dead in it self They afterwards proceed to the rules of morality recommending Hope Charity Humility Chastity Temperance Sobriety and condemn Pride Envy Hatred Variance Drunkenness Calumny Magick Divinations c. HERE we have without question very commendable endeavours but they reach no farther than the instructing of the people in the Articles of the Creed and the principal points of morality These Fathers in their greatest zeal to reform both themselves and others make no mention of the Real Presence 'T was not then above fifty years when the Dispute was very hot on this subject and Books were wrote on both sides Yet it seems they took no notice of it much less determin to instruct the people in what they ought to hold of it All their care was to remove that ignorance of the Fundamentals wherein the people lay and correct that fearful corruption of manners wherein the greatest parr spent their lives Now this shews us that Mr. Arnaud can draw no advantage from these essays of a Reformation for supposing they had their whole effect they extended not so far as the question of the Real Presence because they suppose either that the people were not ignorant of it or that the Pastors were themselves so persuaded of it that t was needless to instruct them in it or exhort them to instruct their Flocks in it But what likelihood is there that this in numerable multitude of people of both Sexes and of all Ages and conditions of life that knew not their Creed nor the Lords Prayer and lived without any knowledg of the Principles of Christian Religion should know the Doctrin of the Real Presence Were they all in those days born imbued with this Doctrin What likelihood is there those Abbots that knew not the Statutes of their Monasteries and who to excuse themselves from reading 'em when offered to them were forced to say nescimus literas were not likewise greatly ignorant of the Mystery of the Eucharist What reason is there to say the Pastors themselves were commonly instructed in it seeing Odon Abbot of Clugny as we have already seen testifies that those who pretended to be learned yet had little knowledg of the Sacrament till they read Paschasus his Book THERE were likewise other Reformations made in this Century but they served only to establish some order in the Monasteries and the observance of particular Statutes under which the Religious are obliged to live by their profession and this does not hinder but that ignorance and carelesness were very great in respect of the Mystery of Religion AS to the Conversions 't is certain there were some but Mr. Arnaud knows very well the greatest part of 'em were wrought by force or the interests and intrigues of Princes And thus those that were converted might well embrace their Religion implicitly or in gross without troubling themselves with particular Doctrins as the greatest part of the People of the Roman Church do at present In the year 912 according to Matthew of Westminister Rollon or Raoul Duke of Normandy embraced the Christian Religion to espouse Gill the Daughter or Sister of Charles III. King of France In the year 925 Sitricus King of Denmark caused himself to be Baptised to espouse Edgite the Sister of Etelstan King of England but a while after he returned to Paganism In the year 926 Elstan having vanquish'd in Battle several petty Kings which were then in England obliged them and their Subjects to receive the Christian Faith In the year 949 Otton King of Germany having subdued the Sclavonians these people redeemed their lives and Country by being Baptiz'd In the year 965 Poland was converted to the Christian Faith by the Marriage of Miezislaus its King with the Daughter of Boleslaüs Duke of Bohemia John XIII Anti-Pope to Benedict V. sent thither Gilles Bishop of Tusculum to establish under the Authority of the King his Religion in that Country In the year 989 Adalbert Arch-Bishop of Prague went into Hungary to endeavour the conversion of those people but this was under the authority and power of Geisa King of Hungary who was converted by commerce with Christians whom he freely permitted to live in his Kingdom So that all these conversions about which Mr. Arnaud and the Author of the Perpetuity make such a noise to advance the glory zeal and knowledg of the Bishops of the 10th Century do not at all conclude what they pretend LET the Reader then joyn all these things together and judg which of us two has most reason Mr. Arnaud who maintains it to be impossible that the belief of the Real Presence supposing 't were a novelty in the Church could make any progress therein in the 10th Century without Disputes and Commotions or I who maintain that these progresses were not only possible but easie to be conceiv'd First There were Disputes on this subject in the 9th Century which is a matter of fact not to be denied Secondly Altho the question was therein agitated yet was it not decided by any Council nor by the Church of Rome nor by any other publick Authority Thirdly Those of the 10th Century fell into a very confused knowledg of the Mystery of Christian Religion in general the People the Religious and the greatest part of the Priests and Bishops lived in very gross ignorance and in a prodigious neglect of the chief Offices of their Charge as we have fully proved Fourthly Ecclesiastical Discipline was wholly laid aside in this Age and the temporal state of the Church lay in a perpetual and general confusion Fifthly It appears that the Doctrin of Bertram which was contrary to the Real Presence was therein preached in several places Sixthly It also appears that that of Paschasus was so too and was endeavour'd to be under-propt by Miracles and Pastors exhorted to read Paschasus his Book to be instructed in the Mystery of the Eucharist Seventhly To which we may add that the persons that taught the Real Presence in this Century were people of great credit and authority Odon that confirm'd it by Miracles was Archbishop of Canterbury and was in great reputation Th' other Odon who had such an esteem for Paschasus his Book was an Abbot of Clugny a restorer and reformer of several Monasteries of whom Baronius says That he was chosen by God as another Jeremiah Baron ad an 938. to pluck up destroy scatte◠plant and build in that wretched Age. ALL these matters of fact being clearly proved as they are what impossibility is there that the Doctrin of Paschasus which he taught in the 9th Century as an explication of the true Doctrin of the Church confirming it as much as he could by several passages of the Fathers taken in a wrong sense no publick Authority having condemn'd it should have followers in the 10th That these his Disciples finding ' emselves credited and authoris'd by their Offices and Employs in a Church wherein ignorance carelesness and confusion reign'd have themselves communicated
be an effect of the displeasure which he had to be accused of Heresie by his adversaries yet do acknowledg that he was drawn over thither by Alfred Cujus munificentia illectus magisterio ejus ut ex Scriptis Regis intellexi Melduni resedit says Simeon of Durham which is to say that he was won by the Kings liberality to be his Tutor Roger de Howden and Matthew of Westminster say the same thing in the same terms so that according to them these two things do not contradict one another that John Scot was call'd into England by Alfred and yet came thither thro some disgust which his enemies had given him in France THIRDLY French Historians say also that John Scot was called over into England by Alfred Observe here what an ancient Chronicle of France says which ends in 1137. At the entreaty of Alfred John Scot return'd Hist Fran. T. 3. p. 359. from France where he was with Charles the Bald. But fourthly If we suppose that this John Scot whom the Historians say was fetcht over from France into England together with S. Grimbald by an Ambassador sent on purpose by Alfred for him is different from our John Scot it cannot be said who he was Asserus speaks of him not as of an obscure person but as a famous man The King says he sent beyond Sea into France Embassadors to search for Masters and drew over Grimbald a Priest and a Monk he brought over likewise John who was also a Priest and a Monk a man of a great wit and well vers'd in all Sciences Let us be inform'd who this famous man was in France this man that was so well known and deserved to be sent for by an Embassage For we do not any where find there was in France after the middle of the 9th Century any other man of this Character and name of John but John Scot. We find indeed mention made of of Grimbald that he was a Monk of S. Bertin who understood Musick but was far from equalling in Wit and Learning this John Scot of whom Asserus speaks How then came it to pass that there remains no trace of this pretended John supposing this was not he THE Author of the Dissertation's third foundation is that John Scot withdrew from France into England about the year 864. whereas John Scot the Abbot of Aetheling companion of S. Grimbald came over there but in 884. But why must John Scot have pass'd over from France into England about the year 864. Because says our Author Nicholas the First prayed Charles the Bald to send him speedily John Scot or at least to suffer him no longer to remain in his Vniversity of Paris lest he should corrupt it with his Errors Hinc est quod dilectioni vestrae vehementer rogantes mandamus quatenus Apostolatui nostro Joannem repraesentari faciatis aut certe Parisius in Studio cujus jam olim Capital fuisse perhibetur morari non sinatis ne cum tritico sacri eloquii grana Lolii Zizaniae miscere dignoscatur panem quaerentibus venenum porrigat 'T was without doubt adds our Author after these Letters that John Scot withdrew into England Seeing then Pope Nicolas has govern'd the Church since the year 858 till 868. We must place th' arrival of John Scot into England about the year 864. that is to say twenty years before Alfred caused Grimbald and John to come to him For Asser assures us this was in the year 884. THIS reasoning supposes facts which are not proved First This fragment of the Letter of Nicolas I. to Charles the Bald wherein is mention of John Scot and the University of Paris is a piece supposed a great while after the 9th Century for the University of Paris as I have already observ'd began not before the 12th Century and these terms of Studium and of Capital to express the University and Rector of it were not in use in Nicolas I. his time Secondly The Author of the Dissertation informs us that the Letter of Anastasius the Popes Library-keeper to Charles the Bald of which we have already spoken was written in the year 875. and proves it by a Manuscript of the Jesuits of Bourges which bears expresly this date Now in this Letter Anastasius gives singular commendations to John Scot calling him virum per omnia sanctum what likelihood is there then Anastasius would give praises of this kind to a man who was esteem'd at Rome an Heretick and was oblig'd for this reason and the Popes accusation to withdraw from the Court of Charles OUR Author impertinently supposes from the testimony of Asserus that John the Abbot of Aetheling pass'd not over into England till 884. Had he read Asserus with a little more reflection he would have found that altho Asserus refers the sending for of Grimbald and John to the year 884 yet does he not thereby intend precisely to fix it to the year 884. Asserus recapitulates on the year 884. the private life of Alfred since the year 868. which was the year of his Marriage omitting several important things that he might not interrupt the narration of the Wars of this Prince even as in the year 868. he had recapitulated whatsoever Alfred had done during his youth So Asserus does not say in that year as he must have done if he would have precisely design'd the year 884. but he says in these times his temporibus THE fourth proof of the Author of the Dissertation is no better than the rest He says that Mr. Claude having written that John Scot died in the year 884. or in the preceding year he could not be this John whom Alfred the King of England sent for by reason of his Reputation and Learning seeing that this John was not made Abbot till the year 888. or 887. as all Historians agree and that he began not his regency at Oxford till the year 886. as we find in the Annals of the Monastery of Winchester of which Grimbald was made Abbot at the same time as John his companion was of that of Aetheling BUT there 's no solidity in this proof First It is plain one cannot gather any thing certain from Historians either touching the year of John Scot's death nor that wherein Alfred called Grimbald and John into England Secondly Neither is there any certainty in the Annals of Winchester which refer to the year 886. the foundation of the University of Oxford by Grimbald and John his companion two years after their arrival in England for this so great an antiquity of the University of Oxford is a mere fable as has been proved by Bishop Vsher so that whatsoever can be reasonably Antiq. Brit. p. 340 341 342. concluded hence is that there being nothing certain in all this Chronology there can be nothing alledged hence to conclude that John Scot died in the year 883. or 884. And consequently the conjecture of Mr. Claude who has only in this respect
the virtue of the Divine Word it is truly the Body and Blood of Christ yet not corporeally but spiritually That there is a great deal of difference between this Body in which Jesus Christ has suffered and that Body which is Consecrated in the Eucharist For the Body with which our Saviour has suffered was born of the Virgin has Blood Bones Skin Sinews and is indued with a reasonable Soul But his spiritual Body which we call the Eucharist is composed of several grains without Blood Bones Members and Soul and therefore we must not understand any thing of it corporeally but spiritually II. Mr. ARNAVD cannot hinder it from being true that the Ibidem people were instructed in this manner The heavenly food with which the Jews were nourished by the space of forty years and the Water which ran from the Rock represented the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ which we now every day offer in the Church They were the same things which we offer at this day not corporeally but spiritually We have already told you that our Saviour Christ before his Passion Consecrated Bread and Wine to be his Eucharist and said This is my Body and Blood He had not yet suffered and yet he changed by his invisible virtue this Bread into his own Body and this Wine into his own Blood in the same manner as he had already done in the Wilderness before he was incarnate when he changed the heavenly Manna into his Flesh and the Water which ran from the Rock into his own Blood He that eats my Flesh and drinks my Blood has Eternal Life He does not command us to eat that Body which he assum'd nor drink that Blood which he spilt for us but by this he means the holy Eucharist which is spiritually his Body and Blood which whosoever shall taste with a pure heart shall live eternally Vnder the ancient Law the Faithful offered to God several Sacrifices which signified the Body of Jesus Christ to come this Body I say which he offered to God his Father as a Sacrifice for our Sins But this Eucharist which we now Consecrate on Gods Altar is the Commemoration of the Body of Jesus Christ offered for us and Blood shed for us according as he himself has commanded saying Do this in remembrance of me III. Mr. ARNAVD must be remembred that Elfric Abbat of Serm. Elfrici apud Eund Voloc Malmâ—sbury and who was afterwards as 't is thought Arch-bishop of Canterbury and lived in the same time wrote That the Eucharist is not the Body of Jesus Christ corporally but spiritually not the Body in which Jesus Christ has suffered but the Body in which he spake the night before his Passion when he Consecrated the Bread and Wine and said of the Consecrated Bread This is my Body and of the Consecrated Wine This is my Blood which is shed for many for the remission of sins The Lord who before his Passion Consecrated the Eucharist and said the Bread was his Body and the Wine truly his Blood does himself every day Consecrate by the hands of the Priest the Bread into his Body and the Wine into his Blood by a spiritual mystery as we find it written This enlivening Bread is not in any sort the same Body in which our Lord suffered and the Consecrated Wine is not the Blood of our Lord which was shed as to the corporeal matter but it is as to the spiritual The Bread was his Body and the Wine his Blood as the Bread of Heaven which we call the Manna with which the people of God were nourished during forty years and the water which ran from the Rock in the Desart was his Blood as says the Apostle in one of his Epistles they ate of the same spiritual food and drank of the same spiritual drink The Apostle does not say corporally but spiritually For Jesus Christ was not then born nor his Blood spilt when the people ate of this food and drank of this Rock IV. Mr. ARNAVD cannot hinder Wulstin Bishop of Salisbury in Mss. in Colleg. S. Bened. Cant. his Sermon which he made to his Clergy from speaking in this manner This Sacrifice is not the Body of Jesus Christ wherein he suffered nor his Blood which was shed for us but it is made spiritually his Body and Blood as the Manna which fell from Heaven and the water which gushed out of the Rock according to the saying of S. Paul I will not have you Brethren to be ignorant that our Fathers have been all under a Cloud and pass'd the Sea and all of 'em baptiz'd by Moses in the Cloud and in the Sea and that they have all eaten the same spiritual food and drank the same spiritual drink for they drank out of the spiritual Rock which followed them Now this Rock was Christ and therefore the Psalmist says he gave them the Bread of Heaven Man has eaten the Angels food We likewise without doubt eat the Bread of Angels and drink of this Rock which signifies Christ every time we approach with Faith to the Sacrifice of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ V. Mr. ARNAVD must know that the people were publickly In eod Mss. Eccl. Vigorn taught That Jesus Christ brake the Bread to represent the fraction of his Body that he bless'd the Bread and brake it because it pleased him so to submit the human nature which he had taken to death that he has also added that he had in it a treasure of Divine immortality And because Bread strengthens the body and the Wine begets blood in the flesh therefore the Bread relates mystically to the Body and the Wine to the Blood VI. He must know that Heriger Abbot of Lobbs in the County of Sig de Script Eccles cap. 137. de Cest Abb. Lob. tom 6. Spicil p. 591. Liege publickly condemned Paschasus his Doctrin as new and contrary to the Faith of the Church Which we learn by Sigibert and the continuer of the Acts of the Abbots of Lobbs for both of 'em say That he produc'd against Rabbert a great many passages of the Fathers Writings touching the Body and Blood of our Lord. VIII Mr. ARNAVD himself confesses that John Scot who withdrew Book 9. ch 6. p. 909. into England about the end of the preceding Century made perhaps some Disciples of his Doctrin 'T is true he would have these Disciples to be secret But why secret John Scot kept not himself private Bertran and Raban were neither of 'em in private Those that disliked Paschasus his Novelties hid not themselves in the 9th Century Why then must the Disciples of John Scot lie secret in the 10th wherein were Homilies that were filled with Doctrins contrary to that of Paschasus publickly read Besides as I have already said there 's no likelihood that Odon Arch-bishop of Canterbury should think himself oblig'd to have recourse to such a famous miracle as is that related by William of Malmsbury to
were elected by these Monsters seeing there 's nothing more natural than for every thing to produce its like Who doubts but they consented to all which they did who had chosen 'em but that they imitated 'em and trod in their footsteps but that they all desired our Saviour should sleep on and never rise to judg them nor awake to call 'em to account for their wicked deeds Luitprand produces a Letter of John the XIIth to the Council which the Emperor Otton assembled at Rome to depose him which shews us how admirable the Popes were for Learning in those days Joannes Episcopus servus servorum Dei omnibus Episcopis Nos audivimus dicere quod vos vultis alium Papam facere si hoc feceritis Excommunico vos de Deo omnipotenti ut non habeatis licentiam ullum ordinare missam celebrare The Councils answer is as elegant Est vestris in literis scriptum quod non Episcopum sed puerilem ineptiam scribere deceret excommunicastis enim omnes ut non habeamus licentiam canendi missam ordinandi Ecclesiasticas dispositiones si alâ—um Romanoe Sedi constitueremus Episcopum It a enim scriptum erat non habeatis licentiam ullum ordinare Nunc usque putavimus immo credimus duo negativa unum facere dedicativum nisi vestra autoritas priscorum sententias infirmaret autorum THE Zeal Fervour frequent Conversions and Reformations of those days could not hinder but that Symony was very frequent as I proved in my Answer to the Perpetuity by the testimonies of Luitprand and Glaber and by the very confession of the Author of the Perpetuity himself which might be further made to appear were it necessary Now judg I pray you what science and zeal there could be in a Church where the ministerial Office was upon sale to him that offered most And moreover the Arch-bishopricks and Bishopricks commonly bestowed on Children uncapable of discharging those great trusts which Baronius expresly asserts for having told Baron ad ann 925. us from the testimony of Frodoart that Heribert Earl of Guyenne and Süelphus Arch-bishop of Rhemes were agreed that after the death of Süelphus the Arch-bishoprick should come to Heribert's Son he says that Heribert to make quick work caused Süelphus to be poisoned and his Son to be chosen in his place who was not above five years old that the news of the Election being brought to the King he confirm'd it which was also done by Pope John the Xth. To which Baronius adds That this example was quickly followed by several Princes who promoted their own or relations Children to the Episcopal Seats as oft as they became vacant which says he was likewise done in Rome it self in those days Constantinople and other great Cities And would to God adds he this custom had went no farther than those days and that so detestable a wickedness against the Churches Canons were unknown to the following Ages Let Mr. Arnaud himself judg whether ignorance and carelesness are not the natural effects of such disorders WHEREUNTO we may add the Tumults and continual Wars with which the West was afflicted during this whole Century for 't is certain that from the beginning to the end of it all Europe resounded with the noise of them France was therein troubled by the League of Robert and the dreadful consequences hapning thereupon by the Wars against the Normans Danes and Germans and by those which hapned upon the rejection of Charles Duke of Lorrain and th' Election of Hugo Capet England was therein disturb'd by divers Civil Wars and the frequent Incursions of the Danes Scotch Irish and other people still professing Paganism Spain was also molested by the Moors Arabians and Saracens by the Invasions of the Normans and by the dreadful Divisions of the Christians GERMANY spent this Century in perpetual Confusions the Danes Sclavonians and Huns ravag'd all things by their irruptions which often hapned For Children to contrive the death of their Parents was ordinary and Great Persons to rise up against their lawful Princes which commonly ended in bloody Battels not to mention the cruel Wars which the Emperors had to maintain in Italy against the Factious and in Calabria against the Greeks and Saracens As to Italy she was throughout this whole Century in the most deplorable state imaginable on one hand by the Princes of Tuscany on the other by the Wars of the Italian Princes one against another and the Arms of the Emperors and neighboring Kings In short the confusions were then so general that there was scarcely a corner in Europe wherein a man that loves quiet could obtain it Now who is it but knows that times of War and Divisions are apt to introduce carelesness looseness and ignorance of the mysteries of Religion into the Church I CONFESS there were in this Age some endeavours after a Reformation bu besides that they were but mere essays that proved ineffectual I deny they were strong enough supposing they could have had a wished for success to stir men up to search into the Controversie of Christs Real Presence in the Sacrament The most considerable were those made in the Council of Trosly already mention'd by us and it will not be amiss to make some remarks on what was resolved therein Let us endeavour Concil Trost n Epilogâ— say these Fathers which were not above twelve by our own means and by the Priests under us to avoid as much as in us lies this terrible damnation which we have drawn down upon our selves and the people committed to our charge Let us instruct 'em both by our Doctrin and Example Let us behave our selves as the Ministers of Christ that our Office be not dishonored and it be said of us the Priests are without knowledg those to whom the Law is committed have not known me and lest we fall into the fault of Ely who corrected not the faults of his Sons First then let every Christian ground himself well in the Christian Religion which is the Catholick Faith without which a man cannot be called a Christian Let him believe in the Father Son and Holy Spirit one only true God three persons in unity of substance But yet know that the Son alone took on him our Flesh to save us and thus suffered Death rose again ascended up into Heaven and will come in the same Flesh to judg both quick and dead Let him believe in the Holy Ghost and that by him we have the remission of sins in our Baptism and that thro his Grace our sins are continually pardon'd by the penitence and ministery of the Priests Let him believe also a real and general Resurrection of the Flesh at the coming of Jesus Christ This is the true foundation of Faith which must be adorned by Good Works for as 't is impossible without Faith to please God so Faith cannot be persect if it shews not it self by Charity for if it be void of works it 's become
Philosophy I have shew'd the difference which there is between the genius of Bertram and that of John Scot. Tenthly It is equally false that neither of 'em dared to discover their minds touching the Real Presence Our Author himself will have Bertram's Book to be John Scot's and John Scot's Book was burn'd in a full Council because it opposes it Eleventhly There is no great matter of wonder that after the question was moved and the Book of John Scot burn'd there should be more diligent search made after the Books which respected a Dispute touching which Berenger maintain'd that Paschasus gave the occasion by his novelties and thus the Book of Ratram has appear'd since that of John Scot has disappear'd IN fine twelfthly There are no rational people that will be perplexed with this imaginary difficulty of the Author of the Dissertation to wit that of one of these Authors which is Bertram there should remain nothing that is certain to posterity neither in respect of his quality nor his name altho his Book has remain'd and that the quality of the other to wit John Scot should be well known altho his Book be lost It is apparent enough who Ratramnus was and that Bertram is but a name corrupted thro the ignorance of the Transcribers But what I now represented is sufficient to dissipate the illusion which the name of Bertram had produced and all reasonable people will be fully convinced that Ratram is the Author of the Book of the Body and Blood of our Lord and not John Scot. We have only then to shew that the authority of this Book will be of no less weight supposing John Scot were the Author of it For which purpose I have design'd the second part of this Answer THE SECOND PART That the Authority of the Book of the Body and Blood of our Lord Publish'd under the Name of Bertram will be never the less considerable supposing John Scot were the Author of it CHAP. VI. That John Scot was in great esteem both in his own and succeeding Generations THERE are so many things which advance the repute of John Scot that one may well wonder Mr. Arnaud and the Author of the Dissertation should mention him with such lessening terms and persuade themselves that to diminish the credit of the Book of the Body and Blood of our Lord they needed only to attribute it to John Scot. For he was a person who by his merit had gain'd the esteem and affection of Charles the Bald which is to say of a judicious Prince who took to heart the interests of Religion as Ratramn praises him in his Book of Predestination These two things says he exalt your Majesty in a manner really illustrious T. 1. Maug p. 29. That you seek after the secrets of the heavenly Wisdom and burn with Religious Zeal And indeed this Prince deserv'd the Title of Orthodox which Concil apud Vermer T. 2. Nov. Bibl. Mss. p. 735. was given him by a Council held in 869. Henry a Monk of Auxerre praises him also for his knowledg and piety as we see in the Epistle Dedicatory in the Life of S. Germain of Auxerre related by Du Chene and Baronius But Hist Fr. T. 1. p. 470. Annal. 876. sect 3. 39. T. 3. A. 886. sect 10 11. amongst other things he commends him for having drawn over into France Learned Ireland meaning thereby John Erigena that is to say John the Irish man according to the Observation of Alford the Jesuit in his English Annals HE that wrote the lives of the Bishops of Auxerre describing the advantages which Heribald had in his Youth reckons for a great happiness that he was brought up under the tuition of John Scot. He applied himself T. 2. Nov. Bib. Mss. p. 4â—5 says he to John Scot who in that time imparted to the Gauls the Rays of his Wisdom He was a long time his Disciple and learn'd from him the art of knowing divine and human things and to judg rightly of good and evil THE Authority of John Scot was so considerable in the 9th Century that Hincmar Arch-Bishop of Reims and Pardulus Bishop of Laon who found themselves engaged in sharp Disputes touching Predestination and Grace with Gotthescalc believ'd they could not do better for their party than to oblige John Scot to write on these two subjects He did so in effect and T. 2. Maug 132. altho the choice which he made of the worst side drew on him the censures of the Councils of Valence and Langres and that Hincmar himself defended him but weakly yet did he keep up his credit and Charles the Bald set him upon translating the works which bear the name of Denis the Areopagite HIS Reputation maintain'd it self not only in France but passed over into Italy and Rome it self Anastasius the Popes Library-keeper gives him particular Commendations in a Letter which he wrote to Charles the Bald. I speak says he of John Scot of whom I have heard say that he is a Saint Syll. Epist Hyber n. 33. p. 64. seq It is a work of the Spirit of God to have made this man so zealous as well as eloquent WE may likewise here add the kindness which Alfred King of England had for him and the Employs which this Prince gave him but of this I shall discourse hereafter I shall only say that John Scot was in effect worthy of the esteem and affection which the world shewed him his Wit was lively and piercing he was not only a profound Philosopher but also very well read in the Fathers and especially the Greek ones which was very rare in the 9th Century wherein the learning of the greatest men was bounded by the knowledg of S. Hierom S. Augustin Gregory the Great Isidor of Sevil and their skill lay in copying out these Authors word for word IN fine we may moreover observe in favour of John Scot that altho his Book of the Eucharist was condemned in the Councils of the 11th Century yet the reputation of the Author was perpetuated in the following Ages as appears from the authentick Testimonies which all Historians give him I shall not relate here what Ingusphus William of Malmsbury Simeon of Durham Roger de Hoveden Matthew of Westminster and Florent of Worcester have said of him we may find this in the Answer to the first Part 3 ch 3. Treatise of the Perpetuity WE need only add to these testimonies First that of the Manuscript of the Library of S. Victor which has for Title Memoriale Historiarum Tempore eodem fuit Joannes Scotus vir perspicacis ingenii mellitoe facundioe qui rogatu Caroli Calvi jamdudum verbo ad verbum Hierarcham Dionysii de Groeco in Latinum transtulerat post super eundem librum fecit commentum fecitque librum de naturoe divisione librum de Eucharistiâ qui postea lectus est condemnatus in Synodo Vercellensi â Papa Leone celebrata eodem
the several testimonies which Historians give John Scot has thought good to fall foul on 'em and maintain these four things First That John Scot was neither the Disciple of Venerable Bede nor the Companion Art 4 5 6 7. of his Dissert on John Scot. of Alcuinus nor the Founder of the University of Paris Secondly That he was not Abbot of Etheling in England Thirdly That the History of his Martyrdom is uncertain Fourthly That he has not been put in the rank of Martyrs by the Authority of the Supreme Prelates and that his name is not to be found in any Edition of the Roman Martyrology FOR the first of these Articles I know not why the Author of the Dissertation should trouble himself about it seeing Mr. Claude mention'd nothing like it in his discourse of John Scot. We know that Bede died in Artic. 4. 735. that Alcuinus died in 804 and that John Scot was living in the year 870. We acknowledg also that John Scot could not be the Founder of the University of Paris seeing that this University did not begin till about the middle of the 12th Century as all learned men are agreed Yet can it not be deny'd but that those who fell into these mistakes to wit of making John Scot Bede's Disciple the Companion of Alcuinus and the Founder of the University of Paris by seeing the name of John Scot so famous and renowned amongst Authors would advance by the same of his person the Original of th' University of Paris which helps to establish his Reputation and Authority and to combat in general the pretensions of the Author of the Dissertation AS to the second Article wherein our Author maintains that John Erigenus was not Abbot of Aetheling Mr. Claude contented himself with saying in general That he was made in England Abbot of a Monastery of the Royal Foundation Ingulphus says the same and remarks in particular that this Monastery was that of Aetheling SO that here we have at least Mr. Claude's sincerity secured Harsfield Sect. 9. cap. 12. and Cellot the Jesuit have related as well as he the testimony of Ingulphus and I know not why he might not make use of it as well as these Authors Append. ad Hist Goth. p. 885. who are of the Roman Church I confess 't is somewhat difficult to determin precisely whether the testimony of Ingulphus be absolutely true when he says Alfred gave the Abby of Aetheling to John Scot for I know there are Authors who deny that John the Abbot of Aetheling was the same John Scot whom we mean We will see presently what are the reasons which the Author of the Dissertation brings to prove that these are two different persons yet howsoever 't is true in general Authors agree that John Scot the same we speak of was received very kindly by King Alfred and had a very considerable employ in England when he retired thither which is sufficient to keep up his Reputation and shew he was in no sort respected as an Heretick who withstood the constant and universal Faith of the Church MOREOVER the reasons which the Author of the Dissertation offers to oppose the testimony of Ingulphus who will have John Scot to be Abbot of Aetheling are very slight ones and fall short of convincing or persuading He agrees there was one John who was made Abbot of Aetheling but will have him to be another than our John Scot. His first proof is that John Abbot of Aetheling was of the County of Essex which is to say of the County of the Western Saxons whereas the other was an Irish man BUT this proof is a very weak one for these terms Ex Saxonum genere as speak Asserus and Roger de Howden or Ex antiqua Sazonia oriundum as speaks William of Malmsbury are not inconsistent with the surname of Scot or Erigenus that is to say Irish man Nothing can hinder but that he might have been originally from the County of Essex and an Irish man by the abode which he made in Ireland It may happen that our French men have spoken less exact of the true Country of John Scot than Asserus has done who knew him more particularly In effect Harsfield Will have John Scot to be surnamed Irish man only on the account of the abode which he made in Ireland where he had been brought up but was really an English man and of the Country of Essex We know that the surnames of Countries have been ever given to divers persons by reason of the abode which they made therein Cicero gives two Countries to every man one the Country where he is born and the other the Country which has favourably received him When once this last kind of surnames is become as proper one retains 'em till death and after it which is not inconsistent with what may be said moreover of the Country wherein a man is born And therefore Ingulphus who first deried the Text of Asserus did not believe that for this pretended difference of the name of Irish man and of the Country of Essex a man ought to make two John Scots the one a Saxon and the other an Irish man Similiter says he de veteri Saxonia Joannem cognomento Scotum accerrimi ingenii Philosophum ad se alliciens Adelingioe Monasterii sui constituit Praelatum When he says De veteri Saxonia Joannem cognomento Scotum he shews sufficiently that there is not according to him any inconsistency in making him of the Country of Essex and yet giving him the surname of Irish the one designing the Country of his Birth and the other that of his Abode The Author of the Dissertation tells us that Ingulphus has suffered himself to be imposed on by some Impostor who was affection'd to John Scot. What is this but a mere conjecture in the Air which has neither proof nor ground nor any appearance of truth THE second proof of our Author is taken from that he pretends John Scot withdrew into England t' avoid the shame which he endured of being reputed an Heretick in France whereas John Abbot of Aetheling was sent for over into England by a messenger from Alfred THIS proof is no more conclusive than the rest For first Ingulphus overthrows this pretended occasion of the retreat of John Scot into England by saying that Alfred drew him over to him The first who supposed this cause of his retreat was Simeon of Durham or William of Malmsbury of whom the Author of the Dissertation says Simeon has borrow'd it Now William of Malmsbury wrote a long time sine Ingulphus others have follow'd Simeon of Durham without examining whether what he said was well grounded or not So that all their testimonies do reduce themselves to that of one man posterior to Ingulphus and who consequently by all the laws of History cannot be preferred before him Secondly These same Historians who will have the cause of John Scot's retreat into England to