owne Nicholas Sanders who though he saw not much in matters of faith yet he both saw and professed this truth and therefore in plaine termes calleth k Ob easdem haeresâ—s decrevit eos esse alienos à diaconorii honore Lib. 7. de visib Monarch an 537. the defending of the Three Chapters an heresie Now heresie it could not be unlesse it were a cause of faith seeing every heresie is a deviation from the faith But omitting him and some others of his ranke I will now in the last place adde one other witnesse which with the favourites of Baronius is of more weight and worth than all the former and that is Baronius himselfe who as he doth often deny so doth he often and plainly professe this to be a cause of faith Speaking of the Emperours Edict concerning these Three Chapters he bitterly reproveth yea he reproacheth the Emperour for that he would l An. 546. nu 41. arrogate to himselfe edere sanctiones de fide Catholica to make Edicts about the Catholike faith Again the whole Catholike faith saith he would m An. eodeÌ„ nu 43. be in jeopardy if such as Iustinian de fide leges sanciret should make lawes concerning the faith Againe n Ibid. nu 50. Pelagius the Popes Legate sounded an alarum contra ejusdem Imperatoris de fide sancituÌ„ EdictuÌ„ against the Emperors Edict published concerning the faith And yet againe o An. 547. nu 50. Pope Vigilius writ letters against those qui edito ab Imperatore fidei decreto subscripsissent who had subscribed to the Emperours Edict of faith So often so expresly doth Baronius professe this to be a cause of faith which himselfe like the Aesopicall Satyr had so often and so expresly denied to be a cause of faith and that also so confidently that he shamed not to say Consentitur ab omnibus all men agree herein that this is no cause of faith whereas Baronius himselfe dissenteth herein confessing in plaine termes this to be a cause of the Catholike faith 15. The truth is the Cardinals judgement was unsetled and himselfe in a manner infatuated in handling this whole cause touching Vigilius and the fift generall Councell For having once resolved to deny this one truth that Vigilius by his Apostolicall sentence maintained and defined heresie and decreed that all other should maintaine it which one truth like a Thesean threed would easily and certainly have directed him in all the rest of his Treatise now he wandreth up and down as in a Labyrinth toiling himselfe in uncertainties and contradictions saying and gainsaying whatsoever either the present occasioÌ„ which he hath in hand or the partialitie of his corrupted judgement like a violent tempest doth drive him unto when the Emperour or his Edict to both which he beares an implacable hatred comes in his way then this question about the Three Chapters must bee a cause of faith for so the Cardinall may have a spacious field to declame against the Emperour for presuming to intermeddle and make lawes in a cause of faith But when Pope Vigilius or his Constitution with which the Cardinall is most partially blinded meet him then the ease is quite altered the question about the Three Chapters must then bee no more a question or cause of faith for that is an easie way to excuse Vigilius and the infallibilitie of his Chaire he erred onely in some personall matters in such the Pope may erre he erred not in any doctrinall point nor in a cause of faith in such is hee and his Chaire infallible 16. There remaineth one doubt arising out of the words of Gregory by the wilfull mistaking whereof p An. 547. nu 30. an 553. nu 231. Baronius was misse-led He seemeth to teach the same with the Cardinall where speaking of this fift Synod hee saith q Lib. 3. Epist 37. In eâ de
§ In his autem Pelagius who both himselfe fully assenteth herein to Saint Austen and testifieth the assent of Pope Leo in this manner Quis nesciat who knoweth not that the doctrine of Leo is consonant to Saint Austen Heare o Cyr. lib. cont Theod. cit à Conc. 5. Collat. 8. pa. 585. a. S. Cyrill who speaking of heretikes saith Evitandi sunt sive in vivis sive in mortuis they are to bee avoyded whether they bee dead or living 7. The Church speakes yet somewhat louder in the united judgement of Provinciall Synods In an p Citatur in Conc. 5. Coll 5 pa. 548 a. Africane Councell it was proved how certaine Bishops at their death had bequeathed their goods to heretikes whereupon statuerunt the Bishops in that Synod decreed ut post mortem anathemati subjiciantur that such should bee accursed even after their death and this Sextilianus an Africane Bishop testifieth upon his owne certaine knowledge The judgement of the Romane Church is to this purpose most pregnant About some twenty yeares before this fift Councell Dioscorus was chosen Bishop of Rome but shortly after dying eum post mortem anathematizavit Romana Ecclesia the Romane Church accursed him even after he was dead although hee had not offended in the faith but in some pecuniary or Symoniacall crime Et hoc sciunt omnes qui degunt Romae and they all who live at Rome know this to have beene done against him after his death they especially who are in eminent place who also continued in the communion with Dioscorus untill hee dyed as after q Inst Edict § Invenimus Iustinian Benignus r Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 549. a. Bishop of Heraclea and after them both the fift Councell ſ Coll. 8. pa. 585. b. testifieth In this very cause of Theodorus there was a Synod held in Armenia by Rambulas t Bar. an 435. nu 4 Bishop of Edessa Acatius and others wherein both themselves condemned Theodorus though dead and in their letters to Proclus exhort u Petimus quatenus fiat unitas vestra contra Theodorum sacrilega Dogmata ejus Jn Libell Presbyt Armē ad Procl in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 542. b. him to doe the like 8. But this voyce of the Church sounds like a mighty thunder in the consenting judgement of generall Councels In the sixt x Act. 12.13 18. Pope Honorius who in his life time had not been was now about threescore yeares after his death convicted to bee an heretike and then noviter condemned and anathematized by the whole Councell The same sentence of Anathema was confirmed and againe denounced against him in the second y Act. 7. in Epistola 2. Synod Can. 1. Nicene and in the other under z Honorius post mortem ab Orientis Episcopi◠anathemate est affectus Conc. 8 Act. 7. pa. 891. b. Hadrian which they account to be the seventh and eighth generall Councels In the Councell of Chalcedon Domnus a Edict Justin § Quod autem Conc. 5. Coll. 6. pa. 575. b. Bishop of Antioch was after his death condemned In the holy Ephesine Councell was this very Theodorus of Mopsvestia after his death condemned as Pope Pelagius b Pelag. 2. Epist § In his expresly testifieth The like to have beene done against Macedonius by the fift Councell at Constantinople Iustinian c Sancta Dei Ecclesia post mortem Macedonium anathem atizavit Iust Edict § Quod declareth Before that was the same done by the Councell at Sardica for when some of those who had subscribed to the Nicene faith returned to Arianisme alij quidem d Jbidem vivi alij autem post mortem anathematizati sunt à Damaso Papa ab universali Sardicensi Synodo they were anathematized some while they lived others after their death by Pope Damasus and by the generall Councell at Sardica as witnesseth Athanasius With such an uniforme consent doe all these Councels teach this and teach it not as any novell doctrine but as a truth successively from age to age even from the Apostles time delivered unto them by warrant of which Apostolical tradition Valentinus Martian Basilides à nulla Synodo e Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 549. a. anathematizati being by no Synod in their life time condemned were after their death accursed by the Church of God 9. And yet if none of all these particulars could bee produced seeing the doctrine of the faith decreed in this fift Councell one part whereof is this of condemning the dead is consonant to all the former and confirmed by all succeeding Councels as we did before demonstrate nor Councels only but approved by all Popes and Bishops from Gregory the first to Leo the tenth yea by all Catholikes whatsoever who all by approving this fift Councell consent in this truth Seeing all these that is the whole Catholike Church for 1500 yeares with one consenting voyce sound out like a multitude of mighty waters this Catholike truth which Vigilius oppugneth that one may after his death be noviter condemned and found it as a doctrine of the Catholike faith and even thereby found out Pope Vigilius to have held yea to have defined heresie and all who defend Vigilius to bee hereticall I do nothing doubt but if ever you did or can you doe now most distinctly heare the voyce of the Church even of that Church of which their Romane Rabsecha vaunteth that we are marvellously affrighted at the very name thereof 10. May I now intreate that as you have heard the Church so you would be pleased to heare what the Cardinall doth say of this matter After this part of Vigilius decree he sets a memorable glosse upon the Popes text Hic adverte Note here saith the Cardinall that f Bar. an 553. nu 185. this assertion of Vigilius that dead men ought not to be condemned is not so generally received as it is set downe by him A worthy note indeed out of a Cardinals mouth Papa hic non tenetur But I pray you by whom is it not received The Cardinall answers not by the holy Church the holy Church g Ejusmodi homine jure damnare post mortem sancta consucvit Ecclesia Bar. ibid. doth practise the contrary unto it What the holy Church not receive the dogmaticall and Apostolicall assertion of the holy Pope not that assertion which his Holinesse decreeth to be taught by Scripture to be a Constitution a rule a definition of the holy Apostolike See No truly The holy Church for all that receives not this assertion saith the Cardinall And the Cardinall was to blame to use such a palpable 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Church receiveth it not hee might and he should have said The holy Church rejecteth condemneth and accurseth this Cathedrall assertion of the Pope and all that defend it nor the Church onely of that one age wherein Vigilius lived but the Catholike Church
the priestly ministerie could not performe to wit the loosing of that band of censure or of sinne under which they dyed Thus Leo who denieth not that men after their death may be condemned but that any who in his life time is not may after his death bee pardoned Hee speakes not of such as have not beene in their life time condemned of which onely Vigilius entreateth but of such who being unpenitent or condemned by the Church die in their sin or under that just censure therefore in the state of condemnation So neither doe the words of Leo signifie any such thing as Vigilius by them intended to prove and Pope Pelagius assureth us that Leo taught the quite contrary to that which out of Leo Vigilius in vaine laboureth to prove 21. The very like construction is to bee given of the words of Gelasius in both the places cited out of him by Vigilius In the former x Gelas Epist 11. entreating of Acatius he thus saith Let no man perswade you that Acatius is freed from the crime of his prevarication for after he had falne into that wickednesse and deserved to be excluded and that jure by right from the Apostolike communion in hac eâdem persistens damnatione defunctus est hee persisting in this condemnation dyed Absolution cannot bee now granted unto him being dead which he neither desired nor deserved while he lived for it was said to the Apostles Whatsoever yee binde on earth But of him these are the words cited by Vigilius who is now under Gods iudgement that is who is dead in this sort it is not lawfull for us to decree ought else but that in quo eum supremus dies invenit wherein hee was found at the time of his death So Gelasius In which words it is evident that hee speakes not as Vigilius doth of such as in their life time were not condemned nor denieth hee that such may after their death when their heresie is discovered be condemned but of such as being in their life time justly condemned dye impenitent in that estate and of such he denyeth that after their death they can be absolved A truth so cleare that Binius sets this marginall note upon it Qui impoenitens mortuus est excommunicatus post mortem non potest absolvi He who dieth impenitent under the censure of excommunication cannot after his death bee absolved And Gelasius himselfe often repeateth the same most clearly in his Commonitorium to Faustus We reade saith he y Gelas Epist 4. that Christ raised up some from the dead but we never reade that he forgave or absolved any who were impenitent when they dyed and this power he gave to Peter Whatsoever thou shalt binde on earth on earth saith he nam in hac ligatione defunctum nusquam dixit absolvi For Christ never said that any who dyed being so bound should be loosed 22. The same is his meaning also in the other place z Epist Synodalis Gelas ij Synod Rom. 2. p. 268. b. alleaged by Vigilius In it he intreateth of Vitalis and Misenus who being the Popes Legates had communicated with Acatius and other hereticall sectaries and were for that cause both of them excommunicated by Pope Felix the next predecessor of Gelasius Misenus repenting was received into the communion of the Church Vitalis remaining impenitent died under that just censure when some of Vitalis friends desired the like absolution for Vitalis being dead a Nos etiam mortuis veniam praestare deposcunt ibid. Gelasius utterly refused to grant it and calling a Romane Synode it was declared in it That Misenus ought in right to be loosed but not Vitalis whom as they professed they gladly would but by reason of his owne impenitency wherein he dyed they could not helpe nor absolve but must leave him which are the words on which Vigilius relyeth to the judgement of God it being impossible for them to absolve him being dead seeing it is said Whatsoever ye shall binde upon earth such then as are not upon earth God hath reserved them not to mans but to his owne judgement Nor dare the Church challenge this unto it So Gelasius and the whole Romane Synode who doe not herein generally deny that any without exception may bee judged being dead for then they should condemne besides many other the holy Councell of Chalcedon which absolved Flavianus and bound or condemned Domnus and both after their deaths but limiting their speach to the present matter which they handled they teach that none who are dead to wit in such state as Vitalis dyed excommunicated and impenitent no such can after their death be judged to wit in such sort as the favourers of Vitalis would have had him adjudged that is absolved or loosed after his death from that censure and that the words of our Saviour doe forcibly conclude seeing whatsoever is bound upon earth is also bound in heaven and seeing such as die in that just bond of the Church are indeed reserved to the onely judgement of God the Church can pronounce no other nor milder sentence then it hath already passed of them That none at all after their death may be condemned by the Church Gelasius saith not and that is the hereticall position which Vigilius should out of Gelasius but doth not prove That none who at their death are justly bound by the Church and dye impenitent therein can after their death be loosed by the Church is a catholike truth which Gelasius teacheth and we all professe this Vigilius firmly by Gelasius doth but should not prove 23. So willing am I to quit Pope Leo and Gelasius from that hereticall doctrine wherewith Vigilius by his Apostolicall decree hath not onely himselfe eternally blemished the Romane See but laboureth also to fallen that heresie as an ancient and hereditarie doctrine from the time of Leo unto their See If this my indeavour for the honor of Leo and Gelasius be not accepted by them I must returne a conditionall and shorter but more unpleasing answer to this second reason of Vigilius relying on their authority and that is this If Leo and Gelasius truely and indeed taught the same with Vigilius that none after their death may noviter be condemned then were they also as Vigilius by the consenting judgement of the catholike Church hereticall If they did not indeed teach this doctrine then is Vigilius not only erroneous in faith both decreeing himselfe and judging them to have decreed heresie but slanderous also falsly imputing so great a crime as is heresie to so ancient famous Popes as were Gelasius and Leo And so whether they taught this doctrine or taught it not this second reason of Vigilius is of no worth at all proving nothing else but either them to be hereticall if Vigilius say true or himselfe to be a slanderer if he say untrue 24. Now after the reasons of Vigilius fully refuted in stead of a conclusion I will adde one short
consideration to all that hath beene said That this position decreed by Vigilius is such as doth not onely condemne the catholike church that is all the oppugners of it but even Vigilius himselfe and all who defend it Say you that a dead man may not noviter be condemned In saying so you condemne the holy Councell at Sardica of Constantinople of Ephesus of Chalcedon for they all did noviter condemne such persons being dead as in their lives time had not beene condemned Now the holy Fathers of those Councels having thus condemned the dead dyed themselves in the Lord and were in peace gathered to the Lord. If you say they should not have condemned the dead even in saying so you doe noviter condemne all those Fathers being now dead and so you doe that same thing which you say must not bee done and even by defending your position you overthrow your owne position for you doe noviter condemne all those holy Fathers being dead and yet you say that no man may noviter condemne the dead Nay you condemne not them only but even your own selfe also herein for you condemne those who condemne the dead and yet your selfe condemnes all those holy Fathers being now dead and you condemne them for doing that which your selfe now doe even for condemning the dead Such a strange discord there is in this hereticall position of Vigilius that it not only sights against the truth and the opposites unto it but viper-like even against it selfe and against the favourers and defenders of it CAP. VII That the second reason of Vigilius touching the first Chapter why Theodorus of Mopsvestia ought not to be condemned because he dyed in the peace and communion of the Church is erronious and untrue 1. THE second reason of Vigilius why Theodorus of Mopsvestia should not bee condemned is for that as he supposeth Theodorus dyed in the peace and communion of the Church to this purpose he saith that a Vigil Const apud Bar. an 553. nu 179. the rules of his predecessors which he applyeth to Theodorus did keepe inviolate the persons of Bishops in pace Ecclesiastica defunctorū who dyed in the peace of the Church And again We b Ibid. nu 184. doe especially provide by this our present Constitution lest by occasion of perverse doctrine any thing be derogated from the persons of them who as wee have said in pace communione universalis Ecclesiae quieverunt have dyed in the peace and communion of the Catholike Church and that no contumelie be done to those Bishops qui in pace Catholicae Ecclesiae sunt defuncti who have dyed in the peace of the Catholike Church Now that Theodorus so dyed Vigilius proveth not but takes as consequent upon the former point which as we have c Sup. ca. 6. shewed was knowne and confessed because d Perspenimus si quid de his qui defuncti sum nunime reperiuntur in vita damnati Vig. loc cit nu 176. Quos vocat In pace Ecclesiae defunctos Ibid nu 179. 184. he was not in his life time condemned by the Church Nor was Vigilius the first founder of this reason he borrowed it of other Nestorians with whom in this cause he was joyned both in hand and heart They to wit the followers of Theodorus and Nestorius flee unto another vaine excuse saith e Iust Edict § Quod autem Iustinian affirming that Theodorus ought not to be condemned eò quod in communione Ecclesiarum mortuus est because he dyed in the communion of the Churches 2. I shall not need to stay long in refuting this reason of Vigilius The Emperour hath done it most soundly and that before ever Vigilius writ his Constitution Oportebat f Iust ibid. eas scire those men who plead thus for Theodorus should know that they dye in the communion of the Church who unto their very death doe hold that common doctrine of piety which if received in the whole Church Iste autem usque ad mortem in sua permanens impietate ab omni Ecclesia ejectus est but this Theodorus continuing in his impiety to his death was rejected by the whole Church Thus Iustinian To whose true testimonie Binius ascribeth so much as well hee might that whereas some reported of Theodorus that he recalled his heresie this saith he might g Bin. Notis in Conc. 5. verbo Theodorus be beleeved nisi Iustinianus unlesse the Emperor had testified that he dyed in his heresie 3. The same is clearly witnessed also in the fift h Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 552. a. Councell where as it were of purpose this reason of Vigilius is refuted in this manner Whereas it is said of some and one of those is Vigilius that Theodorus died in the peace and communion of the Church mendacium est calumnia magis adversus Ecclesiam this is a lie and slander and that especially to the Church For he is said to die in the communion and peace of the Church qui usque ad mortem rectae Ecclesiae dogmata servavit who hath kept and held the true doctrines of faith even till his death But that Theodorus did not keepe those doctrines certum est it is certaine by his blasphemies and Gregory Nissen witnesseth the same And after the words of Gregory recited they adde this quomodo conantur dicere how doe any say that such an impious and blasphemous person as Theodorus was dyed in the communion of the Church Thus testifieth the Councell 4. Can ought be wished more pregnant to manifest the foule errours of Vigilius in this part of his decree Vigilius affirmeth that Theodorus dyed in the peace and communion of the Catholike Church The Emperour and Councell not onely testifie the contrary but for this very cause the Councell impatient at such indignitie offered to Gods Church cals him in plaine termes a lyar and a slanderer yea a slanderer of the whole Catholike Church in so saying Vigilius from the not condemning of Theodorus in his life time collecteth that hee dyed in the peace and communion of the Church both the Emperour and Councell witnesse his doctrinall errour herein truly teaching that though an heretike live all his life time not onely uncondemned by the Church but in all outward pompe honour and applause of the Church either himselfe cunningly cloaking or the Church not curiously and warily observing his heresie while hee liveth yet such a man neither lives nor dyes in the intire peace and communion of the Church The Church hath such peace with none who have not peace with God nor communion with any who have not union with Christ It condemned him not because as it teacheth others so it selfe judgeth most charitably of all It judged him to be such as hee seemed and professed himselfe to bee It was not his person but his profession with which the Church in his life time had communion and peace As soone as ever it seeth
him not to bee indeed such as hee seemed to bee it renounceth all peace and communion with him whether dead or alive nay rather it forsaketh not her communion with him but declareth unto all that shee never had communion or peace with this man such as hee was indeed before though she had peace with such as he seemed to bee Shee now denounceth a double anathema against him condemning him first for beleeving or teaching heresie and then for covering his heresie under the visor of a Catholike and of the Catholike faith So justly and fully doth the Emperour and Councell refute both the personall errour of Vigilius in that hee affirmeth Theodorus to have dyed in the peace of the Church and the doctrinall also in that he affirmeth it upon this ground that in his life time hee was not condemned by the Church 5. Now whereas i Accesserunt dignae causae ac rationes Bar. an 553. nu 233. Baronius saith that Vigilius had just and worthy reasons to defend this first Chapter one of which is this because if this were once admitted that one dying in the communion of the Church might after his death be condemned for an heretike pateret ostium there would a gap be opened that every ecclesiasticall writer licet in communione Catholica defunctus esset although hee dyed in the communion of the Catholike Church might after death be out of his writings condemned for an heretike truly hee feareth where no feare is at all This gap nay this gate and broad street of condemning the dead hath laine wide open this sixteen hundred years Can the Cardinall or any of his friends in all these successioÌ„s of ages wherin have dyed many thousand millions of Catholikes can he name or finde but so much as one who hath truly dyed in the peace and communion of the Church and yet hath beene after his death condemned by the Catholike Church for an heretike He cannot The Church should condemne her owne selfe if shee condemned any with whom she had peace and whom she embraceth in her holy communion which is no other but the society with God Such indeed may dye in some errour yea in an errour of faith as Papias Irenee Iustine in that of the millenaries as Cyprian as is likely and other Africane Bishops in that of Rebaptization but either dye heretikes or be after their death condemned by the Catholike Church for heretikes they cannot 6. But there is most just cause why the Cardinall and all his fellowes should feare another matter which more neerely concernes themselves and feare it even upon that Catholike position that the dead out of their writings may justly bee condemned They should feare to have such an itching humour to write in the Popes Cause for his supremacy of authority or infallibility of his Cathedrall judgement feare to stuffe their Volumes as the Cardinall hath done his Annals with heresies and oppositions against the faith feare to continue and persist in their hereticall doctrine feare to die before they have attained to that which is secunda post naufragium tabula the second and onely boord to save them after their shipwracke to dye I say before they revoked disclamed condemned or beene the first men to set fire to their hereticall doctrines and writings and at least in words if not as the k In fine vitae reconciliatio petentibus et poenitentibus non est neganda dum tamen si haeretici sint recipiantur cum scriptura juramento Gloss in dist 1. de poenit ca. Multiplex custome was by oath and handwriting to testifie to the Church their desire to returne unto her bosome These are the things indeed they ought to feare knowing that howsoever they flatter themselves with the vaine name of the Church yet in very truth so long as their writings remaine testifying that they defended the Popes infallibility in defyning causes of faith or any other doctrine relying on that ground whereof in their life time they have not made l Satis est ut Ecclesiae judicio coâ—flet aliquem decessisse impoenitentem si non conflet de illius poenitentiâ qui haereticus post mortemcoÌ„victus est Fran. Torrens lib. de 6 7 8. Synod pa. 13. ejusdem sententiae ait Pigh fuisse a certaine and knowne recantation they neither lived nor dyed in the peace and communion of the Catholike Church but may at any time after their death and ought wheÌ„soever occasioÌ„ is offered be declared by the Church to have dyed in their heresies and therefore dyed both out of the peace of God and of the holy Church of God This unlesse they seriously and sincerely performe it is not I nor any of our writers whom they imagine but most unjustly out of spleene and contention to speake these things who condemne them but it is the whole Catholike Church Shee by approving this fift Councell and the true decree therof condemns this Apostolicall Cathedral definition of Vigilius and all that defend it that is all the members of the present Romane Church to be hereticall and as convicted heretikes she declares them to die anathematized that is utterly separated from God and from the peace and most blessed communion with the Church of God howsoever they boast themselves to be the onely children of the Church of God 7. If any shall here reply or thinke that by the former examples of Papias Irenee Iustine Cyprian and the rest Baronius and other meÌ„bers of the present Romane church may be excused that these also as the former though dying in their error may dye in the peace coÌ„munion of the Church this I confesse is a friendly but no firme excuse for although they are both alike in this that the former as well as the latter dye in an errour of faith yet is there extreme odds and many cleare dissimilitudes betwixt the state or condition of the one and the other 8. The first ariseth from the matter it selfe wherin they erre The former erred in that doctrine of faith wherein the truth was not eliquata declarata solidata per plenarium Concilium as S. Austen m Aug. lib. 2. de bapt ca. 4. speaketh not fully scanned declared confirmed by a plenary Councell Had it bin we may well think the very same of all those holy men which Austen n Ibid. most charitably saith of S. Cyprian Sine dubio universi orbis authoritate patefacta veritate cessissent without doubt they would have yeelded to the truth being manifested unto them by the authority of the whole Church The latter erre in that which to use same Fathers o Aug. lib. eod c. 1. words per universae Ecclesiae statuta firmatum est which hath beene strengthened by the decree of the whole Church This fift Councell consonant to all precedent and confirmed by all subsequent generall Councels unto Leo the tenth decreeing this cathedrall sentence of Pope Vigilius to bee hereticall
of Mopsvestia where hee had beene Bishop gave a memorable example They for a time esteeemed of Theodorus as a catholike Bishop and for that cause kept his name in their dipticks or Ecclesiasticall tables reciting him among the other Orthodox Bishops of that city in their Eucharisticall commemoration But now seeing him detected and condemned both by catholike Bishops by Councells and by the Imperiall Edict for an heretike they expunged and blotted out the name of Theodorus and in his roome inserted in their dipticks the name of Cyrill who though hee was not Bishop in that See yet had by his pietie and zeale manifested and maintained the faith brought both the heresie person of Theodorus into a just detestation and all this is evident by the Acts of that Synode d Acta illa Synodi Mopsvest extant in Conc. 5. Collat. 5. pa. 553. seq held at Mopsvestia about this very matter of wiping out of the name of Theodorus 17. We are now come to the time of the Councell of Chalcedon for the expunging of Theodorus name and inserting of Cyrills followed as it seemes shortly after the death of Cyrill and he dyed about seven e Cyrill obijt an 444. Conc. Chalced. habitum an 451. Bar. et Bin. yeares before the Councell of Chalcedon That by it Theodorus was also condemned their approving f Conc. Chalc. Act. 5. in definit Synodi the Councell of Ephesus and the Synodall Epistles of Cyrill in both which and in the later by name g Vt liquet ex Cyrilli Epistolis ad Iohannem Aâ—tiocheÌ„ et ad Acatium quae citantur in Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 549. et 550. Theodorus is condemned doth manifest and besides this the Emperour Iustinian expresly saith h Iustin Edict §. Tali of it that the impious Creed of Theodorus being recited in that Councell both it cum expositore ejus with the Author and expounder of it and that was Theodorus were condemned in the Councell of Chalcedon 18. When many yeares after that holy Councell some Nestorians began againe contrary to the Edict of Theodosius and Valentinian to revive the dead and condemned memory of Theodorus Sergius Bishop of Cyrus making mention i Vt teslantur Act. Conc. 5. Coll. 7. pa. 578. a. et 582. a. and commemorating him in the Collect among catholikes the truth of this matter being examined and found that same Sergius by the command of Iustinus the Emperour was deposed from his Bishopricke excluded out of the Church and so continued even to his dying day and this was done but six yeares before the Empire of Iustinian as by the date k Iustinus scripsit id edictum Rustico Coss Conc. 5. Coll. 7. pa. 582. b. fuit is Coss an 520. ut teslatur Marcell in Chron. et agnoscit Bar. in illo an nu 1 Justinianus vero coepit imperare an 527. ut Marcell et Baron asserunt of Iustinus his letters doth appeare 19. Now if to all these particular sentences you adde that which the fift Councell l Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 557. a. witnesseth that Theodorus post mortem à catholica ecclesia ejectus est hath beene after his death condemned and cast out and that even by the whole Catholike Church you will easily confesse that from the time almost of his death unto the raigne of Iustinian there hath beene a continuall and never interrupted condemnation of him in the Church But in Iustinians time and perhaps before though lesse eagerly the Nestorians began afresh to renew the memory and doctrine of Theodorus setting now a fairer glosse and varnish on their cause then ever they had before for they very gladly apprehending and applauding those to say the least inconsiderate speeches of the Popes Legates Maximus in the Councel of Chalcedon that by his dictation or Epistle Ibas was declared to be a catholike hereupon they now boasted that the holy Councell by approving that Epistle of Ibas had approved both the person and doctrine of Theodorus seeing they both are highly extolled and defended in that Epistle By this meanes was this cause brought ab inferis the second time upon the stage and that also cloaked under the name and credit of the Councell of Chalcedon And at this second boute all the defenders of the Three Chapters and among them Pope Vigilius as Generall to them all undertooke the defence of Theodorus and as if there had never beene any sentence of condemnation either in generall or in particular denounced against him even in his definitive and Apostolicall constitution declareth That Theodorus was not condemned either by former Councels or Fathers and this he declareth after his solicitous circumspective and most diligent examination of their writings 20. What thinke you was become of the Popes eyes at this time that he could see none of all those condemnations of Theodorus before mentioned Not the general anathema of the Councels at Ephesus and Chalcedon in which Theodorus was involved not the expresse and particular anathema denounced against him by Rambulas and Acatius with the Councell of Armenia not the condemnation of him and his writings by Saint Proclus by S. Cyrill by the Church of Mopsvestia by the Edict of the religious Emperours by the whole Catholike Church None of all these things were done in a corner they were all matters of publike notice and record obvious to any that did not shut their eyes against the sun-shine of the truth But as I said before and must often say Nestorianisme like Naash the Ammonite had put out the Popes right eye he could see nothing with that eye all that he saw in this cause was but a very oblique and sinister aspect as doth now I hope fully appeare but will bee yet much more manifest by that which in the Constitution of Vigilius wee are next to consider 21. For as if it were a small matter not to see Theodorus condemned by the former Councels and Fathers though in a man professing so exact and accurate inspection in any cause such grosse oversights are not veniall the Pope ventures one step further for the credit of this condemned heretike Hee could not finde that Theodorus was condemned by the former witnesses Tush that is nothing he findes him acquitted by them all hee findes by Cyrill by Proclus by the Councels of Ephesus and Chalcedon yea by Iustinians owne law that Theodorus ought not to be condemned This was indeed a point worthy the Popes owne finding But withall I must tell you that you also shall finde one other thing that Pope Vigilius having once passed the bounds of truth for defence of Theodorus cares not now if he wade up to the eares and drowne himselfe in untruths 22. Let us then examine the allegations which for proofe of this the Pope hath found and begin we as the Pope doth with Cyrill In his m Eam citat Vigi in Const nu 173. 174. apud Bar. an 553. Epist
that Theodorus ought to be anathematized adding that they have demonstrated this even out of the words of Cyrill and Proclus which they writ ad condemnationē ejus for the condemning of Theodorus Thus writ the Councell unto which the whole Catholike Church hath ever since subscribed Seeing then it is certaine that Proclus both taught that Theodorus ought to be condemned and did himselfe write to condemne him there can bee no doubt but that those Epistles to Iohn and Maximus which Vigilius citeth and wherein Proclus is made to avouch the quite contrary that neither himselfe did nor that any ought to condemne Theodorus are forged in the name of Proclus by such hands as had wrought the like feat in Cyrill And if either those Epistles were extant for in that of Proclus to Iohn recorded in the fift u Coll. 6. pa. 562. Councell there is no such thing at all or had this Constitution of Vigilius beene published and knowne to the Councell before they had fully examined and cleared this Chapter touching Theodorus it is not to bee doubted but the one of them if not both would have discovered this forgery also 27. Besides all which there are divers evident prints of a false and hereticall hand in those Epistles Is it injury as that forged Proclus affirmeth to condemne the dead Nay it is even hereticall and that by the judgement of the whole Catholike Church as before we have proved to say that the dead may not be condemned Had Proclus writ or said this he had condemned the Councels of Sardica of Constantinople of Ephesus as injurious unto the dead nor them onely but he had condemned himselfe who as we have now demonstrated both condemned the dead and taught that Theodorus though dead ought to bee condemned 28. Did Theodorus at his death goe as this forged Proclus affirmeth to the Lord a blasphemer an heretike equall by the judgement of Proclus himselfe to the Iewes and Pagans and of the same ranke with Arius Macedonius Eunomius and Nestorius such a blaspheming heretike goe unto the Lord why then did the Ephesine Councell why did Saint Cyrill why did Proclus himselfe adjudge him to bee anathematized that is separated from the Lord Heretikes and impious persons as living they goe not in the wayes of the Lord but in their owne wayes so dying they goe like Iudas to their owne place not to the Lord not to his habitation and place of rest the Saints and they onely goe that way To them onely he sairh This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise 29. Was Theodorus not so much as blamed no not so much as once in his life as the forged Proclus saith It seemes Leontius borrowed his most partiall speech before mentioned out of this Proclus and was too credulous unto it But the true Proclus living so x Theodorus obijt an 427. Proclus sit Episcopus an 434. Bar. in illis annis neare to the time of Theodorus could not bee ignorant nor would ever have uttered so foule an untruth for although the Church pronounced no publike censure by name against him yet was he reproved and blamed not onely by others complaining of his erroneous doctrine but even by Theophilus B. of Alexandria and Gregory Nissene This the fift Councell witnesseth saying y Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 545. a. Saint Theophilus and Saint Gregory Nissene susceptis querimonijs adversus Theodorum adhuc viventem Complaints being brought unto them against Theodorus of Mopsvestia as yet living and against his writings scripserunt adversus eum Epistolas they writ Epistles against him and in those Epistles some part whereof is recorded in the Councell they blame him as presuming to renew the heresie and madnesse of Paulus Samosatenus And it is further added porrecta sunt autem and the impious chapters collected out of the books of Theodorus were shewed and brought to Theophilus whence it is now evident that those Epistles alleaged by Vigilius under the name of Proclus are no lesse by the untrue and hereticall assertions contained in them then by the cleare testimonies of the fift generall Councell convicted of forgery 30. From Fathers hee commeth to Councells and concerning the first Ephesine Vigilius noteth two points The former that Theodorus was not condemned by it to which purpose hee thus saith z Vigil Const nu 173. Solicite recensentes having with diligence and sollicitude reviewed the Ephesine Synode We have found that in it nothing is related touching the persō of Theodorus What nothing how then did Pope Pelagius a Theodorum mortuum sancta Synodus Ephesina damnavit Pelag 2. Epist 7. §. In his after Cyrill and the fift Councell finde that in it Theodorus was condemned and if they condemned him then certainly somwhat was related debated about him upon knowledge whereof the Councell condemned him But say indeed is nothing found concerning Theodorus in that Councell What say you to the impious and diabolicall Creed which was both related b Act. Ephes conc to 2. ca. 29 30 31 33. in the Synode and condemned c Hec Symbolum una cum authore Ephesina prima Synodus anathematizavit conc 5. coll 4. pa. 537. a. together with the author of it Truely here Vigilius useth a shift worthy to be observed That Creed he found and hee found it to be condemned but to quite Theodorus hee d Sed Symbolum quod Charisius prodidit condemnatū magis quia ab Athanasio Photio c. Vigil const nu 173. ubi sententia manca per dictionem condemnatum aut aliam similē supplendae est would have it beleeved that Theodorus was not the author of it nor that it was condemned as being the Creed of Theodorus but because it was divulged by certaine Nestorians Athanasius Photius Antonius and Iacobus Nor doth Vigilius use this shift only about that impious Creed but in other hereticall writings of Theodorus Proclus adjoyned to his Tome certaine impious positions collected è Theodori codicibus as Cyrill e Cyrill Epistola ad Acatium quae citat in conc 5. coll 5. pa. 543. expresly witnesseth Vigilius likewise of them would have it thought that they were none of the positions of Theodorus and by the forged Epistles of Proclus hee would perswade f Mala quae damnaverat cujus essent Proclus professus est se ignorare Vigil conc nu 175. that Proclus himselfe did not know whose they were The Emperour Iustinian before the Synode began sent threescore severall hereticall passages or chapters truly gathered out of the bookes and writings of Theodorus hoping that the Pope seeing Theodorus bookes so full fraught with heresies and blasphemies would make little doubt to condemne the writer of them Vigilius turnes to his former shift hee will not thinke nor have others to thinke that Theodorus writ such heresies though they had his name prefixed unto them for concerning those 60. chapters expressed both in the Popes Constitution g
Conc. Vig. a nu 60. ad nu 173. and in the Synodall h Conc. 5. coll 4. acts he thus saith i Vigil in const nu 173. Wee decree that by those foresaid chapters nulla injuriandi praecedentes patres praebeatur occasio no occasion be given to injure the former Fathers and Doctors of the Church And again k nu 184. We provide by this our Constitution that by these or the like doctrines condemned in Nestorius and Eutyches no contumely nor occasion of injury bee brought to those Bishops who have died in the peace of the Catholike Church and that Vigilius thought Theodorus so to have dyed we have before l Sup. ca. 7. declared yea that Vigilius knew it Baronius assured us Thus Vigilius to free Theodorus from condemnation pretends those hereticall writings to be none of his 31. What is it that Vigilius will not say for defence of this blasphemous and condemned heretike This cavill was used as Baronius m Defensores Theodori ea ipsius scripta esse negarunt Bar. an 435. nu 14. tells us by the old Nestorians and defenders of Theodorus denying those to bee the writings of Theodorus quae diffamata which were famously knowne through the whole East and which being afterwards detected and discovered to bee truly his writings both they and their author with them were condemned Now this old hereticall and rejected cavill Vigilius here reneweth those writings famously knowne to be the workes of Theodorus condemned as his writings and he with them and for theÌ„ Vigilius will now have thought to be none of his nor he by them nor for them may bee now condemned And that you may see how Vigilius herein doth strive against the maine streame of the truth Saint Cyrill n Cyrill Epistolae ad Proclum citata in Conc. 5. coll 5 pa. 550. b. who then lived testifieth Theodorus to be author of those hereticall and blasphemous writinâ—â— That wee have found certaine things in the writings of Theodorus nimiae plena blasphemiae nulli dubium est full of blasphemie none that thinks aright can make any doubt And againe o Ibid. pa. 550 a. I examining the bookes of Theodorus and Diodorus have contradicted them as much as I could declaring that sect to be every where full of abomination Yea hee writ divers bookes p Qui Cyrilli libri citantur saepe in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 538. seq against Theodorus expressing the words of Theodorus and his owne confutation of the same So cleare and undoubted was this truth in Cyrills dayes who lived at the same time with Theodorus that hee thought them unwise who made any doubt of that which Vigilius now calls in question And particularly touching that impious Creed Cyrill saith q Prolata apud sanctâ—m Synodum expositione ab en composita sicut dicebant qui protulerunt c. Verba Cyrill in Epist ad Proclum citat in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 550. b. that they who brought it to the Synode of Ephesus said that it was composed by Theodorus which they said not as by way of uncertaine report but as testifying it to be so in so much that the whole Synode giving credit thereunto thereupon condemned Theodorus r His condemnatis qui sic sapiunt nullam viri Theodori memoriam fecerunt Ibid. though by a dispensation they expressed not his name 32 The same is testified by Rambulas Acatius and the whole Armenian Councell who after examination Å¿ Fiat unitas vestra contra Theodorum sacrilega capitula dogmata ejus Libell Episc Armen ad Proclum in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 542. b. of this cause found the true and indubitate writings of Theodorus to be sacrilegious and therefore by name condemned him exhorting both Cyrill and Proclus to doe the like The Imperiall Edicts of Theodosius t De quibus legibus supra hoc cap. Exta â—t vero in Conc. 5. coll 5. pa. 544. and Valentinian leave no scruple in this matter who would never have so severely forbidden the memory of Theodorus and the reading or having of his bookes had it not by evidences undeniable beene knowne that those were indeed his workes and hereticall writings If all these suffice not when this cause about Theodorus was now againe brought into question the Emperour Iustinian and the fift Councell so narrowly and so exactly examined the truth hereof that after them to make a doubt is to seeke a knot in a rush They testifie those very hereticall assertions whereof Vigilius doubteth to be the doctrines and words u Habemus quae ex Theodori codicibus collegistu Conc. 5. coll 4. pa. 527. b. idem docet Iustin in suo Edict § Si quis defendit Theodorum of Theodorus that impious creed also whereof Vigilius is doubtfull to be composed by Theodorus they are so certaine x Jmpius Theodorus aliud Symbolum exposuit Iust in Edicto §. Tali Et impium ejus Theodori Symbolum coll 4. pa. 537. a. hereof that even in their Synodall sentence y Licet volentibus codices impij Theodori prae manibus accipere vel quae ex impijs codicibus ejus à nobis inserta his gestis sunt Conc. 5. coll 8. pa. 585. a. they referre the triall of what they decree herein to the true and undoubted bookes of Theodorus And in their sentence is included the judgement of the whole catholike Church ever since they decreed this which hath with one consent approved their decree 33 After all these Pope Pelagius in one of his decretall Epistles wherein at large he handleth this cause not onely testifieth that impious Creed z Ab ejus Theodori discâ—pulis dictatum ab eo symbolum in eâ â—em Synodo Ephesina prolatum Pelagius Epist 7. §. In his and those hereticall a Ejusdem Theodori ex libris illius dicta replicemus ibid. writings to bee the workes of Theodorus alleaging many places of them but wheras some obstinately addicted to the defence of the three Chapters moved againe b Haec Theodori dicta utrum ejus sint fortasse dubitatur ibid. §. Haec this same doubt which Vigilius doth and as is likely by occasion of his decree Pelagius of purpose declareth those c Ibidem seq to have beene the true writings of Theodorus and consonant to his doctrine and that hee proveth by the testimonies of the Armenian Bishops of Proclus of Iohn of Antioch of Cyrill of Rambulas of Honoratus a Bishop of Cilicia and so a neighbor of Mopsvestia which is in the same d Secunda Cilicia sub qua Mopsvestia constituta est Conc 5. coll 5. pa. 547. b. Province of Hesychius of Theodosius and Valentinian the Emperours and of Theodoret then whom not any except perhaps Nestorius was more devoted to Theodorus insomuch that he is thought to have taken from Theodorus the name of Theodoret. After which cloud of witnesses produced Pelagius thus concludeth
this but a vertuall and implicite anathematizing of those his owne writings against Cyrill which defended Nestorius and his doctrines None can anathematize the former but eo ipso he doth most certainely though not expresly anathematize the later as on the contrary none can say as Vigilius doth and decreeth that all shall doe the like none can say that the writings of Theodoret against Cyrill and his twelve chapters ought not to be anathematized but eo ipso even by saying so he doth most certainly though but implicitè and by consequent say that Nestorius and his heresie ought not to be condemned A truth so cleare that Pope Pelagius k Pelag. 2. Epist 7. §. Quis haec from his anathematizing of Nestorius and his doctrine concludeth of Theodoret Constat eundem it is manifest that in doing this he condemned his owne writings against the twelve Chapters of Cyrill 14. Neither is that true which Vigilius fancied that to require men to anathematize the writings of Theodoret is to seeke and require more then the Councell of Chalcedon required It is not It is but requiring the selfe same thing to be done in actuall and expresse termes which the Councel required and Theodoret performed in vertuall and implicite termes The thing required and done is the same the manner onely of doing it or requiring it to be done is different Even as to require of men to professe Christ to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Councell of Nice and the Church ever since requireth is not to require them to professe more or ought else then the Scripture teacheth and all catholikes l Hoc testimonio omnes patres utuntur contra Arianos ut probent unam esse essentiam patris filij Bell. lib 1. de Christ ca. 6. §. Quartum before professed by those words I and my Father are one but it is a requiring of an explicite profession of that truth concerning the unity of substance of the Father and the Sonne which by those words of Scripture they did before implicitè professe 15. But yet at least will some of Vigilius friends reply it was unfit to require this explicite anathematizing of Theodorets writings seeing the Councell of Chalcedon did not require it No not so neither The explicite condemning of them was not only fit but necessarie at that time in the dayes of Iustinian and Vigilius For as when the Arians denyed Christ to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it was enough for one to cleare himselfe of Arianisme to say that he held this text for true I and the Father are one though therein he doe implicitè professe Christ to bee 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and though to have professed that alone before the question about the unity of one substance was moved had beene sufficient but now he must explicitè professe that truth which is explicitè denyed and oppugned even so it is in this cause of Theodorets writings and all like it While there was no doubt moved by heretikes whether those writings of his ought to be condemned and whether by the Councell of Chalcedon they were condemed or no so long it was sufficient for one to professe that he condemned Nestorius and subscribed to the definition of Chalcedon both which were implicite condemning of those writings of Theodoret but when the Nestorians began to boast that Theodorets writings against Cyrill neither were condemned but rather with the author of them approved by the Councell of Chalcedon neither ought to be condemned the Church now was necessarily eâ—â—â—rced to require of all men a profession of that truth in plaine and explicite termes which before they made onely in generall and implicite Nor could Vigilius or any other Nestorian who refused in expresse manner to condemne the writings of Theodoret purge himselfe of that heresie of Nestorius at this time by saying they approved the definition of Chalcedon or condemned Nestorius though in both these they did implicitè condemne the writings of Theodoret but now they must expresly professe that which the heretikes expresly denyed they must in plaine termes anathematize those hereticall writings of Theodoret and acknowledge them to have bin anathematized by the Councel of Chalcedon as the heretiks in plaine termes vauÌ„ted that neither they ought nor were anathematized but approved by the Councel of Chalcedon whensoever any point tending to the impeaching of faith begins explicitè to be denyed the holy Church may not then content her selfe in generall and implicitè to condemne the same few perhaps can perceive that and many will make that generality of termes as Vigilius and other Nestorians now did but a cloak for their heresie but the Church must now in most plaine easie and expressed manner that can be devised both teach declare and define the same This the Church did in this fift Councell as in the other two so in this Chapter touching Theodorets writings It taught but the very same which the Councell of Chalcedon had done before it anathematized those his writings which at Chalcedon were anathematized before but they did this now in a plaine manner and explicitè which by the Councell of Chalcedon only in an obscure manner and implicitè was done before 16. The third personall errour which Vigilius m Vig. Const nu 181. taketh for a ground of his decree is that Cyrill himselfe though he was so exceedingly injured by the writings of those Easterne Bishops that tooke part with Nestorius yet when he made union with them he required them not to anathematize their owne writings but overpast them in silence as if there had never beene any such whence Vigilius inferreth that neither ought this anathematizing of their writings by name of Theodorets bee required by others yea he saith the Fathers of Chalcedon imitated this example of Cyrill and so would not require that of Theodoret which they saw Cyrill not to have required of others 17. The answer is easie by that which hath beene declared this saying of Vigilius laboureth of the same equivocall sophistication as did the former for both Cyrill required and all who were united unto him and received into his which was the communion of the Catholike Church they all did though not in explicite termes which then was not needfull yet vertually and after a certaine and undoubted though implicite manner condemne and anathematize all their writings against Cyrill and the Catholike faith for he received none till they had anathematized thâ— doctrines of Nestorius This doth Cyril himselfe most plainly witnesse in his Epistle to n Cyrill Epist ad Dynat extat in Act. Conc. Ephes to 5. ca. 16. Dynatus I would not saith he admit Paulus Bishop of Emisa into communion priusquam Nestorij dogmata proprio chyrographo anathematizasset untill hee had anathematized by his owne hand-writing the doctrines of Nestorius And he intreated me in behalfe of the other Bishops that I would rest contented with that profession which they had sent and require no
maintained he shall finde them full stuft with many grosse and palpable untruths of matters de facto on which they build their doctrinall positions as in this concerning the Epistle of Ibas it is now most manifest 12. For this time I will not enter into so spacious a field but yet this one thing by the way I cannot but observe seeing those Nicene Fathers professe that writing against Image-worship going under the name of Epiphanius to be in such sort the book of Epiphanius as this Epistle going under the name of Ibas is the Epistle of Ibas and seeing we have now demonstrated this Epistle to be truly and indeed the Epistle of Ibas it followeth even by their owne reason and comparison that the book also against Image-worship cited by the Councell at Constantinople in the name of Epiphanius is in truth and in very deed the true writing of Bishop Epiphanius And yet further because those Nicene Fathers acknowled Epiphanius for a Catholike k Beatum patrem Epiphanium catholicae ecclesiae Doctorem agnoscimus Conc. Nic. 2. Act. 6. pa. 371. b. Doctor of the Church one who held the ancient tradition l Illi qui antiquam ecclesiae traditionem recipiunt beato Epiphanie non adversantur ibid. b. of the Church and consented to the Catholikes in and before his time it hence againe followeth that the doctrine of condemning Image-worship which in that booke of Epiphanius is delivered was by the generall Councell at Constantinople some thirty m Conc. Const contra Imagines habitum est an 754. Bin. to 3. pa. 229. Conc. Nicenum habitum an 787. Bin. notis in id Conc. yeares before this Nicene Assembly decreed n Qui imaginem ausus fuerit parare aut adorare aut in ecclesia aut in privata domo constituere aut clam habere si Episcopus fuerit deponatur c. Decretum Conc. Constant sub Constantino Copronimo quod extat in Nicenâ— Conc. 2. Act. 6. pa. 377. a. that it I say is ancient Catholike consonant to the ancient tradition and the doctrine of the ancient and catholike Fathers of the Church even from the Apostles time And this is all which Baronius hath gained by his alleaging those publike acts of the Nicene Fathers to prove this not to be the Epistle of Ibas And let this suffice to be spoken of the personall untruths of Vigilius and Baronius touching this Epistle of Ibas which are but a praeludium to their doctrinall errors and heresies wherof in the next place we are to entreat CHAP. XI That Vigilius and Baronius in their former reason for defence of the Epistle of Ibas drawne from the union with Cyrill mentioned in the latter part of that Epistle doe defend all the heresies of the Nestorians 1. WEE come now from personall matters to that which is the Capital point and maine heresie contained in the defence of this this Chapter wherein Vigilius and Baronius have so behaved themselves that those former errours though they be too shamefull are but a very sport and play to that hereticall frenzie which here they doe expresse For now you shall behold the Pope and his Cardinall in their lively colours fighting under the banner of Nestorius and using the most cunning stratagems that were ever devised to cloake their hereticall doctrine and gaine credit to that condemned heresie Those sleights are principally two The former is gathered out of the latter part of the Epistle of Ibas where mention is made of the union betwixt Cyrill and Iohn which although I touched before a Sup. ca. 4. yet because it is a matter of greater obscuritie and containeth a most notable fraud of Vigilius and Baronius I purposely reserved the full handling of it unto this place where without interruption of other matters I might have scope enough to explaine the depth of this mysterie 2. In the time of the Ephesine Councell there was as all know an exceeding breach betwixt Cyrill with other Catholike Bishops who condemned Nestorius and Iohn Bishop of Antioch with divers other Eastern Bishops who tooke part with Nestorius against the holy Councell And the division was so great that at the selfe-same time in one the selfe-same citie of Ephesus they held two severall Councels and set up altare contra altare Councell against Councell Patriarcke against Patriarcke Bishops against Bishops and Synodall sentence against Synodall sentence But betwixt those two Councels there was as much difference as is betwixt light and darkenesse betwixt truth and heresie betwixt the Church of God and the Synagogue of Satan The one consisted of holy orthodoxall and Catholike Bishops whose President was Cyrill the other of hereticall b Coactis in unum solo nomine Episcopis qui unà cum Nestorio desciveraÌ„t ex quibus alij erant extorres â—agi proprijs sedibus destituti alij à suis Metropolicanis depositi alij Pelagij Caelestij veneno imbuti Epi. Synodal sanct Conc. Eph. ad Caelestinum to 4. Act. Eph. c. 17. factious and divers deposed Bishops whose President was Iohn The former condeÌ„ned Nestorius his blasphemous doctrine whereby hee denied Christ to be God the latter defended Nestorius and all his impious doctrines The former was held in a Church even in the Church of the Blessed c Considentibus in sanctiss Eccles quae appellatur Maria to 2. act Ephes coÌ„c ca. 1. saepe alibi Virgin whose Sonne they professed to bee truly God the latter in an Inne d Iohanne in diversorio maneÌ„te sacraque illius Synodo praesente Act. Ephe. coÌ„c to 3. ca. 1. Cum vix curru dissilijsset Iohannes cubiculuÌ„que ingressus esset Apol. Cyril ad Imper. to 5 ca. 2. pa. 827. b. or Taverne a fit place for them who denied Christ to be God The former proceeded in all respects orderly and Synodally as was fit and requisite that they should the latter did all things tumultuously e Iohannes cum suis nullam omnino vel per leges ecclesiasticas vel per. Augustorum decretum potestatem obtinuit Libel Cyril et Mem. oblatus s synodo to 4. Act. ca. 2. Johannes omni ecclesiastica authoritate proculcata omnique ecclesiarum ordine ritu consuetudine contempta c. ibid. Quae temere vaneque fuerant nugati quaeque praeter omnem Canonum ordinem ediderant c. Epist Synod ad Imp. to 4. ca. 8. quod contra leges et canones omnemque ordinem perpetrarunt ibid. presumptuously and against the Canons of the Church supporting themselves onely by lies calumnies and slanderous reports In a word the former was truly an holy a generall an Oecumenicall f Omnes Orientales atque Occidentales vel per se vel per legatos sacerdâ—tali huic concessui intersunt Act. Ephes to 2. ca. 16. Quod à nobis exijt judicium aliud nihil esse quam coÌ„munem concordemque terrarum orbis sensum atque consensum Ep. Synod Eph. Conc. ad Imp. to 2.
that decree they never either by word or writing urged Cyrill to condemne those Chapters Before they made that decree and condemned Nestorius they were hereticall and held communion neither with Cyrill nor Sixtus nor any other Catholikes After they had made that decree and condemned Nestorius with his heresies they were orthodoxall communicated no lesse with Cyrill thā with Sixtus or any other Catholike nay they cōmunicated first of all with Cyrill then with all other Catholikes 39. The other point to bee observed out of the Cardinalls words is that by his narration Cyrill did indeed as Ibas and the Nestorians slandered him renounce reject the Catholike faith for the Cardinall makes Paulus of Emisa but to goe once to Alexandria about the union or if any can finde in the Cardinall a second journey thither yet by his narratiō the Synodall Epistle of Iohn and the rest wherein they condemne Nestorius and set downe an orthodoxall profession that Epistle was sent by Paulus at the first time for he had withall in charge to urge Cyrill to condemne his twelve Chapters which at his last going had beene absurd and incongruous So then the Epistle which Paulus at his first going to Cyrill brought with him was the orthodoxall Epistle of Iohn and the Synod Now it is certaine by the expresse words of Cyrill that the letter which Iohn and the rest sent by Paulus at his first going was rejected by Cyrill for he saith of that Epistle hujusmodi epistolas non acceptavi I did not accept this Epistle sent by Paul and the Cardinall t Bar. an 432. nu 66. citing those words of Cyrill verbatim and making some prettie collection out of them could not be ignorant hereof Seing then by the Cardinalls narration the Epistle which Paulus brought at his first comming was orthodoxall and seeing it is certaine that Cyrall rejected that Epistle which Paulus at his first comming brought from Iohn it inevitably followeth upon the Cardinalls narration that Cyrill indeed rejected an orthodoxall and Catholike profession containing the condemnation of Nestorius and his heresies and therefore that Cyrill renounced his former Catholike doctrine consented to Nestorianisme which is the same calumnie wherewith Ibas in his impious Epistle slandereth Cyrill And although Baronius doe in words deny this as I know hee doth yet considering the deepe projects which the Cardinall hath it may bee feared that he meant by this meanes cunningly and closely to lay a foundation to uphold that union in which Ibas in his Epistle rejoyceth and which Vigilius and the Cardinall himselfe approve for Catholike or if the Cardinall intended not this yet I am sure that hee hath then unwittingly devised such a notable ground to maintaine that slander which Ibas imputeth to Cyrill that at the time of the union he rejected his former doctrines as that neither Ibas himselfe nor any of the old Nestorians could possibly have forged a more faire and colourable pretence for the same 40. My conclusion now of this their former reason for defence of the impious Epistle of Ibas drawne from the union mentioned therein is this Seeing that union mentioned and approved by Ibas in the later part of his Epistle is no other but the union in Nestorianisme unto which hee malitiously slandereth Cyrill to have consented and seeing Pope Vigilius and Cardinall Baronius not onely approve as Catholike the union there mentioned by Ibas but prove by it and consenting to it both Ibas himselfe to bee a Catholike and his Epistle in that part at least to be orthodoxall it hence cleerely ensueth that Vigilius by his Apostolicall sentence defineth and Baronius by name as also all who maintaine the Popes Cathedrall sentence in causes of faith to bee infallible doe all defend Nestorianisme to be the Catholike union and so Nestorianisme to bee the Catholike faith which whosoever affirmes are by the judgement not onely of the fift but the fourth and third generall Councells convicted condemned and anathematized heretickes CHAP. XII That Vigilius and Baronius in their later reason for defence of the Epistle of Ibas taken from the words of Ibas wherein hee confesseth two natures and one person in Christ doe maintaine the heresies of Nestorius 1. THe other reason whereby they labour to defend this impious Epistle and with no lesse fraud then they did in the former is taken from the very confession of Ibas set downe in his Epistle wherein hee acknowledgeth Christ to have two natures and to bee one person His words to Maris the hereticke are these neare the beginning of his Epistle a In Cont. Chalc. Act. 10. Cyrill hath written twelve Chapters which I thinke your holinesse knoweth wherein he teacheth quia una est natura divinitatis humanitatis that there is one nature of the divinitie and humanitie in Christ these things are full of all impiety and giving a reason hereof he addeth for the Church saith thus as it hath beene taught from the beginning and confirmed therein by the doctrine of the most blessed Fathers Duae natura una virtus una persona quod est unus filius Dominus noster Iesus Christus Two natures one power one person which is one Sonne our Lord Iesus Christ Thus Ibas which words seeme to be so true so orthodoxall and Catholike that Vigilius and Baronius might either be themselves hereby deceived or which I rather thinke judge them as they are indeed a most colourable pretence to deceive others lead them into Nestorianisme for no Catholike can possibly in fairer tearmes or better for shew of words expresse against Nestorius the true doctrine of the Catholike faith then to say that there are two natures in Christ and yet but one person This seeing Ibas professeth in his Epistle and withall accurseth b Denuncians ei ut anathematizaret eos qui dicunt quia una est natura divinitatis et humanitatis Ibas in eadem Epist those who deny two natures in Christ sure none can thinke but this was a fit text for Vigilius and Baronius by it to commend this impious Epistle as orthodoxall Catholike wherein so Catholike a confession seemeth to bee made But let us see how the Pope and the Cardinall descant on these words 2. Baronius saith not much but yet hee speakes plainely of this matter The fathers at Chalcedon saith he c Bar. an 448. nu 75. out of this Epistle of Ibas gathered Ibas then when he writ it to be a Catholike utpote quodex eadem epistola demonstratur ipse because by this very Epistle Ibas was demonstrated both to have held communion with Cyrill execratusque esse unam naturam in Christo confitentes confessus vero esse naturas duas unam d Vox personam vitio Typographi deest apud Baron sed ex Constructione Gammatica et ipse sensu necessariè ad dendam liquet personam efficere Dominum nostrum Iesum Christum and also he was demonstrated by this Epistle
assent to their Popes or to their Cathedrall definitions and doctrines maintained by the present Romane Church but co nomine even for that very cause they are convicted condemned and accursed heretikes For the manifesting of which conclusion I will begin with that their fundamentall position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in defining causes of faith whereof before I have so often made mention And to prove the present Romane Church to bee hereticall herein two things are to be declared the one that this is indeed the position or doctrine of their Church the other that this doctrine is hereticall and for such condemned by the Catholike Church 7. For the former that the assertion of Popes infallibility in defining causes of faith is the doctrine of the present Romane Church I thinke none conversant in their writings will make doubt Give mee leave to propose some testimonies of their owne The Pope saith Bellarmine g Lib. 4. de pont ca. 3. §. Sic. when hee teacheth the whole Church those things which belong to faith nullo casu errare potest hee can by no possible meanes then erre And this as he saith is certissimum a most certaine truth and in the end hee addeth this is a signe Ecclesiam totam sentire that the whole Church doth beleeve the Pope to be in such causes infallible So he testifying this to be the judgement and doctrine of their whole Church The Iesuite Coster for himselfe and their whole Church saith We h Ench. tit de summo pont §. Fatemur doe constantly deny the Popes vel haeresim docere posse vel errorem proponere to be able either to teach an heresie or to propose an errour to be beleeved When the Pope saith Bozius i Th. Boz lib 18. de Sig. Eccl. ca. 6. §. Sequitur teacheth the Church or sets forth a decree of faith Divinitùs illi praeclusa est omnis via God then stoppeth every way unto him which might bring him into errour Againe k Idem lib. 16. ca. 8. §. Rursus in making such decrees nunquam valuit aut valebit facere contra fidem he never was he never shall be able to doe ought against the faith We beleeve saith Gretzer l Def. ca. 3. lib. 4. de Rom. Pont. §. Terius the judgement of him who succeeds Peter in the Chaire non secus ac olim Petri infallibile to be no otherwise infallible then the judgement of Peter was And the m Idem def ca. 28. lib. 1. de pontif §. Quocirca gates of hell shall never be able to drive Peters successours ut errorem quempiam ex cathedra definiant that they shall define any errour out of the Chaire This is saith Stapleton n Relect. Cont. 3. qu. 4. §. Circa a certaine and received truth among Catholikes That the Pope when he decreeth ought out of his pontificall office hath never yet taught any hereticall doctrine nec tradere potest nor can he deliver any error yea if it bee a judgement o Rel. Conc. 6. q. 3. Art 5. §. Respondeo of faith it is not onely false but hereticall to say that the Pope can erre therein They saith Canus p Loc. Theol. lib. 6. ca. 7. §. Quid. who reject the Popes judgement in a cause of faith are heretickes To this accordeth Bellarmine q Lib. 3. de verb. Dei ca. 8. §. Excutimus It is lawfull to hold either part in a doubtfull matter without note of heresie before the Popes definition be given but after the Popes sentence he who then dissenteth from him is an hereticke To these may be added as Bellarmine testifieth r Lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 2. § Quarto St. Thomas Thomas Waldensis Cardinall Turrecremata Cardinall Cajetane Cardinall Hosius Driedo Eccius Iohannes a Lovanio and Peter Soto all these teach it to be impossible that the Pope should define any hereticall doctrine And after them all the saying of Gregory de Valentia is most remarkable to this purpose It now appeareth saith he ſ In 2. 2. disp 1. q. 1. punct 1 part 30. that Saint Thomas did truly and orthodoxally teach that the proposall or explication of our Creed that is of those things which are to be beleeved doth belong unto the Pope which truth containes so clearely the summe and chiefe point of Catholike religion ut nemo Catholicus esse possit qui illam non amplectatur that none can be a Catholike unlesse hee hold and embrace this So he professing that none are to be held with them for Catholikes but such as maintaine the Popes infallibilitie in proposing or defining causes of faith 8. They have yet another more plausible manner of teaching the Popes Infallibilitie in such causes and that is by commending the judgement of the Church and of generall Councels to be infallible All Catholikes saith Bellarmine t Lib 2. de Conc. ca. 2 §. Ac ut doe constantly teach that generall Councels confirmed by the Pope cannot possibly erre in delivering doctrines of faith or good life And this he saith is so certaine that fide catholica tenendum est it is to be embraced by the Catholike faith and so all Catholikes are bound to beleeve it Likewise concerning the Church he thus writeth u Lib. de Eccles milit ca. 14. §. Nostra Nostra sententia est it is our sentence that the Church cannot absolutely erre in proposing things which are to bee beleeved The same is taught by the rest of their present Church Now when they have said all and set it out with great pompe and ostentation of words for the infallibility of the Church and Councell it is all but a meere collusion a very maske under which they cover and convaie the Popes Infallibilitie into the hearts of the simple Try them seriously who list sound the depth of their meaning and it will appeare that when they say The Church is infallible Generall Councels are infallible The Pope is infallible they never meane to make three distinct infallible Iudges in matters of faith but one onely infallible and that one is the Pope 9. This to be their meaning sometimes they will not let to professe When we teach saith Gretzer x Def. ca. 10. lib. 3. de verb. Dei §. Iam. pa. 1450. that the Church is the infallible Iudge in causes of faith per Ecclesiā intelligimus Pontificem Romanum we by the Church doe meane the Pope for the time being or him with a Councell Againe y Ibid. §. An. pd 1451. They object unto us that by the Church we understand the Pope Non abnuo I confesse wee meane so in deed This is plaine dealing by the Church they meane the Pope So Gregorie de Valentia z In 2. 2. disp 1. q. 1. By the name of the Church we understand the head of Church that is the Pope So Bozius a Lib. 2. de sig eccl ca. 21. §. His. lib.
Church and generall Councels to be infallible seeing their infallibility is none but onely by adhering and consenting to the Pope it necessarily ensueth that they all à fortiori doe beleeve and must professe the Pope to be infallible seeing on his the infallibility of both the other doth wholly and solely depend 12. Let me adde but one other proofe hereof taken from Supremacy of authoritie and judgement It is a ruled case in their learning Si o Bell. lib. 3. de verb. Dei ca. 5. § Quintū et lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 1. § Denique et lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 11. § De tertio errare non potest debet esse summus judex He who is infallible must be the highest and last Iudge and Vice versa He p Affirmant ejus judicium esse ultimū Hinc autem aperte sequitur non errare Bell. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 3 § Accedat who is the last and highest judge must be infallible Supremacy and infallibility of judgement are inseparably linked To whomsoever Supremacy is given even for that cause infallibility of judgement is granted unto him also for seeing from the last or supreme Iudge there can be no appeale it were most unjust to binde Christians to beleeve his sentence who might be deceived most unjust to binde them from appealing from a judge that were fallible or from an erronious judgement Consider now to whom Supremacy of judgement in causes of faith belongeth To whom else but to the Pope whereas some dare affirme saith the Canonist q Cupers com ad cap. oporteb pa. 4. nu 33. that a Councell is above the Pope Falsissimum est This is most false The Successor of Peter saith Stapleton r Rel Cont. 6. q. 3. art 5. opin 10. supra omnes est is above all Bishops Church generall Councels above all The Pope saith Bellarmine ſ Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 17. is simply and absolutely above the whole Church and above a generall Councell t Lib. eod ca. 14. § Vltimae Hee further tels us that this assertion That the Pope is above a generall Councell is not only the judgment of all the ancient Schoole Divines the cōmon sentence of their Writers of whom he reckoneth thirteene and if it were fit three times thirtie might bee scored up with them but that it is the publike doctrine of their Church decreed in their Laterane Synod under Leo the tenth There the Councell saith he u Lib. eod ca. 17. § Denique disertè ex professo docuit did plainly and of set purpose teach the Pope to bee above all Councels yea expressissimè x Lib. eod ca. 13. § Deinde rem definivit that Laterane Councell did most expresly define this and their definition hereof is Decretum de fide a Decree of faith for which cause in his Apology bearing the name of Schulkenius hee professeth y Ca. 6. § Probo pa. 227. that this is Articulus fidei an Article of faith such as every Christian is bound to beleeve that the Pope is Summus in terris totius Ecclesiae Iudex the Supreme last and highest Iudge of the whole Church here upon earth which he proves besides many other authorities by this very Laterane z Cap. eodem § Lateran pa. 249. decree and by their Trent Councell The words themselves of those Councels make the matter plaine in that at the Laterane Councell they thus decree Solum a Sess 11. pa. 639. b. Romanum Pontificem supra omnia Concilia authoritatem habere that the Pope alone hath authority above all Councels and this they say is taught not b Nedum ex Scripturae sacrae testimonio dictis sanctorum patrum c. Ibid. onely by Fathers and Councels but by the holy Scriptures thereby shewing that in this decree they explicate declare the Catholike faith which is one of the Cardinals notes to know when a decree is published by a Councell tanquam de fide as a decree of faith and they threaten the c Ibid. pa. 340. indignation of God and the blessed Apostles to the gainsayers of their decree A censure as heavy as any Anathema the denouncing whereof is another of the Cardinals notes that they proposed this decree as a decree of faith In the other at Trent the Councell teacheth d Sess 14. ca. 7. that unto the Pope is given Suprema potestas in universa Ecclesia the Supreme power in the whole Church And this Supremacy is such that from all Councels all other Iudges you may appeale to him and hee may reverse e Pontifex ut Princeps Ecclesiae summus potest retractare illud judicium Concilij Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 18. § Dico Potest approbare vel reprobare Idē lib. 2. ca. 11. § De tertio adnull or repeale their judgement but from him as being the last and highest Iudge as having supreme power qua f Bell. lib. eodem 2. ca. 18. § Praeterea nulla est major cui nulla est aequalis then which none is greater and to which none is equall you may appeale to none no not as some g Aug. Triump de potest Eccl. q. 6. ar 8. of them teach unto God himselfe The reason whereof is plaine for seeing the Popes sentence in such causes is the h Sententia Concilij cui praest Petrus est sententia Spiritus sancti Bell. lib. 3 de verb. Dei ca. 5. § Sextum Idem asserere possunt caetera legitima Concilia Bell. lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 2. § Tertius sentence of God uttered indeed by man but assistente i Bell. lib. 3. de verb. Dei ca. 10. § Decimum gubernante Spiritu Gods Spirit assisting guiding him therein if you appeale from him or his sentence you appeale even from God himselfe and Gods sentence Such soveraignty they give unto the Pope in his Cathedrall judgement Now because Infallibility is essentially and inseperably annexed to supremacie of judgement it hence evidently ensueth that as their Laterane and Trent Councels and with them all who hold their doctrine that is all who are members of their present Romane Church doe give supremacy of authority and judgement unto the Pope so with it they give also infallibility of judgement unto him their best Writers professing their generall Councels desining and decreeing their whole Church maintaining him and his Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to bee infallible which was the former point that I undertooke to declare 13. Suffer mee to goe yet one step further This assertion of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith is not onely a position of their Church which hitherto wee have declared but it is the very maine ground and fundamentall position on which all the faith doctrines and religion of the present Romane Church and of every member thereof doth relie For the manifesting whereof that must
diligently be remembred which we before have shewed that as when they commend the infallibility of the Church or Councell they meane nothing else then the Popes infallibility by consenting to whom the Church and Councell is infallible even so to the point that now I undertake to shew it is all one to declare them to teach that the Church or generall Councell is the foundation of faith as to say the Pope is the foundation thereof seeing neither the Church or Councell is such a foundation but onely by their consenting with and adhering to the Pope who is that foundation 14. This sometimes they will not let in plaine termes to professe Peter saith Bellarmine k Lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 3. § Secundo and every one of his successors est petra fundamentum Ecclesiae is the rocke and foundation of the Church In another place l Praef. in lib de Pont. § Quae. he calleth the Pope that very foundation of which God prophesied in Isaiah I m Isa 28.16 1 Pet. 2.8 lay in the foundations of Sion a stone a tried stone a precious corner stone a sure foundation Ecce vobis lapidem in fundamentis Sion saith Bellarmine pointing at the Pope behold the Pope is this stone laid in the foundations of Sion And in his Apology under the name of Schulkenius n Ca. 6. pa. 255. he cals these positioÌ„s of the Popes supremacy CardineÌ„ fundamentuÌ„ summaÌ„ fidei Christianae the Hinge the foundation the very summe of the Christian faith To the like purpose Pighius cals o Lib. 4 Hier. ca. 6. § Habes the Popes judgement Principium indubiae veritatis a principle of undoubted verity and that he meaneth the last and highest principle his whole Treatise doth delare Coster observes p Euch ca. de sum Pont § Nequc that the Pope is not onely the foundation but which is more the Rock other Apostles were foundations other Bishops are pillars of the Church but Peter and his Successor is that solid Rocke quae fundamenta ipsa continet which supporteth all other pillers and foundations To this purpose tends that assertion which is so frequent in their mouthes and writings q Bell. li. 4. de Pont. ca. 1. et l. 2. de Conc. ca. 14. § Vltima et Gretz def ca. 1. lib. 1. de verbo Dèi pa. 16. that in causes of faith ultimum judicium est summi Pontificis the last judgement belongs to the Pope Now if it bee the last in such causes then upon it as on the last and lowest foundation must every doctrine of their Church relie into his judgement it must last of all be resolved but it because it is the last into any higher judgement or lower foundation cannot possibly bee resolved 15. But their most ordinary and also most plausible way to expresse this is under the name of the Church teaching men to rest and stay their faith on it although in very truth as wee have shewed before all which they herein say of the Church doth in right and properly belong to the Pope onely and to the Church but onely by reason of him who is the head thereof The r Lib. de Eccl. milit ca. 10 § Ad haec tradition of the Scriptures and all doctrines of faith whatsoever doe depend of the testimony of the Church saith Bellarmine Againe The Å¿ Lib. de effect Sacr. ca. 25 § Tertium certainty of all ancient Councels and of all doctrines doth depend on the authority of the present Church And yet more fully t Lib. 6. de grat et lib. arb ca. 3. § At Catholici The faith which Catholikes have is altogether certaine and infallible for what they beleeve they doe therefore beleeve it because God hath revealed it and they beleeve God to have revealed it quoniam Ecclâ—siam ita dicentem vel declarantem audiunt because they heare the Church telling them that God revealed it So Bellarmine who plainly professeth the testimony of the present Church that is of the Pope to bee the last reason why they beleeve any doctrine and so the very last and lowest foundatioÌ„ on which their faith doth relie None more plentifull in this point than StapletoÌ„ The externall testimony of the Church saith he u Tripl cont Whit. ca. 11. § Venies Fundamentum quoddam fidei nostrae verè propriè est is truly and properly a foundation of our faith Againe x Dupl cont Whit. ca. 16. sect 4. the voyce of the Church est regula omnium quae creduntur the rule and measure of all things which are beleeved Againe y Tripl ca. 16. § At qui. whatsoever is beleeved by the Catholike faith wee Catholikes beleeve that propter Ecclesiae authoritatem by reason of the Churches authority we z Relect. Cont. 4 q. 1 art 3. ad 8. beleeve the Church tanquam Medium credendi omnia as the Medium or reason why we beleeve all other things And yet more fully in his doctrinall principles a Doct. Prin. lib. 8. ca. 21 § Hic when we professe in our Creed to beleeve the Catholike Church the sense hereof though perhaps not Grammaticall for the Pope and his divinity is not subject to Grammer rules yet certainly the Theologicall sense is this Credo illa omnia quae Deus per Ecclesiam me docuit I beleeve all those things which God hath revealed and taught mee by the Church But how know you or why beleeve you this Deum per Ecclesiam revelare that all those things which the Church teacheth are revealed and taught of GOD What say you to this which is one peece of your Creede To this Stapleton both in that place b Ca. Eod. § Adsecundam and againe in his Relections c Reâ— Cont 4. q. 3. art 2. ad 8. gives a most remarkeable answer This that God revealeth those things by the Church is no distinct Article of faith sed est quoddam transcendens fidei Axioma atque principium ex quo hic alij omnes Articuli deducuntur but this is a transcendent Maxime and principle of faith upon which both this it owne selfe note this especially and all other Articles of faith doe depend upon this all Articles of faith doe hang hoc unum praesupponunt they all praesuppose this and take it for granted This and much more hath Stapleton 16. But what speake I of Bellarmine or Stapleton though the latter hath most diligently sifted this cause This position that the Church is the last Iudge and so the lowest foundation of their faith is the decreed doctrine of their Trent Councell and therefore the consenting voyce of their whole Church and of every member thereof For in that Councell d Sess 4. § Praeterea the Church is defined to bee the Iudge of the sense and interpretation of the Scriptures and by the like reason it is to judge of traditions and of the
sense of them Now because all doubts and controversies of faith depend on the one of these it clearly followeth upon that decree that the very last stay in all doubts of faith is the Churches judgement but that upon no other nor higher stay doth or can relie for whatsoever you take besides this the truth the waight and validity of all must be tried in the Church at her judgement it must stand or fall yea if you make a doubt of the Churches judgement it selfe even that as all other must be ended by the judgement of the Church it is the last Iudge of all This to bee the true meaning of the Trent Councel Bellarmine both saw and professeth when hee saith e Lib. 3. de verbo Dei ca. 3. § Tota The Church that is the Pope with a Councell is Iudge of the sense of the Scripture omnium controversiarum and of all controversies of faith and in this all Catholikes do agree and it is expresly set downe in the Trent Councell So Bellarmine testifying this to be both the decreed doctrine of their generall and approved Councell and the consenting judgment of all that are Romane Catholikes 17. Now all this which they have said of the Church if you will have it in plaine termes and without circumloquution belongs onely to the Pope who is vertually both Church and Councell As the Church or Councell is called infallible no otherwise but by a Synechdoche because the Pope who is the head both of Church and Councell is infallible So is the Church or Councell called the foundation of faith or last principle on which their faith must relie by the same figure Synechdoche because the Pope who is the head of them both is the foundation of faith And whosoever is a true Romane Catholike or member of their present Church hee beleeveth all other doctrines because the Church that is the Pope doth teach them and the Pope to teach them infallibly he beleeveth for it selfe because the Pope saith hee is in such teaching infallible This infallibility of the Pope is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very corner stone the foundation on stone the rocke and fundamentall position of their whole faith and religion which was the point that I purposed to declare 18. I have hitherto declared and I feare too abundantly that the assertion of the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie in causes of faith is not onely a position but the very fundamentall position of all the doctrines of the present Romane Church In the next place we are to prove that this position is hereticall and that for such it was adjudged and condemned by the Catholike Church In the proofe whereof I shall not need to stay long This whole treatise and even that which hath already beene declared touching the Constitution of Pope Vigilius doth evidently confirme the same For seeing the defending of the Three Chapters hath been proved f Ca. 3. 4. to be hereticall the Constitution of Vigilius made in defence of those Chapters must of necessity be confessed to be hereticall Nay if you well consider you shall see that this very position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibilitie is adjudged to bee hereticall For the fift generall Councell knew this cause of the Three Chapters to bee a cause of faith They knew further that Pope Vigilius by his Apostolicall decree and Cathedrall Constitution had defined that those Three Chapters ought to bee defended Now seeing they knew both these and yet judicially defined the defence of those Three Chapters to be hereticall and for such accursed it even in doing this they define the Cathedrall judgement of Vigilius in this cause of Faith to be hereticall and therefore most certainly and à fortiori define this position That the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith is infallible to bee hereticall and for such they anathematize both it and all that defend it And because the judgement and definitive sentence of the fift Councell is consonant to all former and confirmed by all subsequent Councels till the Laterane Synod under Leo the tenth it unavoydably hence ensueth that the same position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith is by the judgement of all generall Councells untill that time that is by the constant and uniforme consent of the whole Catholike Church adjudged condemned and accursed for hereticall and all who defend it for heretikes And seeing we have cleerly proved the whole present Romane Church and all that are members therof to defend this position yea to defend it as the maine foundation of their whole faith the evidence of that assertion which I proposed g Sup. hoc cap. nu 6. doth now manifestly appeare That none can now assent to the Pope or to the doctrines of the present Church of Rome but he is eo nomine even for that very cause adjudged and condemned for hereticall and that even in the very ground and foundation of his faith 19. From the foundation let us proceed to the walls and roofe of their religion Thinke you the foundation thereof is onely hereticall and the doctrines which they build thereon orthodoxall Nothing lesse They are both sutable both hereticall That one fundamentall position is like the Trojan horse in the wombe of it are hid many troopes of heresies If Liberius confirme Arianisme Honorius Monothelitisme Vigilius Nestorianisme these all by vertue of that one assertion must passe currant for Catholike truths Nay who can comprehend I say not in words or writing but in his thought and imagination all the blasphemous and hereticall doctrines which by all their Popes have beene or if as yet they have not which hereafter may be by succeeding Popes defined to bee doctrines of faith Seeing Stapleton h Lib. 9. doct prin ca. 14. §. Manet assures us That the Church of this or any succeeding age may put into the Canon and number of sacred and undoubtedly Canonicall bookes the booke of Hermas called Pastor and the Constitutions of Clement the former being as their owne notes censure it i Notae in lib. Hermae to 5. Bibl. S. patr haeresibus fabulis oppletus full of heresies and fables rejected by Pope Gelasius k Concil Rom. primū sub Gelasio with his Romane Synod the later being stuffed also with many impious doctrines condemning m Const Clem. lib. 3. ca. 2. lawfull mariage as fornication and allowing n Idem lib. 8. ca. 32. fornication as lawfull with many the like impieties which in Possevine o Bibl. in verbo Clemens Rom. are to bee seene together for which cause they are worthily rejected in the Canons p Can. 2. of the sixt Councell seeing the Pope may canonize these what blasphemies what heresies what lies may not with them be canonized why may not their very Legend in the next Session bee declared to be Canonicall And yet by that fundamentall position they are bound and now doe implicitè beleeve whatsoever
any Pope either by word or writing either hath already or shall at any time hereafter define to be a doctrine of faith Because I will not stay on particulars if any please seriously to consider this matter hee shall perceive that which now I intend to prove such venome of infidelity to lye in that one fundamentall position of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility that by reason of holding it they neither doe nor can beleeve or hold with certaintie of faith any one point or doctrine which they professe to beleeve and hold upon that Foundation 20. For the clearing of which point being very materiall it is to be observed that unto certainty of faith two things are of necessity required The one ex parte objecti on the part of thing beleeved which must be so true and certaine in it selfe that it cannot possibly bee or have beene otherwise then it is beleeved to be to have beene or to be hereafter And therefore none can truly beleeve any untruth for nothing which is untrue is or can be the object of faith The other thing is required ex parte subjecti on the part of him who beleeveth Now faith being onely of such things as are inevident that is which neither by sense can be perceived nor by naturall reason collected or found out but which are onely by the testimonie of such as first knew them made knowne unto us and none doth or can know that which is supernaturall unlesse God himselfe reveale the same unto him it hence followeth that whatsoever is by any beleeved the same is revealed and testified to him by God himselfe who is infallible and further that it is certainly knowne unto him who beleeveth that it is God himselfe who doth reveale and testifie that thing unto him For otherwise though the doctrine proposed be in it selfe never so certaine and divine yet unto thee or me it cannot be certaine nor held by certainty of faith unlesse first we be sure and infallibly certaine that he who testifieth it unto us is himselfe infallible that is that he is God Let us for perspicuity call the former of these two materiale fidei the materiall in faith or the thing beleeved and the later formale fidei that which is formall in faith seeing as the former is the thing beleeved so the later containes the reason the ground or foundation upon which and for which it is beleeved 21. Consider now first the materials in their faith In them there is a great difference for some of them are in themselves credible as being divine truths and true objects of faith Such are all those Catholike truths common to us and them as that there is a Trinity that Christ was borne of a Virgin dyed rose againe and the like Others are in themselves untrue such as cannot be the object of faith Of this sort are all those doctrines wherin they dissent from us Transubstantiation reall and proper sacrifice worshipping of Images Purgatory Iustification by the merit or dignity of our works and the like which may rightly bee called popish doctrines The later sort of these they neither doe nor can beleeve The former they might but they doe not beleeve The reason whereof will appeare by considering that which is formall or the fundamentall ground of their faith where it is first to be observed that a man may hold many yea all the doctrines professed by the present Church except that one of the Popes Cathedrall infallibility and yet bee no Papist or member of their present Church For although the things professed or the Materialls be the selfe same yet the formalitie or diverse reason of holding them causeth a maine difference in the parties that hold them And for our present purpose it may suffice to note three divers wayes whereby their doctrines are or may be held 22. The first is of them who build all those doctrines upon the Scripture as the Foundation thereof upon that ground holding not onely many Catholike truths which they most firmly beleeve the Church inducing the Scriptures outwardly teaching and the holy Spirit inwardly sealing the same unto them but together with those truths hold some errors also of the Romane Church take for example Transubstantiation which although for the inducement of that present Church wherein they live they thinke to be taught in the Scriptures and therefore hold and professe them and thinke they beleeve them yet because they are neither in truth taught in the Scriptures nor sealed by Gods Spirit unto their hearts therefore they hold not these nor in truth can they hold them with that firmnesse and certainty of faith as they doe the former truths but they have a faintnes and feare in their assent unto these and so a readines and willing preparation of heart to disclaime these and to hold or professe the contrary if ever it may be fully cleared manifested out of the Scriptures unto them Of this sort we doubt not but many thousands of our fathers were who living in the darknesse thicke mists of their Antichristian superstition upon the Scriptures word of God which they held for the foundation of their saith builded indeed much gold precious stones but with a mixture of much hay stubble drosse thinking but very erroneously the later as well as the former to be contained in that foundation The state of all these is very like to S. Cyprians and those other Africane Bishops which were so earnest for Rebaptizatiō supposing it to be taught in the Scriptures though the foundation of it of those catholike truths that Christ was God or the like was one and the same unto them yet they held not both with like firmnes certainty of faith The doctrine of Christs deity manhood they so beleeved that they would not cōmunicate with any that denied this nay they would rather die then deny it But Rebaptization they so held as not thinking their opposites to be heretikes nor refusing p Haecre scripsimus nemini praescribentes aut praejudicantes quo minus unusquisque quod putaverit faciat habent liberam arbitrij sui facultatē Nos autem cum Collegis nostris non contendimus cum quibus divinam dominicam pacem tenemus Cyp. Epist ad Iubaian in fine vid. August lib. 5. de Baptis ca. 17. to cōmunicate with thē that denyed it so they held this with a certaine faintnes of faith or rather as indeed it was of opinion and not of faith having a preparation in heart to beleeve and professe the contrary if it might at any time be made manifest unto them This S. Austen often witnesseth of Cyprian Satis q Lib. 2. de Baptis ca. 4. ostendit se facillime correcturum he sufficiently declareth that hee would most easily have altered his opinion if any would have demonstrated the truth unto him Againe r Lib. 4 ca. 5. That holy man Cyprian being non solum doctus sed docilis not onely
learned but willing to learne and who sets this among the prayses of a Bishop that hee ought not onely to teach with knowledge but learne with patience hee I doubt not would readily have demonstrated not onely how learned but how willing to learne himselfe had beene had this question in his life time beene debated by such learned and holy men as afterwards it was I often admire that one observation among many which the same ſ Lib. 1. ca. 18. Augustine makes touching this error in Cyprian of whom being so very learned he saith Propterea non vidit aliquid ut per eum aliud eminentius videretur He therefore saw not this one truth touching Rebaptization that others might see in him a more eminent and excellent truth And what truth is that In him we may see the truth of Humilitie the truth of modestie the truth of Charitie and ardent love to the peace and unitie of the Church but the most excellent truth that I can see or as I thinke can be seene in erring Cyprian is this that one may be a true Catholike a Catholike Bishop a pillar of Gods Church yea even a Saint and glorious Martyr and yet hold an error in faith as did that holy Catholike Bishop and blessed Martyr Saint Cyprian To him then and the other Africane Bishops who in like sort erred as he did may fitly be compared the state of those servants of God who in the blindnesse and invincible ignorance of those times of Antichrist together with many golden truths which they most firmely beleeved upon that solid foundation of the Scriptures held either Transubstantiation or the like errors thinking them as Cyprian did of Rebaptization to be taught in that foundation also They erred in some doctrines of faith as Cyprian did yet notwithstanding those errors they may be Catholikes and blessed as Cyprian was because they both firmely beleeved many Catholike truths and their error was without pertinacie as Cyprians was For none who truly beleeves the Scripture and holds it for the foundation of his faith can with pertinacie hold any doctrine repugnant to the Scripture seeing in his very beleeveing of the Scripture and holding it as the foundation he doth in truth though implicitiè and in radice as I may say beleeve the flat contrarie to that error which explicitè he professeth And because he doth implicitè beleeve the contrarie thereof he hath even all the time while he so erreth a readinesse and preparation of hart to professe the contrarie whensoever out of the Scripture it shall bee deduced and manifested unto him 23. A second way of holding those doctrines is of them who together with the truths hold the errours also of their Church Transubstantiation Purgatorie or the like thinking them to bee taught in Scriptures as did the former but adding obstinacie or pertinacie to their holding of them which the former did not And their pertinacie is apparant hereby if either they will not yeeld to the truth being manifested out of the Scriptures unto them or if before such manifestation they be so addicted and wedded to their owne wills and conceits that they resolve either not to heare or if they doe heare not to yeeld to the evidence of reason when they are convinced by it For it is certaine that one may bee truly pertinacious not onely after conviction and manifestation of the truth but even before it also if he have a resolution not to yeeld to the authority and weight of convincing reasons Of this sort were all those who ever since their second Nicen Synod about which time the Romane Church made their first publike defection from the true and ancient faith tooke part with that faction in the Church which maintained the adoration of Images and after that Deposing of Princes then Transubstantiation and other like heresies as they crept by degrees into the Church in severall ages From that time untill Leo the tenth the Church was like a confused lumpe wherein both gold and drosse were mingled together or like a great Citie infected with the plague All as well the sicke as sound lived together within the walls and bounds of that Citie but all were not infected and of those that were not all alike infected with those hereticall diseases which then raigned more and more prevaled in the Church Some openly and constantly withstood the corruptions and heresies of their time and being worthy Martyrs sealed with their blood that truth which they professed Others dissented from the same errors but durst not with courage and sortitude oppose themselves such as would say to their friends in private Thus ſ Paralip ad Abb. Vsperg pa. 448. I would say in the schooles and openly sed maneat inter nos diversum sentio but keepe my counsell I thinke the contrarie Many were tainted with those Epidemicall diseases by the very contagion of those with whom they did converse but that strong Antidote in the foundation which preserved Cyprian and the Africane Bishops kept from their hearts and at last overcame all the poyson wherewith they were infected Onely that violent and strong faction which pertinaciously adhered to the hereticall doctrines which then sprung up the head of which faction was the Pope and who preferred their owne opinions before the truth out of the Scriptures manifested unto them and by some Councels also decreed as namely by that at Constantinople in the time of Constantinus Iconomachus and that at Frankford these I say who wilfully and maliciously resisted yea persecuted the truth and such as stood in defence of it are those who are ranked in this second order who though they are not in proprietie of speech to bee called Papists yet because the errors which they held are the same which the Popish Church now maintaineth they are truly and properly to be tearmed Popish Heretickes 24. The third way of holding their doctrines beganne with their Lateran decree under Leo the tenth at which time they held the same doctrines which they did before but they held thē now upon another Foundation For thē they cast away the old and sure Foundation and laid a new one of their owne in the roome thereof The Popes word in stead of Gods and Antichrists in stead of Christs For although the Pope long before that time had made no small progresse in Antichristianisme first in usurping an universall authority over all Bishops next in upholding their impious doctrines of Adoration of Images and the like and after that in exalting himselfe above all Kings and Emperors giving and taking away their Crownes at his pleasure yet the height of the Antichristian mysterie consisted in none of these nor did he ever attaine unto it till by vertue of that Laterane decree he had justled out Christ and his word and laid himselfe and his owne word in the stead thereof for the Rocke Foundation of the Catholike faith In the first the Pope was but Antichrist nascent In the
second Antichrist crescent In the third Antichrist regnant but in this fourth he is made Lord of the Catholike faith and Antichrist triumphant set up as God in the Church of God ruling nay tyrannizing not onely in the externall and temporall estates but even in the faith and Consciences of all men so that they may beleeve neither more nor lesse nor otherwise then he prescribeth nay that they may not beleeve the very Scriptures themselves and word of God or that there are any Scriptures at all or that there is a God but for this reason ipse dixit because he saith so and his saying being a TransceÌ„dent principle of faith they must beleeve for it selfe quia ipse dixit because he saith so In the first and second hee usurped the authority and place but of Bishops in the third but of Kings but in making himselfe the Rocke and Foundation of faith he intrudes himselfe into the most proper office and prerogative of Iesus Christ For t 1 Cor. 3.11 other foundation can no man lay then that which is laid Iesus Christ 25. Here was now quite a new face of the Romane Church yea it was now made a new Church of it selfe in the very essence thereof distinct from the other part of the Church and from that which it was before For although most of the Materialls as Adoration of Images Transubstantiation and the rest were the same yet the Formalitie and foundation of their faith and Church was quite altered Before they beleeved the Pope to doe rightly in decreeing Transubstantiation because they beleeued the Scriptures and word of God to teach and warrant that doctrine but now vice versa they beleeve the Scriptures and word of God to teach Transubstantiation because the Pope hath decreed and warranted the same Till then one might be a good Catholike and member of their Church such as were the Bishops in the generall Councels of Constance and Basill and those of the fift sixt seventh and succeding Councels and yet hold the Popes Cathedrall judgement in causes of faith to bee not onely fallible but hereticall and accursed as all those Councels did But since Supremacie and with it Infallibilitie of judgement is by their Laterane decree transferred to the Pope he who now gainsayeth the Popes sentence in a cause of faith is none of their Church as out of Gregory de Valentia he is an heretike as out of Stapleton Canus and Bellarmine was u Sup. hoc cap. nu 7 declared He may as well deny all the Articles of his Creed and every text in the whole Bible as deny this one point for in denying it he doth eo ipso by their doctrine implicitè and in effect deny them all seeing he rejects that formall reason for which and that foundation upon which they are all to be beleeved and without beleefe of which not one of them all can be now beleeved 26. These then of this third sort are truly to he counted members of their present Romane Church these who lay this new Laterane foundatioÌ„ for the ground of their faith whether explicitè as do the learned or implicitè as do the simpler sort in their Church who wilfully blind-folding themselves and gladly persisting in their affectate and supine ignorance either will not use the meanes to see or seeing will not embrace the truth but content themselves with the Colliars x Hos de author sac Script lib. 3. § Quaerit Catechisme and wrap up their owne in the Churches faith saying I beleeve as the Church beleeveth and the Church beleeveth what the Pope teacheth All these and onely these are members of their present Church unto whom of all names as that of Catholikes is most unsutable and most unjustly arrogated by themselves so the name of Papists or which is equivalent Antichristians doth most fitly truly and in propriety of speech belong unto them For seeing forma dat nomen esse whence rather should they have their essentiall appellation then from him who giveth life formality and essence to their faith on whom as on the Rocke and corner-stone their whole faith dependeth The saying of Cassander to this purpose is worthy remembring There are some saith hee y Lib. de offic viri â—ij § Sunt alij who will not permit the present state of the Church though it be corrupted to be changed or reformed and who Pontificem Romanum quem Papam dicimus tantùm non deum faciunt make the Bishop of Rome whom we call the Pope almost a god preferring his authority not onely above the whole Church but above the Sacred Scripture holding his judgement equall to the divine Oracles and an infallible rule of faith Hos non video cur minus Pseudo-catholicos Papistas appellare possis I see no reason but that these men should be called Pseudo-catholikes or Papists Thus Cassander upon whose judicious observatioÌ„ it followeth that seeing their whole Church and all the members thereof preferre the Popes authority above the whole Church above all generall Councels and quoad nos which is Cassanders meaning above z Ecce potestas Ecclesiae supra Script Enchyr. tit de Eccles the Scriptures also defending them not to be a Enchyr. Ibid. authenticall but by the authority of the Church that there is multo b Th. Boz lib. de signis Eccl. 16. ca. 10. § Illud major authoritas much more authoritie in the Church than in them that it is no c Non adeo absurde dictum est c. Gretz Appen 2. ad lib. 1. de verb. dei pa. 396. absurd nay p Potuit illud pio sensu dici Hos lib. 3. de author Script § Fingamus it may be a pious d saying That the Scriptures without the authoritie of the Church are no more worth than Aesops Fables seeing they all with one consent make the Pope the last supreme and infallible Iudge in all causes of faith there can bee no name devised more proper and fit for them than that of Papists or which is all one Antichristians both which expresse their essentiall dependence on the Pope or Antichrist as on the foundation of their faith which name most essentially also differenceth them from all others which are not of their present Church especially from true Catholikes or the Reformed Churches seeing as we make Christ and his word so they on the contrary make the Pope that is to say Antichrist and his word the ground and foundation of faith In regard wherof as the faith religion of the one is from Christ truly called Christian and they truly Christians so the faith and religion of the other is from the Pope or Antichrist truly and properly called Papisme or Antichristianisme and the professors of it Papists or Antichristians And whereas Bellarmine e Lib. de not Eccl. ca. 4. glorieth of this very name of Papists that it doth attestari veritati give testimony to that truth which they
professe truly we envy not so apt a name unto them Onely the Cardinal shews himself a very unskilful Herald in the blazony of this coat the descēt of this title unto them He fetcheth f Papista deducitur à Papa qualis fuit Petrus Christus ipse ibid. it forsooth frō Pope Clement Pope Peter and Pope Christ Phy it is of no such antiquity nor of so honourable a race Their owne Bristow will assure g Demand ◠him that this name was never heard of till the dayes of Leo the tenth Neither are they so called as the Cardinall fancieth because they hold communion in faith with the Pope which for sixe hundred yeares and more all Christians did and yet were not Papists nor ever so called but because they hold the Popes judgement to be supreme and infallible and so build their faith on him as on the foundation thereof which their owne Church never did till the time of Leo the tenth It is not then the Lion of the Tribe of Iudah but the Lion of that Laterane Synod who is the first God father of that name unto them when hee had once laid the Pope as the foundation of faith in stead of Christ they who then builded their faith upon this new foundation were fitly christened with this name of Papists to distinguish them and their present Romane Church from all others who held the old good and sure foundation 26. You see now the great diuersity which ariseth from the divers manner of holding the same doctrines The errours maintained by all those three sorts of which I have spoken are almost the same and materially they are Popish heresies and yet the first sort did onely erre therein but were not heretikes because not pertinacious The second doe not onely erre but by adding pertinacy to errour are truly heretikes but yet not Papists because they hold those Popish heresies in another manner and on another foundation then Papists doe The third and last sort which containeth all and onely those who are members of the present Romane Church doe both erre and are heretikes and which is the worst degree of heresie are Papists that is Antichristian heretikes not onely holding and that in the highest degree of pertinacy those heresies which are contrary to the faith but holding them upon that foundation which quite overthroweth the faith 27. By this now doth the evidence of that truth appeare which before h Sup. nu 19. I proposed that none who hold the Popes infallibility in causes of faith for their foundation that is none of the present Romane Church either doth or can beleeve any one doctrine of faith which they professe For seeing the beleefe of all other points relyes upō this so that they beleeve thē because they first beleeve this it followeth by that true rule of the Philosopher i Arist lib. 1. demon ca. 2. Propter quod unumquodque illud magis that they doe more firmely and certainly beleeve this which is the foundation than they doe or can beleeve any other doctrine I say not Transubstantiation or Purgatory but more thā that Article of their Creed that Christ is God or that there is a God or any the like which is builded upon this foundatiō And seeing we have cleerly demonstrated that foundation to bee not onely untrue but hereticall and therefore such as cannot be apprehended by faith it being no true object of faith it doth evidently hence ensue that they neither doe nor can beleeve any one doctrine position or point of faith Impossible it is that the roofe should bee more firme than the foundation which supports the roof or the conclusion more certaine unto us than those premisses which cause us to assent and make us certaine of the conclusion That one fundamentall uncertainty contrariety to the faith which is vertually in all the rest breeds the like uncertainty and contrariety to faith in them all and like a Radicall poyson spreads it selfe into the whole body of their religion infecting every arme branch and twigge of their doctrine and faith whatsoever errour or heresie they maintaine and those are not a few those they neither doe nor can beleeve because they are no objects of faith whatsoever truths they maintaine and no doubt they doe many those they thinke they doe and they might doe but indeed they doe not beleeve because they hold them for that reason and upon that foundation which is contrary to faith and which overthroweth the faith For to hold or professe that Christ is God or that there is a God eo nomine because the Devill or Antichrist or a fallible man testifieth it unto us is not truly to beleeve but to overthrow the faith 28. This may be further cleared by returning to our example of Vigilius If because the Pope judicially defineth a doctrine of faith they doe therefore beleeve it then must they beleeve Nestorianisme to be the truth and Christ not to bee God because Pope Vigilius by his judiciall and Apostolicall sentence hath decreed this in decreeing that the three Chapters are to be defēded If they beleeve not this then can they beleeve nothing at all eo nomine because the Pope hath defined it and then the foundation of their faith being abolished their whole faith together with it must needs be abolished also Againe if because the Pope defineth a doctrine they doe therefore beleeve it then seeing Pope Caelestine with the Ephesine and Pope Leo with the Chalcedon Councell decreed Nestorianisme to be heresie they by the strength of their fundamental positiō of the Popes infallibility must at one and the same time beleeve both Nestorianisme to be truth as Pope Vigilius defined and Nestorianisme to be heresie as Pope Caelestine and Leo defined and so they must either beleeve two contradictories to be both true yea to bee truths of the Catholike faith which to beleeve is impossible or else they must beleeve that it is impossible to beleeve either the one or the other eo nomine because the Pope hath defined it and so beleeve it to bee impossible to beleeve that which is the foundation of their whole faith Neither is this true onely in other points but even in this very foundation it selfe for the fift Councell which decreed the Cathedrall and Apostolicall sentence in the cause of the Three Chapters to be hereticall was approved by the decrees of Pope Gregory Agatho and the rest unto Leo the tenth If then they beleeve a doctrine to be true because the Pope hath defined it then must they beleeve the Popes Cathedral sentence in a cause of faith to bee not onely fallible but hereticall and so beleeve that upon this fallible and hereticall foundation they can build no doctrine of faith nor hold thereupon any thing with certainty of faith So if the Pope in defining such causes be fallible then for this cause can they have no faith nor beleeve ought with certainty of faith seeing all
relies upon a fallible foundation If the Pope in defining such causes be infallible then also can they have no faith seeing by the infallble decrees of Pope Gregory Agatho and the rest unto Leo the tenth the Popes Cathedrall sentence in a cause of faith may bee hereticall as this of Pope Vigilius by their judgement was So whether the Pope in such causes be fallible or infallible it infallibly followeth upon either that none who builds his faith upon that foundation that is none who are members of their present Romane Church can beleeve or hold with certainty of faith any doctrine whatsoever which he professeth to beleeve 29. Here I cannot chuse but to the unspeakeable comfort of all true beleevers observe a wonderfull difference betwixt us and them arising from that diversitie of the foundation which they and we hold their foundation being not onely uncertaine but hereticall and Antichristian poysoneth all which they build thereon it being vertually in them all makes them all like it selfe uncertaine hereticall and Antichristian and so those very doctrines which in themselves are most certaine and orthodoxall by the uncertainty of that ground upon which and for which they are beleeved are overthrowne with us and all Catholikes it fals out otherwise Though such happen to erre in some one or moe doctrines of faith say in Transubstantiation Purgatory or as Cyprian did in Rebaptization yet seeing they hold those errors because they thinke them to be taught in the Scriptures and Word of God on which alone their faith relyeth most firmely and undoubtedly beleeving whatsoever is taught therein among which things are the contrary doctrines to Transubstantiatiō Purgatory Rebaptization such I say even while they doe thus erre in their Explicite profession doe truly though implicitè by consequent and in radice or fundamento beleeve and that most firmely the quite contrary to those errours which they doe outwardly professe and think they doe but indeed doe not beleeve The vertue and strength of that fundamentall truth which they indeed and truly beleeve overcommeth all their errours which in very deed they doe not though they thinke they doe beleeve whereas in very truth they beleeve the quite contrary And this golden foundation in Christ which such men though erring in some points doe constantly hold shall more prevaile to their salvation than the Hay and Stubble of those errours which ignorantly but not pertinaciously they build thereon can prevaile to their destruction and therefore if such a man happen to die without explicite notice and repentance of those errours in particular as the saying of Saint Austen k Lib. 1. de baptism ca. 18. that what faults Saint Cyprian had contracted by humane imbecillity the same by his glorious Martyrdome was washed away perswades mee that Cyprian did and as of Irene Nepos Iustine Martyr and others who held the errour of the Chiliasts I thinke none makes doubt it is not to be doubted but the abundance of this mans faith and love unto Christ to whom in the foundation hee most firmely adhereth shall worke the like effect in him as did the blood of martyrdome in Saint Cypran For the baptisme of martyrdome washeth away sinne not because it is a washing in blood but because it testifieth the inward washing of his heart by faith and by the purging Spirit of God This inward washing in whomsoever it is found and found it is in all who truly beleeve though in some point of faith they erre it is as forcible and effectuall to save Valentinian l Ablutus ascendit quē sua fides lavit Amb. Orat. de obitu Valent. neither baptized with water nor with blood and Nepos m Qui jam ad quietem processit ait Dionys apud Euseb l. 1. ca. 23. baptized with water but not with blood as to save Cyprian baptized both with water and with blood Such a comfort and happinesse it is to hold the right and true foundation of faith 30. The quite contrary is to be seen in them Though they explicitè professe Christ to be God which is a most orthodoxall truth yet because they hold this as all other points upon that foundation of the Popes infallible judgement in causes of faith and in that foundation this is denyed Pope Vigilius by his Cathedrall Constitution defining Nestorianisme to be truth and so Christ not to be God it must needs be confessed that even while they doe explicitè professe Christ to bee God they doe implicitè in radice and in fundamento deny Christ to be God and because by the Philosophers rule they doe more firmely beleeve that foundation than they doe or can beleeve any doctrine depending thereon it must needs ensue hence that they doe and must by their doctrine more firmely beleeve the Negative that Christ is not God which in the foundation is decreed then they doe or can beleeve the Affirmative that Christ is God which upon that foundation is builded The truth which upon that foundation they doe explicitè professe cannot possibly be so strong to salvation as the errour of the foundation upon which they build it will be to destruction For the fundamentall errour is never amended by any truth superedified and laid thereon no more than the rotten foundation of an house is made sound by laying upon it rafters of gold or silver but all the truths that are superedified are ruinated by that fundamentall errour and uncertainty on which they all relye even as the beames and rafters of gold are ruinated by that rottennesse and unsoundnesse which resteth in the foundation Or if they say that both the assertions which are directly contradictory are from that foundation deduced Caelestine and Leo decreeing the one that Christ is God as Vigilius decreed the other that Christ is not God then doth it inevitably follow that they can truly beleeve neither the one nor the other seeing by beleeving that foundation they must equally beleeve them both which is impossible Such an unhappy and wretched thing it is to hold that erroneous hereticall and Antichristian foundation of faith 31. My conclusion of this point is this Seeing we have first declared that all who are members of the present Romane Church doe hold the Popes Cathedrall infallibility in causes of faith yea hold it as the very foundation on which all their other doctrines faith and religion doth relye and seeing wee have next demonstrated this to be a fundamentall heresie and not onely an hereticall but an Antichristian foundation condemned by Scriptures by generall Councels by ancient Fathers and by the consenting judgement of the whole Catholike Church that now hence followeth which I proposed n Sup. nu 6. to prove that none is or can bee a member of their present Church but the same is convicted and condemned for an heretike by Scriptures generall Councels Fathers and by the uniforme consent of the Catholike Church An heretike first in the very foundation of his faith which
being Antichristian is hereticall in the highest and worst degree that may be razing the true foundation of faith in regard whereof the mystery of Antichristianisme farre surpasseth all the heresies that ever went before or shall ever follow after it An heretike secondly in many particular doctrines depending on that Foundation among which are the heresies and blasphemies of the Nestorians all which by the Cathedrall constitution of Vigilius are decreed to be truths and by all men to be defended Lastly an heretike vertually and quoad radicem in every doctrine of faith which hee holdeth or professeth and so hereticall therein that the very holding of Catholike truths becomes unto him hereticall seeing he holds them upon that Foundation which is not only contrary to faith but which overthroweth the whole faith Reward o Rev. 18 6. Babylon O ye servants of the Lord as she hath rewarded you give her double according to her workes and in the cup that she hath filled to you fill her the double 32. From hence there ensueth one other conclusion which being worthy observing I may not well omit And this it is That in none at all of their Church or of the same faith with it there neither is nor can be so long as they remaine such any piety or holinesse either in their life or in any of their actions nor any act which is truly good and acceptable unto God is or can be performed by any of them For true faith is the Foundation and fountaine of all true pietie and good actions it being impossible as the Apostle teacheth without p Heb. 11.6 faith to please God and to the q Tit. 1.15 unbeleevers all things are impure even their mindes and consciences are defiled How much more their outward actions speeches writings and thoughts which all spring from the heart To this purpose is that in the Prophet Haggai r Ca. 2.14.15 who demandeth of the Priests If a polluted person such are all whose hearts are not purified ſ Act. 15.9 by faith touch any of these things either holy bread or holy wine or any holy thing shall it be uncleane And the Priests answered and said It shall be unclean The pollution of him that toucheth it pollutes all even the most holy things that are Then answered Haggai and said So is this people and so is this Nation before me saith the Lord. So are all the workes of their hands and that which they offer is uncleane The same agreeth to those of whom we intreat The infidelity of their hearts pollutes all their actions seeme they never so holy their almes-deedes and workes of charity their righteousnesse and workes of justice their fastings continency and workes of temperance their prayers sacraments sacrifices and workes of pietie the fountaine being poysoned with infidelity and want of true faith all the waters every river and little brooke derived from it carieth the same infection in it which it tooke at the spring Saint Austen is plentifull in this point Where the faith saith he t Lib. 5. cont Faust ca. 11. is fained or unsound non potest ex ea bona vita existere there can no good life be or arise from it In another place u Lib. 1. de Nup. Conc. ca. 3. hee sheweth that even to keepe ones selfe chast or continent and yet to doe this without faith is a sinne and that thereby non peccata coercentur sed alijs peccatis alia peccata vincuntur sinnes are not expelled but one sinne of intemperancy is overcome by another sinne of continency wanting faith To omit many the like heare what he saith to the Manichees boasting as they x Potest homo facere plus quā Deus praecipit igitur multo magis potest implere praeceptum Bell. lib. 4. de Iustif ca. 13. §. Accedant Catholici omnes docent legem dei justis hominibus esse absolutè possibilem lib. eod ca. 10 §. Porr◠of the Romane Church doe that they fulfilled the Law Why y Aust lib. 5. contra Faust ca. 5. doe ye boast so much of fulfilling the Law and commandements of God Quid illa prodessent omnia ubi non est fides vera etiamsi vere implerentur à vobis what could all the commandements profit you who have not a true faith though ye did truly fulfill them all Thus and much more Saint Austen Seeing then we have proved their faith to be not onely unsound but hereticall and Antichristian worse then which the faith of the Manichees could not be impossible it is that from such a faith either true vertue or any godly act should ever arise The best that can be said of those which they call good workes is that which Lactantius saith z In lib. Inst divin ca. 6 of the works of the Ethnikes which like theirs quoad substantiam operis were good Vmbra est imago justitiae quam illi justitiam putaverunt It is but a shadow and shew of justice which they thinke to be justice Omnis a Lib. eod ca. 9. doctrina virtus eorum sine capite est all the knowledge and vertue which they have wanteth the head of true knowledge and vertue It wanteth true faith in Christ which is the head of all knowledge and vertue This head whosoever wanteth Non dubium est quin impius sit omnesque virtutes ejus in illa mortifera via reperiantur quae est tota tenebrarum there 's no doub◠to be made but such an one is impious and all the vertues which hee thinkes he hath are mortiferous and deadly 33. Where againe I cannot but observe to the comfort of all true beleevers another exceeding difference betwixt us and them even in these matters concerning life and good workes whatsoever things are either in themselves good or being of themselves indifferent are by the lawfull authority either of civill or ecclesiasticall governours commanded we in doing any of those things and shewing our willing obedience thereunto performe an act not onely lawfull but laudable and acceptable unto God For in doing any of these we doe vertually performe obedience unto Christ who by them commandeth the doing of all such things and in our religious performing of them we hold firme that holy foundation not onely of faith but of good workes which the scriptures teach Neither onely are such workes acceptable unto God but even those acts also which are wicked and ungodly being committed by such as doe truly beleeve though they be as heinous as was the crime of David or the abjuration of Peter even those I say by the strength and vertue of that foundation if one doe rightly hold and beleeve it are so covered b Peccatum tectum est Psal 32.1 put c Isa 43.25 away and forgotten that God d Numb 23.21 seeth none iniquity in Iacob nor transgression in Israel Such so infinite is the goodnesse and so soveraigne is the vertue
are the only essentially schismatickes at this time and in this great rent of the Church 39. Whence againe doth ensue another Conclusion of no small importance For it is a ruled case among them such as Bellarmine m Lib. de Eccles milit ca. 5. avoucheth to be proved both by Scriptures by Fathers by pontificall decrees and sound reason that no schismatickes are in the Church or of the Church Now because out of n Extra quam Ecclesiam nullus omnino salvatur Conc. Lateran ca. 1. the Church there is no salvation it nearly concernes them to bethinke themselves seriously what hope there is or can be unto them who being as wee have proved schismatickes are for this cause by their owne doctrine utterly excluded from the Church But I will proceed no further in this matter wherein I have stayed much longer then I intended yet my hope is that I have now abundantly cleared against Baronius not onely That one may dissent in faith and bee disioyned in communion from the Pope yet neither be Heretickes nor Schismatickes but That none can now consent in faith and hold communion with the Pope but for that very cause he is by the judgement of the Catholike Church both an hereticke and a schismaticke CHAP. XIIII The second Exception of Baronius excusing Vigilius from heresie for that he often professeth to hold the Coūcell of Chalcedon and the faith thereof refuted 1. HIs second excuse for Vigilius is taken from that profession which both other defenders of the three Chapters and Vigilius himselfe often maketh in his Constitution that hee holdes the faith of the Councell of Chalcedon and did all for the safety of that Councell Both parties saith Baronius a An. 547. nu 47. as well the defenders as the condemners of those three Chapters did testifie that they desired nothing more quam consultum esse catholica fidei probatae à S. Concilio Chalcedonensi then to provide that the Catholike faith decreed at Chalcedon might be safe Againe b An. 546. nu 33. liquet omnes it is manifest that all Catholikes in defence of the three Chapters at once contradicted this noveltie set downe in the Emperors Edict for condemning those chapters vindicesque se Concilij Chalcedonensis exhibuisse and shewed themselves to bee defenders of the Councell of Chalcedon Of Vigilius in particular hee not so little as fortie times ingeminates this Vigilius c An. 553. nu 197. writ these things pro defensione integritate Synodi Chalcedonensis for the defence and safety of the Councell at Chalcedon Vigilius d Ibid. nu 47. writ his constitution for no other cause as by it is evident but to the end that all things which were defined by the Councell at Chalcedon firma consisterent might remaine firme and by no meanes be infringed Againe e Ibid. nu 231. All that Vigilius or the rest did in this cause did tend hereunto ut consultum esset dignitati authoritati Synodi Chalcedonensis that the dignity and authoritie of the Councell at Chalcedon might be kept safe and sound Thus Baronius 2. The writings of those who defended those Chapters declare the same Victor in plaine termes affirmeth f In Chron. an 2. post Coss Basill the three Chapters to have been approved and judged orthodoxall by the Councell of Chalcedon and the condemning of them to bee the condemning of that Councell and that for this cause he refused to condemne them least in so doing he should condemne the Councell of Chalcedon The like hee witnesseth g An. 10. post Coss Basilij of Facundus whose owne words set downe by Baronius h An. 545. nu 28. shew that hee disliked the condemners of those three Chapters because by condemning them Synodum improbarent they condemned the Councell of Chalcedon But none shewes the like love to that Councell and care for it as doth Pope Vigilius in his Constitution we decree saith he i Apud Bar. an 553. nu 196. That the judgement of the Fathers at Chalcedon shall be kept inviolable in all things and particularly in this touching the Epistle of Ibas wee dare not call into question their judgement their judgement in omnibus conservantes we keepe in all things Againe k Ibid. nu 197 we permit no man to innovate either by additiō or detraction or alteration any thing which is ordained set down by the Councell at Chalcedon Againe l Ibid. nu 207. Behold O Emperor it is more cleare then the light that we have alwayes beene desirous to reverence the foure Councels and that all things might remaine inviolable which by them are defined and judged This and much more to the like purpose saith Vigilius Who now reading these things in his Cōstitution and seeing him so fervent and zealous for the Councell at Chalcedon and the faith therein declared would not thinke nay proclame Vigilius to be a most sound Catholike an utter enemie to Nestorianisme as that holy Councell at Chalcedon was Or who would not applaud Baronius for his devise to defend and excuse Vigilius from heresie because he was so earnest for the Councell of Chalcedon and the faith declared therein which none can embrace and be guiltie of Nestorianisme This is his plea for Vigilius 3. For answer whereunto I am ashamed that Baronius a Cardinall and man of rare knowledge as hee is supposed should shew himselfe so inconsiderate in this cause as to seeke to excuse or defend Vigilius by alledging the name credit or authoritie of the Councell of Chalcedon For even that alone if there were nothing else puls upon him that just Anathema denounced by the fift Councell who thus decree Wee m Coll. 8. pa. 586. b. 588. a. anathematize the defenders of these Three Chapters and those who have written or doe write for them or who doe defend or indeavour to defend the impiety of them nomine sanctorum Patrum aut sancti Chalcedonensis Concilij by the name of the holy fathers or of the Councell at Chalcedon The more then that either Vigilius pretends that Councell for defence of the Three Chapters or that Baronius pretends it for the defence of Vigilius the more they are still involved in the Councels Anathema and no marvell for by alledging that Councell as a patrone of those Three Chapters they slander that most holy Councell and all that approve it that is the whole Catholike Church to be hereticall and patrons of the most blasphemous and condemned heresie of Nestorius 4. Let this passe Is this reason thinke you of Baronius of any force to excuse Vigilius hee professeth to defend the Councell of Chalcedon therefore he is not an heretike Truly of none at all for who knoweth not that heretikes are as forward in chalenging to themselves the names and authority of ancient Councels and in professing to defend the same faith and doctrine which they taught Take a view but of three or foure examples
Augustine Saint Ierome Saint Ambrose Saint Leo Papius Theophilact Tertullian Eusebius Prudentius and others most excellent Divines And I take God and the whole Court of heaven to witnesse before whom I must render an account of this protestation that the same faith and religion which I defend is taught and confirmed by those Hebrew and Greeke Scriptures those Historians Popes Decrees Scholies and Expositions Councells Schooles and Fathers and the profession of Protestants condemned by the same Thus he 11. Did ever mortall man read or heare of such a braggadochio For learning and languages Ierome is but a baby to him more industrious and adamantine then Origen then Adamantius himselfe A shop a storehouse of all knowledge his head a Library of all Fathers Councels Decrees of all writings an Heluo nay a very hell of books he devoures up all Rabsecha Thraso Pyrgopolinices Therapontigonus all ye Magnificoes Gloriosoes come sit at his feet and learne of him the exact forme of vaunting and reviling What silly men were Eutiches Nestorius and the old heretikes they boasted but of one or two Councells All Councells all Fathers all Decrees all bookes writings and records are witnesses of his faith They sayd it he swears it before God and the whole Court of Heaven that all Scriptures Councels Fathers all witnesses in heaven earth and hell yea the Devill and all are his and confirme their Romane faith and condemne the doctrine of Protestants Alas what shall we doe but even hide our selves in caves of the earth and clifts of the rocks from the force and fury of this Goliah who thus braves it out in the open field as who with the onely breath of his mouth can blow away whole legions quasi ventus folia aut pannicula tectoria 12. But let no mans heart faint because of this proud anonymall Philistim Thy servant O Lord though the meanest in the host of Israel will fight with him nor will I desire any other weapons but this one pible stone of the judiciall sentence of the fift generall Councell against Vigilius This being taken out of Davids bagge that is derived from Scriptures consonant to all former and confirmed by all succeeding Catholike Councells and Fathers directly and unavoydably hits him in the forehead it gives a mortall and uncurable wound unto him for it demonstrates not onely the foundation of their faith to be hereticall and for such to bee condemned and accursed by the judgement of the whole Catholike Church but all their doctrines whatsoever they teach because they all relye on this foundation of the Popes infallibility are not onely unsound and in the root hereticall but even Antichristian also such as utterly overthrow the whole Catholike faith This being one part of the Philistimes weapons wherein he trusted and vanted with his owne sword is his head the head and foundation of all their faith cut off so that of him and the whole body of their Church it may be truly said Iacet ingens littore truncus Avulsumque humeris caput sine nomine corpus 13. You see now how both ancient and moderne heretikes boast of Councells and therefore that the reason of Baronius is most inconsequent that Vigilius was no heretike because hee professeth to hold the Councell of Chalcedon Nay I say more though one professe to hold the whole Scripture yet if with pertinacy hee hold any one doctrine repugnant thereunto the profession of the Scriptures themselves cannot excuse such a man from being an heretike If it could then not any of the old heretikes would want this pretence or to omit them seeing both Protestants and Papists make profession to beleeve the Scriptures and whatsoever is taught therein would this profession exempt one from heresie neither they nor wee should be or be called heretikes But seeing in truth they are and wee in their Antichristian language are called heretikes as Cyrill and the orthodoxall beleevers in his time were by the Nestorians it is without question that this profession to hold the whole Scriptures much lesse to hold one or two Councells as Vigilius did cannot free one from being an heretike 14. You will perhaps say can one then beleeve the whole Scripture and be an heretike or beleeve the faith decreed at Nice Ephesus or Chalcedon and be an Arian Eutychean or Nestorian heretike No verily for as the Scripture containeth a contradiction to every heresie seeing as Saint Austen truly saith l Lib. 2. de doct Christ ca. 9. all doctrines concerning faith are set downe and that also perspicuously therein so doe every one of those three Councels containe a contradiction to every one of those three heresies and to all other which concerne the divinity or humanity of Christ But it is one thing to professe the scriptures or those three Councells and say that he beleeves them which many heretikes may doe and another thing to beleeve them indeed which none can doe and be an heretike for whosoever truly beleeveth the scriptures cannot possibly with pertinacy hold any doctrine repugnant to scriptures but such a man upon evident declaration that this is taught in them though before he held the contrary presently submits his wit and will to the truth which out of them is manifested unto him If this he do not he manifestly declareth that he holds his error with pertinacy and with an obstinate resolution not to yeeld to the truth of the scriptures and so hee is certainly an heretike notwithstanding his profession of the scriptures which he falsly said he beleeved and held when in very truth he held and that pertinaciously the quite contrary unto them The very like must be said of those three Councells and them who either truly beleeve or falsly say that they beleeve the faith explained in them or any one of them 15. Whence two things are evidently consequent the former that all heretikes are lyars in their profession not onely because they professe that doctrine which is untrue and hereticall but because in words they professe to beleeve and hold that doctrine which they doe not but hold and that for a point of their faith the quite contrary All of them will and doe professe that they beleeve the scriptures and the doctrines therein contained and yet every one of them lye herein for they beleeve one if not moe doctrines contrary to the scriptures The Nestorians professed to hold the Nicene faith and so they professed two natures and but one person to bee in Christ for that in the Nicene faith is certainly decreed but they lyed in making this profession for they beleeved not one person but pertinaciously held two persons to be in Christ The Eutycheans in professing the Ephesine Councell professed in effect two natures to abide in Christ after the union for this was certainly the faith of that holy Councell but they lyed in this profession for they held that after the union two natures did not abide in Christ but one onely The Church
Sebast apud Bar. an 550. nu 22. by defending the Three Chapters and communicating with such as defended them contra Iudicati nostri seriem nitebantur dealt against the tenor of his judgement shewing plainly that till then and in that yeare his judgement against the Three Chapters stood so firmly in force that by a judiciall sentence he deposed the contradictors thereof which had himselfe revoked and by a Decree of silence adnulled in likelihood he wold not certainly in justice he could not have done and seeing hee censured them not for speaking of that controversie but for speaking in defence of those Chapters it is evident that as then he had not made any Decree for silence in that cause for then his censure should have beene because they had done contrary to it not because they had contradicted his judgement in condemning those Chapters 10. Is not Baronius thinke you a very wise and worthy Annalist who perswades you that Vigilius made this Decree of silence in the 21. yeare of Iustinian forbidding all thereby to condemne the Three Chapters which not to have been made either in the 22 or 23 or 24. yeares the undoubted writing and censures of Vigilius expressed by Baronius himselfe doe make evident and testifie that the Pope himselfe was so far from being silent therein that both by words by writings by pontisicall censures and judgements himselfe condemned the 3 Chapters who will again perswade you that the Pope suffered very heavy persecution at the Emperors hands because he would not permit the 3. Chapters to be condemned whereas the Pope himselfe not onely condemned them all that time as well as the Emperor did but both by writings reproved and by judiciall censures punished condemned and deposed such as would not condemne them and that also eo nomine because they would not condemne them nor consent to his judgement whereby he had condemned them Now that Vigilius continued of the same mind both in the 25. 26. yeares of Iustinian that is untill the time that the fift Councell was assembled though there be no particulars to explaine yet by the Emperours words before remembred that per totum tempus perseveravit and ejusdem semper voluntatis fuit it is abundantly testified So that it is most certain that Vigilius at no time observed this decree of Taciturnity and because had there beene any he of all men was the most likely to observe it who as Baronius fableth was so rigorous against others even the Emperor also for not observing thereof his not observing of it is an evidence that he made no such Decree at all but that the whole narration concerning it and the consequents upon it is a very fiction and fable 11. Next after the Pope let us see if the Emperor who as Baronius saith ſ Bar. in 551. nu 2. emissū spōsionē de servado silentio c. promised to observe this law of Taciturnity was silent quiet in this cause And truly there is a strong presumption that he neither did nor would now refuse or forbeare to condemne the 3. Chapters seeing by so doing he should have anathematized himselfe for by his Imperiall Edict he denoūced all those to be an Anathema who do not condemne and t Si quis nō anathematizat Theodoric et Theodoreti scriptà c. Apistola Ibae Anathema sit Edict Iustin anathematize the same Chapters The very silence in this cause and ceasing or refusing to anathematize the Chapters had made him guilty of his owne just Anathema But to leave presumptions Certaine it is that Iustinian continued the same man constant in condemning those Chapters and that not onely for the time after this supposed Decree but from the first publishing of his own Edict whereof the whole fift Councell is a most ample witnesse who thus say u Conc. 5. Coll. 7. in sine omnia semper fecit facit quae sanctam Ecclesiam recta dogmata conservant The most pious Emperor hath ever done concerning this cause of the three Chapters and now doth those things which preserve the holy Church and sound doctrine and that to be the condemning of these Chapters they by their Synodall sentence doe make evident where they professe the condemning thereof to bee the preserving of the good seed x Festinantes bonū fidei semē purum conservare ab impietatis Zizaniis Conc. 5. Coll. 8. pa. 584. a. of faith the preserving of the Councell of Chalcedon and the rooting out of hereticall tares 12. And if wee desire particulars of his constant dealing herein Victor Tunavensis declareth the earnestnesse of Iustinian in condemning these Chapters for every yeare since this Decree of Taciturnity is supposed to have beene made The Decree as y Bar. an 547. nu 1. 41. Baronius sheweth was set out in the sixt yeare after the Consulship of Basilius which account by Consalar yeares Victor useth and it answereth to the end of twenty one and most of the 22. yeare of Iustinian In the seaventh yeare after Basilius z Victo Tun. in Chron. sed vitio Typogra scribitur an 8. pro. 7 nam proxime praecedens ānus apud cū rede numeratur an 6. post Coss Bas neque ullum annum omitti ab eo certum est Coss that is in the very next to that wherein the Decree was made Iustinian writ most earnestly saith Victor a Vict. loc citat into divers provinces antistites cunctos praefata tria Capitula damnare compellit and hee compelled all Bishops to condemne the Three Chapters In the eight he sheweth that the Illyrian Bishops held a Synod and writ unto the Emperour to disswade him from condemning those Chapters In the ninth he shewes that Facundus did the like and further in this yeare b Na sacra Imperatoris ad Iohā datae st an Iust 24. post Cōs Bas a 9. extat in Cōc 5 Col. 6. pa. 553. a. the Emperor commanded the Synod at Mopsvestia to be held against Theodorus that it might appeare how and from how long time before then the name of Theodorus had beene blotted out of the Ecclesiasticall tables the judgement of which Synod the Emperor sent c Facta est suggestio ad sanct papam Vigiliū ab eisdem episcopis Concil Mopsvesteni Conc. 5. Coll. 5. pa. 557. a. Acta in Concilio Mopsvesteno ad Vigilium Iustiniani Concilio opera missa fuere ne in futura generali Synodo Theodorum ipse damnare aliquo modo detrectaret Bar. anno 550. nu 39. to Vigilius to assure him of the truth thereof that hee might with more constancie continue to cōdemne the Three Chapters In the tenth Victor declares that the Emperor sent for Reparatus and Firmus two Primates for Primasius Verecundus two Bishops to deale with them that they would condemne the same Chapters and that Zoilus Patriarch of Alexandria for refusing to condemne them was deposed which to have beene done by
after his returne about a year after out of exile 3. The Cardinall gives yet another evidence hereof Pelagius saith he h Bar. an 553. nu 236. the successor of Vigilius did thinke it fit that the fift Synod should bee approved and the three Chapters condemned moved especially hereunto by this reason that the Easterne Church ob Vigilij constitutum schismate scissa being rent and divided from the Romane by reason of the Constitution of Vigilius might be united unto it How was the Easterne Church divided from the Romane in the time of Pelagius by reason of that decree of Vigilius in defence of the Three Chapters if Vigilius by another decree published after it had recalled and adnulled it If the Popes condemning of those Chapters and approving of the fift Councell could unite the Churches then the decree of Vigilius had there beene any such would have effected that union If the Apostolike Decree of Vigilius could not effect it in vaine it was for Pelagius to thinke by his approbation which could have no more authority then Apostolicall to effect that union If the cause of the breach and disunion of those Churches was as Baronius truly saith the Constitution of Vigilius in defence of the Three Chapters against the judgement of the fift Synod seeing it is cleare by the Cardinalls owne confession that the disunion continued till after the death of Vigilius it certainly hence followeth that the Constitution of Vigilius which was the cause of that breach was never by himselfe repealed which even in Pelagius time remained in force and was then a wall of separation of the Easterne from the Westerne Church Againe if the Popes approving the fift Councell and condemning the three Chapters was as in truth it was and as the Cardinall noteth i Cujus Vigilij postremam sententiam pro approbatione 5. Conc. condemnatione triū Capitulorum posteri omnes sequuti universa Dei Ecclesia paucis schismaticis exceptis eandem Synodum ut oecumenicam semper novit Bar. an 554. nu 7. it to have beene the cause to unite those Churches seeing by his owne confession in Vigilius time they were not united for Pelagius k Bar. an 553. nu 236. after Vigilius his death sought to take away that schisme it certainly hence followeth that Vigilius never by any Decree approved that Synod and their Synodall condemning of those Chapters for had he so done the union had in his time presently beene effected 4. The same may be perceived also by the Westerne Church For as that Pontificall decree of Vigilius had there beene any such would have united the Easterne so much more would it have drawne the Westerne the Italian and specially the Romane Church to consent to the fift Councell and condemning of the three Chapters but that they persisted in the defence of the three Chapters and that also to the very end of Vigilius his life may divers wayes be made evident Whē Pelagius being then but a Deacon was chosen Pope after the death of Vigilius and was to be consecrated Bishop there could no more then two Bishops l Dum non essent Episcopi qui eum ordinarent inventi sunt duo Iohannes Bonus Andreas Presbyter de Ostia ordinaverunt eum Episcopum Anast in vita Pelagij 1. be found in the Westerne Church that would consecrate or ordaine him Bishop wherefore contrary to that Canon both of the Apostles m Can. Apost 1 and Nicene Fathers n Conc. Nic. Can. 4. requiring three o Certe omnimodo 3 Episcopi debent esse congregati ita faciant ordinationem Can. 4. Conc. Nic. Bishops to the consecration of a Bishop which they so often boast p Bell. lib. de Notis Ecclesiae ca. 8. §. Ex quo Et Bin. in Notis ad Can. 1. Apost alijque of in their disputes against us the Pope himselfe was faine to be ordained onely by two Bishops with a Presbyter of Ostia in stead of the third Anastasius very ignorantly if not worse sets downe the reason thereof to have beene for that Pelagius was suspected q Subduxerunt se à communione ejus dicentes quia in morte Vigilij se miscuit Anast in vitae Pelag. 1. to have beene guilty by poison or some other way of the death of Vigilius A very idle fancie as is the most in Anastasius for Pelagius was in banishment long before the death of Vigilius and there continued till Vigilius r Nam Vigilius obijt anno praecedente quum Pelagius de exilio revocatus est Vict. Tun. in Chron. ad an 16. corrupte legitur 17. Basilij et ad an sequentem was dead he had little leisure nor oportunity to thinke of poisoning or murdering his owne Bishop by whose death he could expect no gaine The true cause why the Westerne Bishops distasted Pelagius is noted by Victor who then lived Hee ſ Pelagius condemnans ea tria Capitula quae dudum constantissime defendebat à praevaricatoribus ordinatus est Vict. ad an 17. corrupte legitur 18. post Cons Basilij before hee came from Constantinople consented to the fift Synod and condemned the Three Chapters Now the Westerne t Adeo exhor ruisse visi sunt Antistites occidentales ferè omnes aliam post 4. admittere Oecumenicam Synodum ut non potuerit Pelagius reperire Episcopos Romae à quibus consecraretur Bar. an 556. nu 1. Bishops so detested the fift Synod and those who with it condemned those Chapters that among them all there could be found but two Bishops who held with the Synod and so allowed of Pelagius and his act in consenting thereunto and those two with the Presbyter of Ostia were the ordainers of Pelagius whom Victor in his corrupted language calls prevaricators Let any man now consider with himselfe whether it bee credible that in all Italy and some Provinces adjoyning there should be but two Bishops who would consēt to the Apostolicall decree of Vigilius for approving the fift Councell if he had indeed published such a decree If they knew nor the Popes sentence in this cause which they held and that rightly for a cause of faith to be infallible how was not the westerne or the Romane Church hereticall at this time not knowing that point of faith which is the transcendent principle and foundation of all doctrines of faith If they knew it to bee infallible seeing his judgement must then over-sway their owne how could there bee no more but two bishops found among them all who approved the Popes Cathedrall sentence and consented to his infallible judgement Seeing then it is certaine that the Westerne Church did generally reject the fift Synod after the death of Vigilius and seeing it is not to bee thought that they would have persisted in such a generall dislike thereof had they knowne Vigilius to have by his Apostolicall sentence decreed that all should approve the same of which his sentence had
Omne septim◠ordinatum in eádem numeratione quâ res praecesserunt c. Act. 6. pa. 357. a. the seventh must follow the sixt in the same ranke and order and the sixt the fift if there was no fift generall and holy Councell neither can there bee any sixt nor seventh nor eighth nor any other after it So by the assertion of these men there are at once dashed out fourteene of those which themselves h Bell. lib. 1. de Conc. ca. 5. doe honour by the name of holy generall Councels 4. I say more the expunging of all those fourteene Councels doth certainly follow upon the Cardinals assertion though it were granted that Vigilius had confirmed this fift as it is true that Pelagius and Gregory did For if it was as he teacheth neither a generall nor lawfull Synod while the Councell continued and for that whole time while it was an assembly of Bishops then undoubtedly it never at any time was nor yet is either a generall or a lawfull Synod For after the end and dissolution thereof it was never extant in rerum natura againe it was ever after that time Non ens and being neither Synod nor yet so much as Ens it could not possibly be either generall or lawfull It is a Maxime Non entis non sunt Accidentia If while it was extant and while it was an assembly it was but a conventicle if then it was not gathered in Gods name I pray you when was it ever after that gathered in Gods name Did Vigilius Pelagius or Gregory when they made it by their approbation a generall and lawfull Councell did they like some new Aeolus blow all the Bishops againe to Constantinople and assemble them the second time in the Popes name that so they might be said to be gathered in Gods name Let their Popes trie if by all their magicall skill or omnipotent power they can make any one of those Africane Councels under Cyprian a Generall or make the Arimine Syrmian or second Ephesine a lawfull Councell and I will instantly yeeld that hee may doe the like to this fift If hee cannot doe any of the former what vanitie was it in the Cardinall and Binius to say of this fift that while it was extant and Ens it was neither a general nor lawful Councel but some one or some twenty yeares after when it was non Ens the Pope made it with a word both a generall and lawfull Councell Dixit factum est One word of his mouth makes or unmakes what he list Truth is the Popes or any other Bishops approbation or confirmation of a Councell or any decree thereof after the Councell is once ended may perhaps in the opinion of some men gaine some more liking unto that Councell or decree than before it had seeing now it hath the expresse consent of those Bishops whom the other doe much esteeme but the after consent or approbation of all the Bishops in the world much lesse of the Pope cannot make that to bee a generall which before and while it was extant was onely Provinciall or that to be a lawfull which before and while it was extant was an unlawfull Synod Even as the Pope and a thousand Bishops with him cannot now make any of the foure first generall and holy Councels to be either unlawfull or particular Synods and yet his power is every whit as great in annihilating that which now is as in creating that which never was a generall or a lawfull Councell 5. Say you that the fift Councell was of no authority till the Pope approved it and unlesse he should approve it See how contrary the Cardinals assertion is to the consenting judgement of the whole Church Begin we with the Church of that age Baronius tels i An. 547. nu 41. 43. us that both the Emperour the Pope Mennas and other Easterne Bishops agreed to referre the deciding of this doubt about the Three Chapters to a generall Councell Why did none of them reason as the Cardinall now doth against the Councell Why did the Pope delude them with that pretence of a generall Councel Why did hee not deale plainly with the Emperour and the rest who made that agreement and say to this effect unto them Why will yee referre this cause to the judgment of a Councell it cannot decide this question otherwise than my selfe shall please If they say as I say it shall be a Councell a lawfull a generall an holy Councell If they say the contrary to that which I affirme though they have ten thousand millions of voyces their Decree shall be utterly void their assembly unlawfull they shall neither bee nor bee called a generall nor a lawfull Councell no nor a Councell neither but onely a Conventicle without all authoritie in the world Had the Emperour and the Church beleeved this doctrine there had beene no fift Councell ever called or assembled nay there never had beene any other holy generall Councell The Pope had beene in stead of all and above them all This very act then of referring the judgement in this cause to a generall Councell witnesseth them all even the Pope himselfe at that time to have esteemed the sentence of the Synod to be of authority without the Popes consent and to be of more authority in case they should differ as in this question they did than the sentence of the Pope This before the Councell was assembled 6. At the time of the Councell had the Church or holy Synod which represented the whole Church beleeved their assembly without the Pope to be no Synod but a Conventicle why did they at all come together after their second Session for they were then assured by the Pope himselfe that he would neither come nor send any deputies unto them Or had they beleeved that his definitive sentence would or ought to have overswayed others so that without his assent their judgement should be of no validity why did they after the fift Session once proceed to examine or determine that cause For before the sixt day of their assembling they received from Pope Vigilius his Cathedrall and Apostolicall Constitution in that cause inhibiting them either to write or speak much more judicially to define ought contrarie to his sentence or if they did that he by his authority had beforehand refuted and condemned the same Seeing notwithstanding all this well knowne unto them they not onely continued their Synodall assemblies but judicially defined that cause and that quite contrary to the Popes judgement made knowne unto them it is an evident demonstration that the whole general Councell judged their assemblies both lawfull and Synodall and their sentence of full authority even as ample as of any generall Councell though the Pope denied his presence to the one and expressely signified not onely his dislike but contradiction and condemnation of the other 7. What can pervicacie it selfe oppose to so cleare an evidence or what thinke you will
the Cardinall or his friends reply hereunto Will he or can he say that these men who thus judged were heretikes They were not The doctrine which they maintained was wholly Catholike consonant as they k Coll. 8. professe and as in truth it was to Scriptures to Fathers to the foure former generall Councells The doctrine which they oppugned and Vigilius then defended was hereticall condemned by all the former Scriptures Fathers and Councels Heretikes then doubtless they could not be that like a leprosie did cleave to Vigilius Will he or can he say that they were Schismatikes Neither is that true For they all even then remained in the communion with the Catholike Church yea they were by representation the true Catholike Church I say further they held communion even with Pope Vigilius himselfe till his owne pertinacy and wilfull obstinacie against the true faith severed him both from them from the truth In token of which communion with Vigilius they earnestly l Sup. cap. 2. nu 1. seq entreated his presence in the Synod they offered him the presidency therein yea they said in expresse words unto him before they knew his mind to defend the Three Chapters Nos m Coll. 2. p. 523. vero communicamus uniti vobiscum sumus We all doe hold communion with you and are united unto you Schismaticall then they could not be So the judgement of these men being all Catholikes and holding the Catholike communion doth evidently prove the whole Catholike Church at that time to have beleeved a Councell to be both generall and lawfull though the Pope dissented from it and by his Apostolicall authority condemned the same and the decree thereof 8. After the end of the Councell did the Church then think otherwise Did it then judge the Councell to want authority while it wanted the Popes approbation or to receive authority by his approbation Who were they I pray you that thought thus Certainly not Catholikes and the condemners of these Chapters For they approved the Councel and Decree thereof during the time of the Councell and while the Pope so far disliked it that for his refusall to consent unto it he endured banishment Neither did the Heretikes who defended those Chapters judge thus For they as Baronius witnesseth n An. 553. nu 221. persisted in the defence of them and in a rent from the others even after Vigilius had consented to the Synod yea among them Vigilius o An. 555. nu 2. redditus est execrabilis was even detested and accursed by them for approving the Synod Or because Vigilius approved it not Pelagius who is knowne to have approved it was so generally disliked for that cause of the Westerne Bishops that there p Adeo exhorruisse visi sunt Antistites occidentales aliam post quaâ—tam admittere oecumenicam Synodum ut non potuerit Pelagius reperire Episcopos Romae à quibus consecraretur Bar. an 556. nu 1. could not be found three who would lay hands on him at his consecration but in stead of a Bishop they were enforced against that Canon q Can. 1. Con. Nic. can 4. of the Apostles which they often oppose to us to take a Presbyter of Ostia at his ordination So much did they dislike both the fift Councell and all though it were the Pope who did approve it Now the whole Church being at that time divided into these two parts the defenders and condemners of those Chapters seeing neither the one nor the other judged the Synod to be generall or lawfull because the Pope approved it who possibly could there be at that time of the Cardinals fancie that the fift Councell wanted all authority till the Pope approved it and gained authority of a generall and lawfull Councell by his approving of it Catholikes and condemners of those Chapters embraced the Councell though the Pope rejected it Heretikes and defenders of those Chapters rejected the Councell though the Pope approved it Neither of them both and so none at all in the whole Church judged either the Popes approbation to give or his reprobation to take away authority from a generall Councell Thus by the Antecedentia Concomitantia and Consequentia of the Councell it is manifest by the judgement of the whole Church in that age that this fift Councell was of authority without the Popes approbation and was not held of authority by reason of his approbation 9. What the judgement of the Church was as well in the ages preceding as succeeding to this Councell is evident by that which we have already declared For we have at large shewed r Sup. ca. 4. nu 25 26. seq that the doctrine faith and judgement of this fift Councell is consonant to all former and confirmed by all following generall Councells till that at Lateran under Leo the tenth Whereupon it ensueth that this doctrine which wee maintaine and the Cardinall impugneth that neither the Popes approbation doth give nor his reprobation take away authority from a Councell was embraced and beleeved as a Catholike truth by the whole Catholike Church of all ages till that Lateran Synod that is for more than 1500. yeares together 10. And if there were not so ample testimonies in this point yet even reason would enforce to acknowledge this truth For if this fift Councell be of force and Synodall authority eo nomine because the Pope to wit Pelagius approved it then by the same reason is it of no force or Synodall authority eo nomine because the Pope to wit Vigilius rejected it If the Popes definitive and Apostolicall reprobation cannot take away authority from it neither can his approbation though Apostolicall give authority unto it Or if they say that both are true as indeed they are both alike true then seeing this fift Councell is both approved by Pope Pelagius and rejected by Pope Vigilius it must now be held both to be wholly approved and wholly rejected both to be lawfull and unlawfull both to be a generall Councell and no generall Councell And the very same doome must bee given of all the thirteene Councells which follow it They all because they are approved by some one Pope are approved and lawfull Councels and because they approve this fift which is rejected by the Pope they are all rejected and unlawfull Councells Such an havocke of generall Councels doth this their assertion bring with it and into such inextricable labyrinths are they driven by teaching the authority of Councels to depend on the Popes will and pleasure 11. Now though this bee more than abundant to refute all that they can alledge against this fift Councell yet for the more clearing of the truth and expressing my love to this holy Councell to which next after that at Chalcedon I beare speciall affection I will more strictly examine those two reasons which Baronius Binius have used of purpose to disgrace this holy Synod The former is taken from the assembling the
their head for neither did Vigilius resist their assembling but freely and willingly consented unto it neither was hee excluded from the Synod but most undutifully absented himselfe from it and though the members at that time wanted the Popes head-peece yet they had his heart his minde and his Apostolicall direction among them to bee a Cynosure unto them in that cause which alone is able to supply both his personall and Legantine absence in any Councel 17. The other objection of Baronius is taken from the decree of this Synod The sentence saith he y An. 553. nu 219. given by it was contra ipsius decretum against the decree of Vigilius and therefore their assembly deserved not the name of a generall no nor so much as of a private Synod it was no Councell at all Cardinall Bellarmine explaines this more fully saying z Lib. 2. de Conc. ca. 11. §. Ac de Such Councells as define matters against the Popes instruction Reprobata Concilia dici debent are to bee called or accounted Rejected Councells for it is all one saith he whether the Pope doe expresly reject and reprobate a Councell or whether the Councell deale contra Pontificis sententiam against the Popes sentence either of both such Councells are reiected and so of no authoritie at all So Bellarmine What shall we answer to the perversnesse of these men If this rule be admitted the Church hath for ever and inevitably lost this fift Councell and by their second Nicen collection the sixt the seventh and all that follow And I verily am perswaded that none can possibly excuse either Baronius or Bellarmine from this crime of expunging the fift Councell and all which follow it from the ranke and number of generall or approved Councels For it is as cleare as the sunshine at noone day that the sentence pronounced by the fift synod was contradictory to the definition and Cathedrall instruction sent by Pope Vigilius unto them If then to define a cause contrary to the Popes instruction be a sure note of a Reprobate Councell as they teach it to be farewell for ever this fift and all that follow it or approve it they are all by the rule of these two worthy Cardinals Reprobated Councels nay not so much as Councels but meere Conspiracies or Conventicles 18. Besides this see I pray you the zeale and devotion of these men to the Catholike faith If this Councell be for this cause a Rejected Councell because it followed not the instructions of Pope Vigilius sent unto it then it should have beene an holy and approved Councell if it had followed those instructions of Vigilius that is if it had condemned the Councells of Nice Ephesus and Chalcedon if it had decreed Nestorianisme to be the Catholike faith and Iesus Christ not to be God for Vigilius by decreeing that the Three Chapters ought to be defended instructed them thus to define and judge Had they thus done then because they had followed the instructions of Vigilius the two Cardinalls would have embraced this Councell with both armes have applauded advanced it to the skies seeing it did not so but contradicted the Popes Apostolicall instructions at this time fie on it it is an unlawfull a Reprobated Councell nay it is no Councell at all nor of any authority Can any with reason judge these men to be ought else then Nestorians then condemned heretikes and obstinate oppugners of all ancient holy Councells and of the Catholike faith See the strange diversity of judgement which is in us and them They in their hereticall dotage on the Popes Cathedrall infallibility teach this fift holy Councell to bee a reprobated synod eo nomine because it followed not the instructions of Pope Vigilius we on the contrary doe constantly affirme it to bee an holy and most approved synod eo nomine because it followed not but rejected and condemned those Cathedrall instructions of Vigilius with us consent the sixt seventh and all succeeding generall Councells till that at Laterane all former holy Councells also to all which this Councell is consonant From them dissent all these both former and subsequent Councells that is the whole Catholike Church for fifteene hundreth yeares and more Vtri creditis whose doctrine thinke you now is ancient orthodoxall and catholike And whether had you rather with these two Cardinalls account this fift synod an unlawfull assembly and a reprobate Councell because it contradicted the hereticall constitution of Pope Vigilius or with such an army of witnesses honor it for a sacred Oecumenicall approved Councell though it not onely wanted the approbation but had in plaine words the Cathedrall Reprobation z Si quid contra haec quae statuinius à quolibet factum dictum atque conscriptum est vel fuerit hoc modis omnibus ex authoritate sedis Apostolicae refutamus Const Vig. in sine of Pope Vigilius 19. Having now fully refuted not onely the Assertion of Baronius That this Councell was of no authority nor an approved Councell till Pope Vigilius confirmed and approved it but also both those reasons whereby he would perswade the same there remaineth yet one doubt which necessarily is to be satisfied for the finall clearing of this point For it will and justly may bee demanded what it was which made this fift an approved Councell Or if it bee not the Popes confirmation and approbation what it is in any Councell or any decree thereof which makes it to be and rightly to be esteemed an approved Councell or Decree I constantly answer that whatsoever it be it is no approbation no confirmation nor any act of the Pope at least no more of him than of any other Patriarke or Patriarchall Primate in the Church An evident proofe whereof is in the second Generall Councell for that ever since their Synodall sentence was made against the MACEDONIANS and ratified by the Emperour was esteemed by the Catholike Church an Oecumenicall and approved Councell and that before the Pope had consented unto it or approved the same For that Councell being assembled in May a Socr. l. 5. ca. 8. when Eucherius and Seagrius were Consuls an 381. continued till b Vsque ad finem mensis Iulij producta est Bar. an 381. nu 80. about the end of Iuly in the same yeare On the 30. of Iuly Theodosius the Emperour published his severe law against the Macedonians being then condemned heretikes Hee commanded that forth with al Churches should be givē to those c Lib. 3. de fide Cathol Cod. Theod. who held the one and equall Majesty of the Father Sonne and Holy Ghost and were of the same faith with Nestorius Timotheus and other Bishops in that Synod but whosoever dissented in faith from them ut manifestos haereticos ab Ecclesia expelli they should all be expelled as manifest haeretikes and never be admitted againe In which law seeing the Macedonians are called manifest heretikes that is such as are convicted and
Church for a thousand years together these rights of calling and ordering generall Councels doe belong and were acknowledged to belong onely to Kings and Emperours they called and commanded the Bishops the Bishops came at that call and command they governed the assemblies in those Councels all the Bishops without murmuring or so much as once contradicting willingly submitted themselves to that Imperiall government And by this may now easily be discerned wherein the lawfulnesse or unlawfulnesse of any Synod consisteth For wheresoever to Imperiall calling and Imperiall Presidencie there is added the rightfull use of that Imperiall authoritie in seeing liberty freedome diligent discussion of the causes and all due synodall order preserved in any generall Synod the same is and ought to bee truly called a generall lawfull Councell But what generall Councels soever have beene heretofore or shall bee at any time hereafter either assembled by any other than Imperiall and regall authority or governed for the observing of synodall order by any other than Imperiall Presidencie or misgoverned by the abuse thereof they all are and are to bee esteemed for no other than generall unlawfull Councels 19. Suffer mee here to propose some examples of each kinde partly in the ancient partly in the later times of the Church In the order of lawfull generall Councels principally and by a certaine excellency above all the rest are the five first approved Councels to bee reckned The first at Nice the second at Constantinople the third at Ephesus the fourth at Chalcedon the fift at Constantinople in the time of Iustinian unto these the Sardicane and that at Constantinople under Mennas are to bee added like two Appendant Synods the former to that at Nice the later to that at Chalcedon For the sixt which was held at Constantinople in the time of Constantinus Pogonatus I am out of doubt and doe firmely hold it to have beene both generall and lawfull But I mention it apart by reason of that scruple touching the Canons thereof concerning which I intend if ever I have opportunity to make a severall tract by it selfe For their second Nicene and the next unto it to wit that at Constantinople in the time of Basilius and Hadrian the second besides that there are just exceptions against their lawfulnesse in regard of the proceedings used therin it may be justly doubted whether either of them may be esteemed generall specially considering that the Councell at Frankford utterly condemned p Synodus qua ante paucos annos sub Irene Constantino congregata ab ipsis non solum septima verū etiā universalis erat appellata ut nec septima nec universalis haberetur dicereturve quasi supervacua in totum ab omnibus in Conc. Francofordensi abdicata est Aim lib. 4. ca. 85. Similia habet Ado Vien in Chron. Hincm Rhem. in lib. contra Hincm Land ca. 20. Rhegino Hermann Strabus Fuld Egolis Monac alii quam multi that second Nicene and decreed that it should not bee called a generall Synod and in very like manner did the Councell at Constantinople held in the time of Pope Iohn the eighth or as some call him the ninth the next successor to Hadrian the second condemne q Quarius Canon Concilii Constant sub Johan 8. superiores synodos adversus Photium habitas Nicholai Hadriani temporibus explodit rejicit imo ut de Synodorum numero tollantur jubet Fran. Turrian lib. de 6 7 8. synod pa. 95. that Councell which they call the eighth held in the time of Hadrian the second Now although by the judgements of these two Councels those other which they reckon for the seventh and eighth be wholy repealed and that most justly yet if the authority of these Synods were omitted there are so many and so just exceptions against the two former that I am out of doubt perswaded that neither of them ought to stand in the order of generall lawfull Councels nor will any I suppose judge otherwise who shall unpartially examine the Acts of them compare them with the histories of those times If any at all after the sixt be to be ranked in the number of generall and lawfull Councells I would not doubt to make it evident if ever I should proceed so farre in this argument about Councels that the Councell held at Constantinople in the time of Constantinus Iconomachus whom they incontempt have with no small token of their immodesty nicknamed Copronimus that this ought to bee judged the seventh that at Frankford the eighth and that at Constantinople which even now I mentioned held in the time of Pope Iohn the eighth or as some call him the ninth the ninth of that order For both the generality of all these three is by the best Writers acknowledged and all of them were called by Imperiall authority governed by Imperiall presidency and that in a lawfull free and synodall manner as if ever I come to handle the Councels of those times I purpose to explaine This rather for this time I thinke needfull to observe that as a Councell may be generall and yet not lawfull so may one be both generall and lawfull and yet erroneous in the decrees thereof which one point rightly observed shewes an exceeding difference betwixt those five first generall Councels with the Sardicane and that under Mennas and all the rest which follow the fift Synod The former which were all held within the six hundred yeares after Christ in the golden ages of the Church are wholly and in every decree and Canon orthodoxall and golden Councells no drosse nor dramme of corrupt doctrine could prevaile in any one of them and so they are and ever since they were held were esteemed not onely generall and lawfull but in every part and parcell of their decrees holy and orthodoxall Councels approved by all Catholikes and by the whole Catholike Church But in all generall Councels which follow that fift which were held after the 600. yeare and in those times wherein dross and corruption began to prevaile above the gold in them all there is some one blot or other wherewith they are blemished and by reason whereof although they be both generall and lawfull yet are they not in every decree holy and orthodoxall nor approved by the succeeding ages of the Church Such in the sixt is the 2. 52. and 53. Canons in that under Constantinus Iconomachus the 15. and 17. definitions in that at Frankford their condemning of the fact of the Iconoclasts which untill the decree for breaking them downe was repealed by the Councell at Frankford was both pious and warranted by the example of Hezekias dealing with the brazen serpent In that under Iohn the 8. their denying of the holy Ghost to proceed from the Son And these examples which I have now named are all the examples of generall and lawfull Councels which as yet have beene held in the Church 20. Wee come now to unlawfull Synods wherein it is very
many things are praised quae omnia monstrosa sunt prorsus explodenda all which are utterly to be hissed at where also he seemeth to allow the impious Art of Magicke and Divinations His approving of Appolonius and Danis two wicked Magitians who both are relegati ad inferos condemned to Hell And to omit very many of this kinde of impieties and fables which abound in Suidas His narration in verbo Iesus which not onely Baronius rejecteth but Pope Paul the fourth for that cause beside some other k Exploserit in Jndicem lib. prohib exploded the booke of Suidas and placed it in the ranke librorum prohibitorum Such even by the confession of their owne Iesuite is this Suidas a depraver of good a commender of wicked men a fabler a lyer a falsifier of Histories a Magitian an Heretike whose booke is by the Pope forbidden to bee read Such a worthy witnesse hath the Cardinall of his Suidas with whom he conspireth in reviling Iustinian as one utterly unlearned Concerning which untruth I will say no more at this time than that which Gotofrid doth in his censure l Arte lib. Instit of those words of Suidas where calling it in plaine termes a slander he rejects it as it justly deserveth in this manner Valeant calumniae nos sinceriora sequamur Away with this and such like opprobrious slanders of Suidas and Baronius but let us follow the truth 5. His second reproofe of the Emperour is for presuming to make lawes in causes of faith which for Kings and Emperours to doe brings as he saith an hellish confusion into the Church of God The wit of a Cardinal Iustinian may not doe that which King Hezekiah which Asa which Iosiah and Constantine the great the two Theodosii Martian and other holy Emperours before had done and done it by the warrant of God to the eternall good of the Church and their owne immortall fame Had hee indeed or any of those Emperours taken upon them by their lawes to establish some new erronious or hereticall doctrine the Cardinall might in this case have justly reproved them but this they did not what doctrines the Prophets delivered the word of God taught and holy Synods had before decreed and explaned those and none else did Iustinian by his Edict and other religious Emperours ratifie by their imperiall authority Heare Iustinians owne words Wee f Edict Justin in causa trium Capitul in princip have thought it needfull by this our Edict to manifest that right confession of faith quae in sancta Dei Ecclesiâ praedicatur which is preached in the holy Church of God Here is no new faith no Edict for any new doctrine but for maintaining that onely faith which the holy Catholike Church taught and the Councell of Chalcedon had decreed wherein that Iustinian did nothing but worthy of eternal praise the whole fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church approving it is a witnesse aboue exception which entreating of that which Iustinian had done in this cause of the Three Chapters the chiefe of all which was the publishing of his most religious Edict to cōdemne the same saith g Coll. 7. in fine Omnia semper fecit facit quae sanctam Ecclesiam recta dogmata conservant Iustinian hath ever done and as yet doth all things which preserve the holy Church and the true faith So the Councell Is not Baronius minde composed of venome and malice who condemnes and reviles the Emperour as bringing hellish confusion into the Church by publishing that law which to have beene an especiall meanes to preserve the Church and Catholike faith the holy generall Councell and all the whole Catholike Church with it proclameth 6. See here againe the love and respect which Baronius beares to the Imperiall lawes and to those holy and religious Emperors which were the nursing fathers of Gods Church and pillers to uphold the faith in their dayes There are extant in the Theodosian Code many laws cōcerning the Catholike faith concerning Bish Churches and the Clergy concerning Heretikes Apostates Monkes Iewes and Samaritanes concerning Pagan sacrifices and Temples concerning Religion Episcopall judgement those who flee unto Churches and many other of the same kinde lawes wholesome and necessary for those times The like titles are extant also in the Code of Iustinian In the Authenticks there are I know not how many lawes in the like causes Of the foure Councels of the Order of Patriarchs of the building of Churches of goods belonging to sacred places Of the holy Communion of Litanies of the memorials for the dead of the Priviledges of Churches of Patriarchs of the Pope of old Rome of Archbishops of Abbots of Presbyters of Deacons of Subdeacons of Monkes of Anchorites of Synods of deposing Bishops who fall into heresie that Patrons who builded Churches and their heyers shall nominate the Clerks for the same and in case they name such as are unmeet then the Bishop to appoint who he thinks sit that Heretikes shall be uncapable of any legacies and exceeding many the like Now such a spite hath the Cardinall to the Emperours and these their Imperiall lawes made concerning the affaires of the Church that like some new Aristarchus with one dash of his pen hee takes upon him to casheire and utterly abolish those lawes five or sixe hundreth at the least with such care piety and prudēce set forth by Constantine Theodosius Valentinian Gratian Martian Iustinian and other holy and religious Emperours And when these are gone whether the Cardinall meant not after them to wipe away which with as good reason and authority he may all the other lawes which are in the Digest Code and Authenticks that so his master the Pope may play even another Iack Cade that all law might proceed out of his mouth let the judicious consider This is cleare that the Cardinals malice is not satisfied with reproofe of the lawes themselves even these holy Emperors Constantine Theodosius and the rest are together with Iustinian for the making of those lawes touching Ecclesiasticall affaires and persons reproved nay reviled by Baronius as having beene presumptuous persons authors of an hellish confusion in the Church and for turning heaven into hell They and such as they make lawes of faith lawes for Bishops lawes for the Church let them heare as they well deserve and as the * An. 550. nu 14. Cardinall shameth not to upbraid to Iustinian Ne ultra crepidam Sir Cobler goe not beyond you Last and Latchet So indignly doth the Cardinall use those holy and religious Princes and that even for their zeale to Gods truth and love to his Church for that which with exceeding piety and prudence they performed to their owne immortall honor and to the peace and tranquillity of the whole Church of God 7. His third calumnie is that hee revileth Iustinian for his sacrilegious fury and persecution which hee used against Pope Vigilius partly when Vigilius h Bar. an 551.
Iustinian held no such heresie as hee is slandered withall there neither was nor could there bee any effects or consequents of a cause not existent Yet will I not so sleightly reject the Cardinals calumnie in this point but fully examine first the publike and then the private mischiefes which hee without all truth hath fancied and objected against the Emperour 37. The publike was partly the subversion and overthrow of the faith and partly the decay of the Empire in the time and under the government of Iustinian Disertus esse posset Hee that would in an elaborate speech refute this calumnie of Baronius might have an ample scope to display all his Art and skill in this so large an argument My purpose is onely to point at the severall heads and not expatiate at this time Truly the Cardinall could hardly have devised any calumny more easie to be refuted or more evidently witnessing his malicious and wilfull oppugning of the truth I will not insist on those private testimonies of Procopius a Lib. 3. de aedif Justin pa. 433. Iustinian seemeth to have beene advanced by God to that Imperiall dignitie ut totum Imperium repararet that he might repaire and beautifie the whole Empire Of Otho b Lib. 5. ca. 4. Iustinian being a most valiant and most ChristiaÌ„ Prince ImperiuÌ„ quasi mortuuÌ„ resuscitavit did raise the Empire as it were from death to life and exceedingly repaired the Common-wealth being decayed Of Gotofrid c In Chron. part 16. in Justinian The whole glory of God was repaired by his vertue and the Church rejoyced in the stable peace which under him it injoyed Of Wernerus d An. 504. Hee was in all things most excellent and by his just lawes and wisedome he governed the world by his impiety he glorified God Of Aimonius e De gest Fr. lib 2. ca. 8. He was a Catholike a pious a just Emperour therefore all things prospered under his hands I oppose to that Baronian calumny the judgment of Pope Agatho and of the Romane Councell with him wherin this is expresly witnessed f In Epist Agaâ—â— Act. 4. Conc. 6. pa. 18. a. His integritie in faith did much please God exalt the Christian Common-wealth and againe g Ibid. in Epist Synod pa. 22. His vertue and pietie omnia in meliorem ordinem restauravit restored all things into a better state and condition All both Church and Common-wealth both the Civill and Ecclesiasticall state he restored all I oppose the sixt generall Councell that is the judgement of the whole Church in which the suggestions of Agatho eveÌ„ in that point according to the Cardinals doctrine h Vid. sup heâ— cap. nu 18. are approved as uttered by S. Peter yea by the holy Ghost himself These pregnant and irrefragable testimonies of so many so holy and divine witnesses are able I say not to confute but utterly to confound overwhelme Baronius w th his deformed decrepit calumnie 38. If any further please to descend to particulars whether hee cast his eyes on the Church or Common-wealth he shal see every Region every Province almost every City Towne proclaming the honour of Iustinian Besides his happy appeasing of those manifold broyles and suppressing sundry heresies which infested the Church in his dayes among which this concerning the Three Chapters was the chiefe How infinite monuments did he leave of his piety and zeale to Gods glory the good of his Church in building new in repairing decaied Churches reducing both to a most magnificeÌ„t beauty The Church of Christ called Sophia built by him at Constantinople was the mirrour of all Ages Of it Procopius an eye-witnesse testifieth i Proc. lib. 1. de aedif Iustin pa. 423. that the magnificence thereof amazed those who saw it but was incredible to those that saw it not the k Assurgit in altitudinem caeli Ibid. height of it mounted up into the heaven the splendor of it was such as if it received not l Diceres locum illum non externo sole illuminari Jbid. light from the Sun but had it in it selfe the roofe deckt with Gold the pavement beset m Pavimentum ex diversi coloris unionibus perfectum Glic Annal. part 4. with Pearle the silver of the Quire onely contained foure * Myriadas 4. caelati argenti habuisse fertur Proc. loc cit Myriads that is forty thousand pounds in so much that it is said n Hoc aedificio Solomonem esse superatum Glic loc cit to have excelled the Temple of Salomon Further in the honour of the blessed Virgin hee builded every where so many houses so stately and sumptuous throughout the Roman Empire that if you should comtemplate but onely one of them you would thinke saith Procopius o Lib. 1. his whole raigne to have beene imployed in building that alone At Constantinople he builded three p Ibid. one in Blacernis another in Pege a third in Hierio besides others builded in honour of Anna of Zoa of Michael of Peter and Paul of Sergius and Baccus utrumque fulgore lapillorum Solem vincit either of which by the brightnesse of precious stones excelled the Sunne of Andrew Luke and Tymothy of Acatius of Mocius of Thirsis of Theodorus of Tecla of Theodota Haec omnia ex fundamentis erexit All these he raised from the very ground and foundation and that at Constantinople the beauty and dignity of which cannot by words bee expressed by viewing be perlustrated Nor did he this to one onely Citie he builded like magnificent Churches at Antioch q Pro. lib. 2. at Sebastia at Nicopolis at Theodosia at TZani at Iustinianea r Lib. 4. where hee was borne at Ephesus Å¿ Lib. 5. at Helena at Nice at Pythia at Ierusalem so magnificent ut nullum aliud aequipare possit that none other may compare with it at Iericho at mount Gerazim at mount Sinai at Theopolis at Aegila t Lib. 6. pa. 453. where they sacrificed to Iupiter Hammon and Alexander the great even to that time at Boreion at Tripolis at Carthage at the Gades or Hercules pillers which was the uttermost border of the known world in those dayes So that one may truly say of him Imperium Oceano famam qui terminat astris his piety and zeale reacheth as farre as the earth his honour as high as the heaven And yet have I said nothing at all of the Monasteries Zenodochies Nosodochies and other like Hospitals which out of his most pious affection to God and Gods Church he not onely erected but inriched with large patrimonies and possessions which for number are as I suppose equall for expences greater than the former all the particulars whereof I referre to be read in Procopius who considering beside other matters al these magnificent and sumptuous buildings did truly say of IustiniaÌ„ u Lib. 1. pa. 424 Nulla honorandi Dei satietas eum cepit he was never
intends such a calamity as hapned before the condemning of the three Chapters but after the condemning of the Acephali Now it is certaine by the Acts of the fift Councell and by the Emperours testimony that as the Easterne Bishops so also Vigilius presently after he came to Constantinople consented to condemne the three Chapters yea condemned them by a Pontificall decree and judgement and continued in that minde till the time of the fift Councell at which time by the general Synod they were also condemned Gregory then should have spoken against himselfe had hee meant Vigilius and his comming to Constantinople in saying that after the sentence of Vigilius against Theodora the City was besieged and taken as it was once againe indeed taken by Totilas p Proc. lib. eodē 3. an 15. belli Goth. pa. 394. in the 23. yeare of Iustinus for his adversaries to whom he writ being defenders of the three Chapters would have replyed against him that this calamity befell them from the very same cause seeing both the Easterne Bishops and the Pope consented in that doctrine of condemning of the three Chapters Thus it appeareth not by surmises and conjectures but by certaine and evident proofe that the text of Gregory is corrupted or else that Gregory himselfe was mistaken therein which in a matter so neare his dayes wee may not thinke and so that it was not Vigilius but Agapetus whom Gregory intended to denounce that sentence against the Acephali or Theodora of which Baronius maketh such boast and commends with such great ostentation that thereby he might make the Empresse who was a condemner of the three Chapters more odious and strengthen that fiction and fabulous tale of Anastasius that Vigilius contended with Iustinian and Theodora about Anthimus CAP. XXII How Baronius declameth against the cause it selfe of the Three Chapters and a refutation thereof 1. BAronius not content to wrecke his spite upon the Emperour and Empresse in such uncivill manner as you have seene carpes in the next place at the very cause it selfe of the three Chapters What did Vigilius saith hee a Bar. an 547. nu 48. offend in appointing that men should be silent and say nothing untill the future Synod of this cause of the three Chapters which if it could have beene potius perpetuo erat silentio condemnanda sopienda sepelienda atque penitus extinguenda was rather to be condemned to perpetuall silence to be buried and utterly extinguished Againe b an 553. n. 237 I doe never feare to avouch that it had beene much better that the Church had remained without these controversies about the three Chapters nec unquam de his aliquis habitus esset sermo and that there had never beene one word spoken of them Thus Baronius 2. What thinke you moved the Cardinall to have such an immortall hatred to this cause as to wish the condemning buriall and utter extinguishing of those controversies What more hurt did this to the Church than the question abut 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 about 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or about the opinion of Eutiches Very great calamity saith Baronius c Jbidem insued upon this controversie both in the East and West True it did so and so there did and far greater and longer about the controversie of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and more againe than that upon the question whether the Gospell or Paganisme should prevaile and yet by moving those controversies was the faith propagated the truth of Christ spred abroad the blood of Martyrs was made the seed of the Gospell No affliction calamity or persecution is a just cause either to wish that there had never beene any such controversie or to forsake the truth of God when the controversie is moved It was an excellent saying of the Aegyptian Bishops in the Councell of Chalcedon d Act. 1. pa. 8. Christianus neminem timet a Christian feareth no mortall man si homines timerentur martyres non essent if men should be feared there would be no Martyrs But the truth is it was not as Baronius fancieth the controversie it selfe nor the disputing and debating thereof that caused so great calamities in the East and West that is non causa pro causa the peevishnesse and perversenesse of wicked men maintaining heresies and oppugning the truth that was the true cause thereof The controversie it selfe if you well marke it was very beneficiall to the Church Oportet haereses e 1 Cor. 11.19 esse there must be heresies among you that they which are approved might bee knowne Every heresie is a probation and tryall of mens love to God and his truth whether they esteeme it more than their honours pleasures and their owne wilfull conceits and the greater the heresie is and the further it spreads it is still a greater tryall Heretikes saith S. Austen f Lib. de ver◠relig ca. 8. doe much profit the Church though they be out of the Church not by teaching the truth which they doe not know but by stirring up those who are more carnall Catholikes to seeke and those who are more spirituall to defend and manifest the truth This triall and probation of men if I mistake not was never so great in any controversie or question as in this of the three Chapters First it sifted and tryed Vigilius to the full and tryed him to be a wether-cocke in faith an heretike and a defender of heresies even by his Apostolicall authority Next it sifted out divers notable conclusions as first that which I think was never before that tryed that not onely the Pope but the Apostolike See also to wit the Romane Church and with it the Westerne Churches all at once adhered to heresie and forsooke the truth and that even after it was decreed and judged by the generall approved Councell and so it proved both Pope and Romane Church to be properly hereticall the Easterne Churches constantly upholding the truth at that time it shewed that the Catholike faith was tied neither to the Chair nor Church of Rome Another conclusion then tryed was that either persons or Churches may not onely dissent from the Pope and the Romane Church and that in a cause of faith judicially defined by the Pope with a Synod but may renounce communion with them and yet remaine Catholikes and in the unity of the Catholike Church the Pope the Westerne Church and all that adheered unto them being then by forsaking the Catholike faith Heretikes and by forsaking the unity of the Church Schismatikes 3. Neither onely was this controversie a triall to them in that age a tryall of their faith love to God charity to the Church obedience to the Emperour but it is as great a triall even in these our dayes and ever since that doctrine of the Popes infallibility in causes of faith hath beene defined and condemned By this controversie most happly decided by the generall Councell all that hold the Popes definitions of faith to be infallible
that is all that are Papists or members of the present Church of Rome they are all hereby tryed to defend this Apostolicall Constitution of Vigilius that is to maintaine all the blasphemies of the Nestorians to deny the Catholike faith the doctrine of the Apostles of the primative Church of the fift generall Councell so to be not only heretikes but convicted anathematized and cōdemned heretikes by the judgement of a generall approved Councell and so by the consenting judgement of the Catholike Church Further yet there is a tryall of them whether upon that ground or foundation of the Popes infallibility they will build up and maintaine any other doctrine or position of faith or religion if they doe as indeed every point of the Romish faith and Religion relyeth upon that they are againe hereby tryed to be hereticall not onely in the foundation but in every position and doctrine of their faith and religion which relyes upon that foundation 4. This was it which netled Baronius and extorted from him those earnest and affectionate wishes that this controversie had never beene heard of nor mentioned in the world he saw what a tryall was like to be made by it of men of doctrines of Churches of the Pope himselfe and their whole Romish Church and seeing that tryall he never ceased to say that it had beene much better that this controversie had never beene moved nor spoken of for so they had avoided this most notable triall Blessed be God for that it pleased him in the infinite depth of his unspeakable wisedome to cause this controversie to be ventilated and discussed to the utmost that among many other tryals this might be one of the Antichristian Synagogue to try them even untill the very destruction of Antichrist It is for heretikes whose errors and obstinacy is tryed and discovered to the world it is for them I say to wish that the controversies about Arianisme Nestorianisme Eutycheanisme and the like had never beene moved they had scaped the just censures and anathemaes by that meanes But Catholikes have cause to rejoyce and triumph in such controversies by which both the truth which they maintaine is made more resplendent and victorious themselves and their faith tryed to be like refined gold the Church thereby is quieted the truth propagated heresies confounded and the glory of Almighty God much more magnified and praysed CAP. XXIII How Baronius revileth both the Imperiall Edict of Iustinian and Theodorus B. of Caesarea and a refutation of the same 1. SEeing now notwithstanding the wishing of Baronius this controversie could not be buried it ought him and all ill-willers of it a greater shame than that in the next place let us see how he declameth both against the Emperors Edict whereby these three Chapters were condemned Theodorus Bish of Caesarea who as he saith was the author penner of that Edict The Edict it self he calleth first Seminarium a An. 534. n. 2◠dissentionū a seed-plot of sedition which was never made upon a good occasion nor had any good end And not content herewith he tells b An. 546. nu 9. us out of Facundus that it is contrary to the faith yea even to that faith which Iustinian himselfe professed as orthodoxall to which effect also Baronius himselfe saith c Ibid. nu 8. that the Emperours Edict was set forth contrary to the three Chapters of the most holy Councell of Chalcedon But he specially seekes to disgrace it by the author of it for though it was published by Iustinian yet saith he d Edere sanctiones sibi arrogat Iustin quas dolose conscripsissent haeretici an 546. nu 41. Egerunt callide adversarii veritatis c. ibid. nu 9. it was written and that craftily by heretikes and adversaries to the truth by the e Ingenue professus est Origenistarum studiis ea fuisse ab Jmperatore promulgata ibid. nu 49. Origenists and in particular by f Illud à Theodoro conscriptū edictum suo nomine Iustin promulgavit ibid. nu 8. Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea one gratious g an 538. nu 85 potent and familiar with the Emperour and for proofe of all this the Cardinall citeth Liberatus h an 546. nu 9. an 534. nu 21. alibi Facundus and Vigilius 2. Having thus declared Theodorus to be the author and writer of the Edict Baronius then rageth against Theodorus as if he were to act veterē comoediam or according to the Proverbe ex plaustro to raile out of a cart against him calling him factious i Justin factiosorum studijs se inseruit an 550. nu 14. fraudulēt k Hominem vafrum an 551. nu 4. 564. nu 7. impudēt l Ejus gratia factus impudens ibid. nu 3. a most wicked m Theodorum illum nequissimum quem mirum in modum favisse ostendimus Origenis haeresibus an 564. nu 6. occullum haereticum manifestum schismaticum an 551. nu 5. Praeceps Origenista an eod nu 4. hereticall schismaticall headstrong Origenist the ring-leader of the Origenists one marvellously addicted to the heresie of Origen nor onely a servant to Origens errors but also n Non Origenis tantum errorum assecla sed Eutychianae blasphemia vehementissimus propugnator an 564. nu 7. a most earnest defender of the Eutychean blasphemy nor onely so but plunged o Ita miser Iustinianus caecus cacum Theodorum sectans cū īpso pariter mergitur in profundum an 564. nu 7. agit autē de haresi Aphthardochitarum in the heresie of the Aphthardokites or Phantastickes and like a blinde guide leading the blinde Emperour into that ditch of heresie a sacrilegious p Iuque sacrilegum Theodorum pseudoepiscopum imotyrannum insurgit in perversorem legum eversorem juriū an 551. nu 5. person a pseudobishop a tyrant a perverter of lawes an overthrower of right the q Qui Imperatori omnium illi malorum causa fuit an 551. n. 3 author of all mischiefe to the Empire the very r Hic igitur nefandissimus totius Ecclesiae pestis an 564. nu 7. plague of the whole Church Thus and much more doth Baronius utter against Theodorus by whom being so unworthy an author hee would disgrace the Edict it selfe which he writ though the Emperour published it 3. Let us first begin with that most untrue and malicious calumny of Baronius that the Emperor published his Edict against the three Chapters of the Councell of Chalcedon Truly the Cardinall should and might most truly have said the quite contrary that he published his Edict for defence not onely of the three but of every Chapter of every position of every decree of the Councell of Chalcedon The three Chapters which that Imperiall Edict and after it the fift Councell and the whole Catholike Church condemneth were not Chapters of the Councell of Chalcedon but three impious positions assertions or as they were by an
supra wee have proved 17. This were enough to oppose to all that Facundus and Liberatus say two defenders of the three Chapters and so professed enemies both to the Catholike truth defined in the fift Councell and to Theodorus of Cesarea who first of all suggested the condemning of them to the Emperour Iustinian But now besides this just exception against the Cardinals witnesses I will adde two cleare and authentike proofes to demonstrate both Liberatus and after him Baronius unjustly and falsly to slander Theodorus of Cesarea for an Origenist The former is his owne subscription to the fift Councell In that Councel among other heretikes Origen is not only expresly by name condēned that in their definitive sentence but an Anathema also denounced against all who doe not condemne and anathematize him these are the words of the Councell m Coll. 8. pa. 587 a. b. If any doe not anathematize Arius Emonius Macedonius Apollinarius Nestorius Eutyches Origen with their impious writings talis anathema sit such an one let him bee accursed To this Synodall decree did all the 165. Bishops in the Councell consent and subscribe the eighth man was this Theodorus of Cesarea who subscribed n Coll. eadem pa. 588. b. in this manner I Theodorus decrevi quae proposita sunt have decreed these things which are proposed and I confesse that the truth is as all those Chapters and doctrines above named of which this against Origen is the eleaventh doe containe when Theodorus himselfe confesseth Origen and his writings to bee condemned accurseth them yea and all who doe not accurse them is it not a vile and unexcusable calumny in Liberatus and in Baronius to revile him as a patron of Origen 18. Perhaps you will say hee was in former time an Origenist but at the time of the fift Councell hee was become a new man Though this were admitted yet cannot Baronius bee excused for calling him after that fift Councell an heretike an Origenist But hee was still the same man both now and before orthodoxall as by the other evidence taken from the Emperours Edict in condemning Origen will appeare when the defenders of Origen both for their number and insolency grew very troublesome in the East specially about Ierusalem Pelagius and Mennas as Liberatus o Loco citato saith at the instigation of some religious Monks intreated the Emperour that Origen and his heresies might be condemned the Emperour thereupon published a very large and religious Edict against Origen which he directed to Mennas and the copy therof he sent also to Vigilius and to other Patriarks after many other things the Emp. thus writeth p Edictum Iustin contra Origenem extat to 2. Con. pa. 482. We desiring to put away all offence from the holy Church to leave it without blemish following the divine Scriptures holy fathers who have cast out and justly anathematized Origen and his impious doctrine have sent this our Epistle unto you wherein we exhorte you that you call an assembly or Synod of all the holy Bishops and Abbots who are now in Constantinople and that you see that all of them doe in writing anathematize Origen and his wicked doctrines and all the Chapters out of him under-written and further that you send the Copy of what you have done in this cause to all other Bishops and Abbots within your Patriarkship that they also may all doe the like Besides this the Emperour yet commands that none be ordained Bishop or chosen into any Monastery unlesse forthwith in a booke they accurse and anathematize as Arius Sabellus Nestorius Eutyches and the rest so also Origen and his impious doctrines Thus writ the Emperour and what in this manner hee commanded Mennas to doe in his Patriarkship the like was Vigilius to doe in the Romane Zoilus in the Alexandrian Euphrenius in the Antiochian That according as the Emperour commanded this was done Liberatus q Dictata est in Originem damnatio quam subscribentes c. Liber ca. 23. is witnesse so that by all the Bishops in the world that then were and by such as were after this to bee ordained Origen with his impious doctrines was to bee condemned and accursed Particularly of the Synod or Bishops at Constantinople Baronius r An. 538. nu 83 confesseth The Emperour admonished Mennas to assemble a Synod by which all these things which he had written against Origen might bee confirmed quod factum fuit which was accordingly done and as Cedrenus ſ Ced in compend Annal. saith their sentence was this We condemne all these errours of Origen omnes qui ita sentiunt sentient and all who do either now or her after shall think as he doth condemning themselves with an anathema if either then they did thinke so or ever hereafter should think the like That Theodorus though he had remained at Cesarea subscribed to this sentence I thinke none can doubt the Emperours command being so strict to all Patriarks But indeed it seemeth that Theodorus was not onely at Constantinople at this time and there subscribed but that hee was one of the chiefe agents with the Emperour to publish this Edict for of him Evagrius t Lib. 4. ca. 37. witnesseth that cum Iustiniano assiduè versabatur he was continually conversant with the Emperour hee was faithfull and especially necessary unto him of him Liberatus u Ca. 24. saith that hee was dilectus familiaris Principum deare and familiar both with the Emperour and Empresse of him x An. 451. nu ◠Baronius testifieth that he was praepotens armiger Iustiniani the Champion of Iustinian for so saith he I may well call him that was used to sit at the Emperours Elbow yea of whom y An. 564. nu 7. the Emperour had conceived so great an opinion that hee thought it the chiefe point of his duty or piety ejus semper inhaerere Vestigijs alwayes to tread in the footsteps of Theodorus Thus Baronius Seeing Theodorus was so neare unto so potent with the Emperour so highly esteemed by him that hee alwayes trode in his steps how could Theodorus bee a patron of Origen when the Emperor himselfe accursed and commanded all others to accurse him Did not Theodorus treade out this path of an anathema unto the Emperour or had he been an Origenist how could the Emperour following him step by step be an enemy to Origen Or to omit many other like consequences seeing the Synod of Constantinople as besides Baronius Liberatus witnesseth that is all the Bishops there present among whom Theodorus being neare and deare unto the Emperour and so continually conversant with him was doubtlesse one and one of the chiefe condemned Origen it is not to bee doubted but that he was one of the first and chiefe Bishops that subscribed in that Synod to the condemnation of him Now this was done in the 12. z Hoc tempore 12. is annus Justin Constantinopoli
not onely by Nicephorus and the Emperours Epistle but by the evident testimony of the whole Synod in the synodall sentence it is undoubtedly certaine that the cause of Origen was not as he fancieth the first action or cause handled in the Synod and that he doth but play the Mome in carping at the Acts for want of the first Action 4. It may bee yet that the cause of Origen was the second action in the fift Synod as Nicephorus z Loco citato saith and after him Evagrius * Evag. lib. 4. ca. 37. and that is enough to prove the defects of these Acts. No it was not the second neither as it was not before so neither was it handled after the other of the Three Chapters witnesse the Synodall sentence it selfe wherein all the matters which every day they examined and discussed are set downe and repeated after repetition they testifie a Coll. 8. p. 586. a also Repetitis igitur omnibus quae apud nos acta sunt all things being repeated which were done or handled by way of discussion among us or in this Synod Seeing they repeated all that was debated among them and make no mention of this cause of Origen it is undoubtedly certaine that Origens cause was not debated either first or last in the Synod it was neither the first action as Cedrenus and Baronius nor the second as Evagrius and Nicephorus suppose besides the very determination of the Synod evidently declares the errours of Nicephorus and Evagrius The books say they b Niceph. et Evag. loc citat against the doctrine of Origen being offered to the Synod the Emperour demanded of the Councell Quid de his statueret What it would decree concerning those doctrines A matter utterly incoherent and improbable for in the synodall decree concerning the three Chapters which they suppose to be made before this cause of Origen was either heard or proposed the Councell had expresly delivered their judgement and condemned both Origen and his impious writings When they had already condemned both him and his errors what an incongruity is it to make the Emperour demand what they would decree of him and his errours Or may we thinke that the holy Synod would first condemne Origen and his impious writings as they did in the synodall sentence against the three Chapters and then afterwards examin the matter and make an enquiry whether Origen and his writings were to bee condemned or not which were to follow that disorder which the Switzers are reported to have used in judgement which was most justly called Iudicium vetitum to execute a man and then try and examine whether he ought to be executed or not Farre be it from any to imagine such injustice and rashnesse to have beene in this holy generall Councell Seeing then they condemned and accursed Origen and all his errours in that which Nicephorus and Evagrius account the former Session it is ridiculous to think that either the Emperour urged or that they themselves would in the second Session goe Switzer-like to examine the bookes and doctrines of Origen whether he they ought to be condemned Some doubt perhaps may arise out of those words in the Councell d Coll. 5. p. 552. a which the Cardinall slily e An. 553. nu 42 haec acta inquit desiderantur in Synodâ— c. alledgeth Origen was condemned in the time of Theophilus Quod etiam nunc in ipsa fecit vestra Sanctitas which your Holinesse hath now done and Pope Vigilius also But if the words be marked they make nothing against that which I have said for neither hath that Nunc a relation to this present Councell for it is certaine that in it Vigilius did not condemne Origen seeing he was not at all present in the Synod but to this age he was condemned in former ages as namely by Theophilus and now also that is in this your age and even by your selves and by Vigilius and if ought else were imported thereby yet is it onely said that Origen was now condemned which was indeed done by the Synod but that his cause was then examined and debated there neither is it true neither doe the words any way imply 5. Nay I adde further not onely that this Councell did not debate this cause of Origen but it had beene both superfluous and an open wrong to themselves and to the whole Church to have entred into the examination thereof For beside many other former judgements not many e Anno nempe 12. Iustiniani Vigilii 2. ut notat Bar. an 538. nu 29. et 31. yeares before in the time of Mennas both the Emperour in an Imperiall Edict f Extat Edict to 2. Conc. pa. 482. et seq had condemned Origen and his errors and by the Emperours command Mennas with a Synod of Bishops then present at Constantinople had confirmed that condemnation the other Bishops who were absent did the like the Emperour requiring every Patriarke to cause all the Bishops subject to his jurisdiction to subscribe to the same The doctrines and writings of Origen were no doubt at that time fully debated all the Bishops present in this fift Councell had then subscribed and consented to the condemnation of him and his errors so had Vigilius and all Catholike Bishops in the West Seeing the judgement of the Church in condemning Origen was universall would the Councell after themselves and all other Catholike Bishops that is after the judgement of the whole Catholike Church now debate and examine whether Origen and his doctrines ought to be condemned They might as well call into question whether Arius or Macedonius or Nestorius or Eutyches and their doctrine should bee condemned the judgement of the Catholike Church was alike passed on them all for this Councell g Coll. 8. pa. 587 condemned and accursed Origen and his errors as it did Arius Macedonius Nestorius and Eutyches but it condemned them all upon the knowne judgement of the Catholike Church not upon a new tryall or examination then taken of any one of them And this verily seemes to have deceived and led into error Evagrius Nicephorus and Cedrenus for of Baronius I cannot for many reasons imagine it to have beene errour or ignorance in him but wilfull and malicious oppugning the truth they knew or heard by report for even Evagrius h Evag. loc cit who lived in that age saith of that which hee writeth touching the fift Synod Of these things sic actum accepimus we have heard they were thus done I say they might heare that which indeed was true that Origen and his errours were condemned in a Councell at Constantinople in the time of Iustinian and they not being curious nor carefull to sift the diversities of Councels nor exact in computating times confounded the former particular Synod under Mennas wherein many of the doctrines of Origen were recited and he with them condemned in eleven Anathematismes i
the See S. Peters Chaire had beene too hot for him Vigilius wisely considered that it was no lesse art to keepe than to get the See he knowing that without deepe dissimulation and without faining himselfe a Catholike he could not possibly hold it much lesse could he effect that which he purposed and had both promised and sworne to performe and therefore by his private letter assuring Anthimus Severus Theodosius and Theodora of his hearty and serious intent to joyne with them and when time served to worke his feat by his other publike and orthodoxall letters to Iustinian Theodora and Mennas hee did but cast a mist before their eyes that they should not spy his heresie and under that visor of a Catholike he did labour to undermine the whole Catholike faith And thus much in his private letter he signifieth to Anthimus and the rest warning them first q Oportet ut haec quae scribo nullus agnescat Epist Vig apud Lib. of secresie lest if his powder-plot should be discovered as indeed most happily it was the sudden blow should not hit the Councell of Chalcedon and next that besides their secresie they should dissemble also no lesse than hee did they should still seeme r Sed magis suspectum me ante alios habeat sapientia vestra ut facilius possim quae caepi operari et perficere Ib. to suspect and bee jealous of him as of their onely enemy that their feare might make Catholikes secure of him and of that sudden blow which in a moment by the publishing of his Apostolike Edict for the adnulling of the Councell of Chalcedon he meant to give 36. But Bellarmine ſ Bell. lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 10. § Sciendum for all this will prove by two reasons that Vigilius was not in heart t Non fuit animo haereticus Ibid. an heretike nor did ex animo write this Epistle The former is because non palà m in ea condemnavit Catholicam fidem sed occultè he did not openly and publikely but onely in secret and closely condemne the Catholike faith for hee writes therein Vt sint omnia occulta usque ad tempus that they should keepe all private untill a fitter time Condemne then he did the Catholike faith but not ex animo because hee did secretly condemne it Ex studio occultandi saith Gretzer u Gret loc cit by his desire of concealing it Bellarmine collecteth this that Vigilius did not seriously and from his heart but dissemblingly write that impious Epistle As if one may not doe the same thing ex animo and seriously and yet doe it secretly What thinkes he of Iudas his plotting to betray Christ was close and secret his owne fellow Apostles knew not of it but sayd Master is it I his friendly conversing with Christ sitting at table and kissing was open and publike yet his outward courtesie even his kisse was dissembled and trecherous his malice treason and murderous affection which were secret and covered under those outward shewes of love were true and serious The Powder-plotters dealt closely and secretly all underboord their pretended subjection was open and yet the treason was serious their obedience but fained Bellarmine was but a meere novice in the Romane Court when hee writ this and imagined that Popes doe not seriously that which they doe secretly 37. His other reason x Bell. ubi supra to prove that Vigilius was not in heart hereticall when he writ this Epistle is because he writ it not with an hereticall minde sed propter cupiditatem praesidendi but in an ambitious desire of presidency What I pray you Is an hereticall and ambitious minde incompatible doth ambition exclude heresie or in ambition for one to teach heresie doth that hinder him from being in heart an heretike Scarce was there any Heresiarch whom ambition hath not inflamed and who in ambition layd not the foundation of his heresie Valentinus sayth Tertullian y Tert. cont Valent ca. 4. hoped for but missed a Bishopricke in revenge thereof he kindled his heresie and set fire in that Church wherein himselfe could not be governour When Marcion sayth Epiphanius z Epiph. har 42 got not the presidency he invented his heresie and puft up with pride sayd Ego findam Ecclesiam I le rend usunder your Church When Aerius b Epiph. haer 75. missed the Bishopricke which Eustathius obtained in his ambitious pride he devised his heresie that a Presbyter was all one with a Bishop Heare Cardinall Bellarmines c Bell. lib. de not Eccl. ca. 13. owne words All Arch-heretickes have one common vice and that is pride they spring up in divers places but pride is the mother of them all If Vigilius was no heretike in heart because he was ambitious neither was Nestorius nor Arius nor Aerius nor Montanus nor Valentinus by Bellarmines divinity heretikes because they were all ambitious If they notwithstanding their ambition were as certainly they were Arch-heretikes and taught their heresies with hereticall minds then not onely the Cardinals reason is inconsequent and ridiculous but Vigilius for all his ambition may not onely write that Epistle with an hereticall minde but be even an Heresiarch or rather a Pope heretike 38. Againe did he not write this with an hereticall minde why did not the Cardinall expresse what that hereticall minde is which was now wanting in Vigilius An hereticall minde is no other but a minde pertinaciously and obstinately addicted to heresie It was heresie doubtlesse which he writ in teaching with Eutyches but one nature to be in Christ That he writ this obstinately is cleare seeing he writ it against the knowne judgement of the holy Councell of Chalcedon that is of the Catholike Church which none can doe but even thereby he shewes an obstinate and pertinacious minde rebellious against the Church If this be not no hereticke in the world ever had an hereticall minde If Arius Nestorius and Eutyches when they writ or taught their doctrines with this minde were hereticall and heretikes then most certainly Vigilius who writ this Epistle with the like obstinate and pertinacious minde must needs bee judged to be rebellious against the Church and as heretically affected in minde as Arius or Eutyches himselfe Pride and insolency is so farre from excluding an hereticall minde as Bellarmine would here perswade that it is even an individuall companion yea essentiall unto it None can possibly have an hereticall but eo nomine he hath an ambitious heart the pride whereof causeth him to condemne the just sentence of the Catholike Church and prefer before it his owne fancy and opinion 39. You see now how inconsequent both these reasons of the Cardinals are seeing Vigilius might bee hereticall in heart though both his writings were secret and his minde ambitious Let us yet a little further debate this matter with the Cardinall Say you that Vigilius did not write this hereticall Epistle ex animo or from his
heart I pray you when looked your Cardinalship into the heart of Vigilius how know you that he was not an heretike in heart when he was so hereticall in profession or how know you of S. Hildebrand of Boniface 8. or of any of all the Popes that lived since their times that they were not heretikes and plaine Infidels in heart when their words were Catholike I would gladly for my learning be informed how Bellarmine or the most acute Lynceus of them all do or can know otherwise than by their outward professions what any of all the Popes beleeved and thought in their heart What Innocent the third when he decreed the doctrine of Transubstantiation what Leo the tenth when he condemned Luther or what Paul Iulius and Pius the fourth when they confirmed their Trent Councell How know you that in their hearts they beleeved those doctrines or that they did not dissemble and faine as you say Vigilius did What can you say for Pius the fourth which may not be sayd for Vigilius also Doth Pius say he did before and now doth thinke as the Trent masters doe Pope Vigilius sayth the like and most plainly Eam fidem quam tenetis that faith which you Anthimus Severus and Theodosius doe hold I signifie unto you that I have held and that I doe now hold the same Doth Pius call the Trent Fathers his beloved brethren in Christ so doth Vigilius call those hereticall Bishops his beloved brethren in Christ nay in Liberatus he calls them even Christs Doth Pope Pius professe an unity betwixt himselfe and them all making one body of the Church Pope Vigilius doth the like and he doth it more significantly We sayth he preach this same doctrine that you doe Vt anima una sit cor unum in Deo so that there is in you and mee but one soule and one heart in God How can any speech be cordiall if this testifying himselfe to be one soule and one heart with them doe not come à fibris but onely à labris Doth Pope Pius approve the doctrine of the Trent conspirators So doth Pope Vigilius the doctrine of those Eutychean heretikes Doth Pius condemne and anathematize Lutherans Calvinists and all who thinke or teach otherwise than himselfe and his Trent Conventicle taught or beleeved so doth Pope Vigilius condemne and anathematize all who deny two natures in Christ all who beleeve otherwise than himselfe and his Eutychean fellow heretikes did In all these there is as much to be sayd for Pope Vigilius as for Pope Pius and if you please to adde that one other agreement also as of Vigilius it is sayd that they knew crudelitatem fidei so may it in like manner bee truly sayd of Pope Pius that this did manifest unto all men crudelitatem fidei the cruelty of his and his Trent Councels faith If by these outward acts the Cardinall can know Pius the fourth to have ex animo condemned their Trent heresies why can he not by the like outward acts know Vigilius to have ex animo condemned the Catholike faith If Vigilius for all these outward acts and so many testimonies and evidences of a willing minde did dissemble and thinke in his heart otherwise than he writ how will or can the Cardinall prove unto us that Pius the 4. and the whole Councell of Trent did not dissemble and both write and speake otherwise than they thought in heart Hath the Cardinall some windowes to pry into the secrets of the heart of Pius the fourth and the Trent Councell which are dammed up that he cannot see into the brest of Vigilius If Pope Pius upon his word and writing be to be credited much more is Pope Vigilius seeing he did not only by words and writing teach this hereticall doctrine but which Pius did not he bound himselfe by a sacred oath that hee would teach the same And which is yet a farre greater evidence Vigilius after this did teach the like hereticall doctrine to overthrow the same Councell of Chalcedon in the cause of the Three Chapters which hee did so unfainedly and so cordially that for teaching the same he incurred the just indignation of the Emperour the curse of the holy generall Councell the publike hatred of all Catholikes and if wee may beleeve Baronius even exile and persecution also Why might not the same Vigilius from his heart teach Eutycheanisme as well as Nestorianisme The faces of those two heresies looke contrary wayes indeed but their tayles like Sampsons Foxes are joyned together to undermine the Catholike faith and the holy Councell of Chalcedon Hee who once is proved to be treacherous in this sort and to doe this once from his heart semper praesumitur is alwayes to bee presumed treacherous in the same kinde Hee who did this in the Three Chapters would have done it in Eutycheanisme his heart his desire his purpose at both times was the same the odds was accidental in the oportunity which served better in the one than in the other what need they excuse his teaching Eutycheanisme to have been only labiall when it is cleare his teaching of Nestorianisme was cordiall If they cannot excuse Pope Vigilius for teaching Nestorianisme from his heart which cannot possibly be done what need they be so nice in denying his teaching of Eutycheanisme to have come from the same heart his fault in them both being alike one answer will alike serve for them both 44. But what thinke you meant the Cardinall so to busie himselfe and bee so curious about the heart and secret minde of Vigilius what though hee did not in heart yet exteriori professione by his hereticall writing by his outward confession by that Vigilius condemned the Catholike faith as the Cardinall d Dico Vigilium scripsisse illam Epistolam et damnasse Catholicam fidem saltem exteriori professione Bell. lib. 4. de Pont. ca. 10. §. Respondeo multi acknowledgeth it is the Popes outward profession not his inward cogitation by which wee prove his Chayre to bee fallible what have wee nay what hath the Cardinall or any of them all to doe with Vigilius intent or inward thoughts leave those to his Tribunall who onely e Reg. 8.39 knoweth and seeth the hearts of all the sonnes of men let men who cannot see the heart looke to his words to his writings to that profession by which hee teacheth others If that be hereticall what boots it them though his heart bee orthodoxall Confirma fratres pasce oves are outward acts they looke abroad and outwardly not to the inward and hidden man in the Popes breast If he think as Simon Peter and teach as Simō Magus as Arius Nestorius or Eutyches did is he not an hereticall teacher an hereticall Pope a confirmer of his brethrē in heresie a feeder nay a very prisoner of the sheepe with worse weeds than the Socraticall Cicuta If the Pope onely thinke and beleeve heresie why thought is free to wit from
and Cyrill p. 123. sec 15. and p. 134. se 34. The Nestorians confessed two natures and one person in Christ and how p. 144. how Catholikes confesse it ibid. sec 11 12 13. Nestorius affirmeth the two natures to be two persons pa. 145. sect 16. so Theodorus the Master of Nestorius sect 17. to affirme this is plaine Nestorianisme proved by Iustinian pa. 146. sect 18. by Pope Iohn the second The Nestorians in words orthodoxall in sense and meaning hereticall pa. 147. sect 20. and p. 448. sect 22 23. witnessed by Iustinian p. 449. sect 24. by the fift Councell sect 25. by the epistle it selfe sect 26 27. The Nestorians by Nature understand Person p. 162. sect 46 47. The Nestorians slander Cyrill to teach two persons p. 163. sect 47. Narses for his piety and prudence beloved of Iustinian p. 248. sect 12. Narses intreated not for Vigilius pa. 249. sect 14. Narses overcame not Totilas if Binius his glosse be true p. 458. sect 23. Narses overcame not the Gothes by the intercession of Mary p. 459. sect 24. O. THe occasion of the fift Councell was those tria capitula p. 2. sect 3. Origen commended for his gifts and learning p. 103. sect 28. Origen condemned by the Acts of the fift Synod p. 392. sect 1 2. Origens cause not the cause of the first action in the fift Synod p. 393. sect 3. nor the cause of the second action in the Synod sect 4. The order of lawfull generall Councels pa. 304. sect 19. P. PApists are truly such as ground upon the Popes infallibility p. 187. sect 26. Pope Vigilius excommunicated in an African Synod p. 236. sect 16. The Pope refuseth to come to the Synod p. 4. sect 2 3 4. and the true reason why pag. 6. sect 5. The Popes presence not needfull in a generall Councell p. 273. sect 14 15. The Pope present in the fift Councell by his letters of instruction p. 274. sect 16. The Popes consent makes not a Councell to be approved p. 275. sect 27. vid. lit C. In the Pope intensivè there is as much authority as in the Pope with a generall Councell Bellarmines assertion p. 174. sect 10. The Pope vertually both Church and Councell p. 178. sect 15. p. 180. sect 17. The name Papist not heard of till Leo the 10. p. 188. sect 25. to be a Pope an happy thing for all is held for truth that they define pag. 223. sect 16. Papist had need of a strong faith relying on the Popes judgement p. 224. sect 18. Paulus Bishop of Emisa subscribed to the anathematizing of Nestorius to perswade an union betweene Iohn and Cyrill p. 133. sect 31 his Sermon at Alexandria containing an orthodoxall profession of the faith p. 134. sec 33. Pelagius Pope after Vigilius consecrated by two Bishops onely an a Presbyter of Ostia pa. 242. sect 4. A Pope may erre personally they say but doctrinally he cannot p. 244. sect 7. The Pope no competent Iudge of Protestants being an enemy unto them pag. 315. sect 33. Pope Clements epistle to Iames a forgery pa. 422. sect 2. Paul censured by some for an hot-headed person 434. sect 18. in fine R. THe Church of Rome holdeth no doctrine by certainty of faith p. 181. in fine and pa. 282. sect 20. and p. 189. sect 27 28. The Romish doctrines may bee held three wayes p. 183. sect 21. in fine First of them who hold the Scriptures for the foundation p. 183. sect 22. such were our forefathers Second way by grounding upon Scripture but with pertinacy p. 184. sect 23. A third way of holding them is on the Popes word p. 185. sec 24 They of the Romane Church are heretikes p. 192. sect 31. In their Romane Church no true holinesse p. 193. sect 32. They of the Romish Church are schismatikes p. 196. sect 34. Rome miserably besieged by Totilas p. 456. sect 22. Ruba not taken from Alexandria pag. 407. sect 8. S. THe Synod resolves to judge the controversie about the three Chapt. the Pope being absent p. 7. sect 1. Sergius Bishop of Cyrus deposed from his Bishopricke p. 706. sect 18. Scripture being the ground of a mans faith is a comfort unto him though in some things he erre pa. 191. sect 29. and p. 194. sect 33. Supremacy and infallibility are inseparably joyned p. 176. sect 12. Schismatikes are not of the Church pa. 199. sect 39. Profession of Scriptures excuse not from heresie p. 226. sect sect 13. Suidas a fabler 326. sect 4. Sophia built by Constantine the mirrour of ages p. 350. sect 39. Switzers order in judgement p. 394. in fine Shamefull matters not added to the Acts of the fift Synod p. 408. sect 1. 4. Silverius died of famine in the Iland Palmaria p. 472. sect 13. Synods what makes them lawfull p. 282. and what unlawfull p. 306. sect 20. T. THeodorus not condemned in his life time p. 47. sect 2. Theodorus died not in the peace of the Church p. 59. sect 1 2 3 4. and p. 66. Theodorus condemned by Cyrill and Proclus p. 68. sec 2 3. and p. 73. sec 11. c. by the Ephesine Councell p. 69. sec 4. c. by the Armenian Councell p. 72. sec 10. by the Emperours Edict sec 13 14 c. by the Catholike Church p. 76. sec 19. Theodoret writ against Cyrill and the true faith p. 62. sec 4 5. Theodoret very resolute for Nestorianisme p. 93. sec 6. Theodoret his writings condemned by the Councell of Chalcedon p. 96. sec 12 13. and p. 101. sec 23. and by Cyrill p. 98. sec 16 17. Theodoret was not injured though his writings were condemned p. 102. sec 24 26. Theodoret a man of rate worth and learning p. 104. sec 29 30. Taciturnity the decree of taciturnity and what effect it tooke p. 225. sec 2 3 4. a meere fiction p. 228. sec 5 6 c. Trent Bishops were the Popes creatures pa. 319. sec 37. The Trent Councell conspired against Protestants p. 314. sec 32. Theodora unjustly reviled by Baronius pag. 355. sec 1. Theodora favoured Anthimus as being orthodoxall p. 358. sec 5. Theodora not excommunicated by Vigilius p. 359. sec 6. Theodorus Bishop of Caesarea no heretike p. 368. sec 9 10. Theodorus of Caesarea no Origenist pa. 374. sec 17. he maimed not the Acts of the 5. Synod p. 697. sec 7. Theodosius law in the Code not corrupted p. 411. sec 4. Theodoret wrote that Epistle mentioned in the fift Synod p. 413. sec 1. hee wrote it after the union p. 416. sec 6 7. and p. 420. sec 12. Theodora writ not to Vigilius to restore Anthimus p. 449. sec 16 17. Theodora sent not Anthimus Scribe to Rome for Vigilius p. 452. sec 18. Theodoret sets forth his owne orthodoxy p. 417. sec 7. Theodoret condemned by the Councell at Ephesus p. 419. sec 10. Theodoret writ an epistle to Iohn of Antioch p. 422. sec 1. Theodoret rejoyceth over Cyrill