makes no mention therein of Agapius Leo Allatius has outragiously used the same Patriarch in his Book de Perpetua Consensione and has not fail'd to describe at length the Councils of Cyrillus de Berrhaea and Parthenius but he mentions not a word of Agapius The aforesaid Allatius wrote a Book against Dr. Creygton wherein he indeavours to prove the Greeks believe Transubstantiation He has made a Collection of whatsoever favours his Cause out of all Authors whether Prints or Manuscripts Mr. Arnaud knows it very well seeing 't is from thence he has taken his most specious Arguments but he tells us not a Word of Agapius which makes me justly Suspect that 't is the Work of some Imposture But be it as it will 't is silly to Triumph with it till 't is proved Authentick IN fine to clear the Dispute of all Impertinencies and Illusions with which Mr. Arnaud has pestered it we must retrench the Testimonies of the false Greeks that is to say of those who having bin brought up in Latin Seminaries and being in their Hearts Romanists yet Live in the Communion of the Greek Schismatical Church and even sometimes Possess the highest Dignities Gerganus Bishop of Arta in the Epistle before his Catechism complains In Refuta Caryophr very much against these sort of People He says they are secret Enemies outwardly seem to be Greeks but are Latins in their Hearts and Caryophilus that relates this Complaint of Gerganus agrees in this Particular We have already seen by Report of the Jesuits themselves that one of the chiefest Employs of the Missionaries in the East is to gain privately the Bishops and Priests to make use of them upon Occasion or insensibly to insinuate the Romish Faith into the Minds of the Greek Youth under Pretence of teaching them Languages and Philosophy that by this means they may fill by degrees the Ecclesiastical Charges with their Creatures We have already seen even by the Testimony of Allatius and Thomas a Jesu that this is the Advantage received from the Seminary at Rome wherein Greek Children are brought up in the Opinions and Maxims of the Roman Church and from whence they are sent into their own Countries to receive Orders from Schismatical Bishops to the end they may be promoted to Bishopricks by the Schismatical Patriarchs and carry on the Latin Interest under this false Pretence I do not pretend to decide here the Question whether this way of Proceeding be justifiable or not this being not my Business Let every Man judg thereof as he pleases But I Affirm 't is not possible for People to be more disingenuously dealt with than we are by Mr. Arnaud in making use of the Testimony of these Persons whereby to decide the Question between us If this be his way of Confounding Ministers and Triumphing at their Defeat his Victories indeed will be easy but his Triumph neither Honourable nor Just Is it not a disingenuous Artifice thus to make use as he hath done of the Mystery of the Missions and Seminaries to blind the World imagining his indirect Dealing will scape being taken Notice of AND thus does Mr. Arnaud gloriously retayl out to us the Testimony of Paysius Ligaridius together with the Letters of Mr. de Pompone his Nephew He first produces some Collections out of him Translated into our Language and in fine has Translated his Treatise into Latin and inserted it in his 12th Book Would we know who this Paysius Ligaridius is observe what Mr. Pompone has writ of him in his Letter He is a Greek say's he by Nation and a Religious of the Order of St. Basil He was sometime a Student at Rome and Padoua and being returned from thence to Constantinople was made Archbishop of Gaza in Palestine Mr. Pompone seems to make this Acknowledgment with some kind of Constraint I the rather tell you say's he whatsoever I know of this Archbishop because I do not doubt but some Calvinists here have given notice of this Treatise to Mr. Claude and informed him he ought to be Suspected seeing he was Educated at Rome and went out Doctor at Padoua so that he may think his Testimony ought to be rejected being brought up in our Religion Should we not have known then of Mr. Pompone what kind of Man this Archbishop was were it not for that he feared some Calvinists at Stockholm would give an Account of him to Claude the Minister Alas we are not beholding to him for his Account for we can be informed elsewhere by a Latiniz'd Greek at Venice who goes under the Name of Signor Gradenigo observe what he lately Wrote concerning him Paysius Ligaridius studied at Rome and when he left that City was a Zealous Defendor of the Latins but I heard since he has publickly abjured the Romish Religion when made Metropolitain of Gaza TO give the World a more particular Character of this Person and such as are like him it will not be amiss to relate at large this Abjuration mentioned by Signor Gradenigo Observe here then what Dr. Bazire an English Divine whose Testimony I have already Cited wrote to me who was present at Jerusalem when Paysius was made Archbishop of Gaza In the Year 1646 say's he during the Troubles in England King Charles the first of Blessed Memory sent me over from England to France to his Son then Prince of Wales my now gracious Sovereign Charles the Second whom God grant long to Reign After an abode of two Years in France I resolved to make a long Voyage and to visit all Syria Mesopotamia and Palestine which I did in five Years time Being in the Year 1652 at Jerusalem in the Temple of the Sepulchre 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to pray and behold the Holy Places in Imitation of that Alexander mentioned by Eusebius in the sixth Book of his Ecclesiastical History Paysius Ligaridius came to me from the Patriarch of Constantinople whose Name likewise was Paysius to present me with a Cake on which was described the whole History of our Saviour from his Annunciation to his Ascension and in leaving me Invited me to be present on the Morrow at his Spiritual Marriage these were his Expressions meaning his Installment into the Dignity of Metropolitain of Gaza The next Day being the fourteenth of September 't was performed and I was present at the Ceremony The Patriarch sat upon his Throne which was hung with rich Turky Carpets and under him sat the Metropolitains and a little lower the Bishops Archimandrites c. Whilst the Office was Celebrating Ligaridius rehearsed a Confession of Faith a Copy of which he afterwards gave me Before his Consecration he twice or thrice trampled under his Feet a Picture which represented a City scituated on seven Hills with a two headed Eagle soaring over it The Latins there present were extreamly offended thereat for they knew well enough this City represented Rome After the Consecration was ended I withdrew into a publick House of Entertainment in
make this Rhapsody turned Roman Catholick which might well transport him by a Zeal common to young Converts to make his Master speak a word or two in favour of Transubstantiation Mr. Arnaud seems moreover to speak of Ministers but it is known by every one that Scaliger was none WITEMBOGARD was one of the chief of the Arminian Party interessed against the French Ministers neither is he a Witness to be fully believed in what he tells us concerning Casaubon yet if what Spondanus has written of Casaubon be true we must acknowledge that this Person who altho otherwise was extraordinarily learned did not excel in Judgment He was a man saith he of a fickle Mind and ever wavering in maters of Religion Annals Eccl. ad An. 1600 art 12. he was willing to please both Parties and by that means pleased neither It is very likely that near Familiarity he had with Cardinal Perron drew him into this ambiguos Humour which ought not to be made use of against us much less to be proposed as an Example for the regulating of our Conduct And besides he may more justly be said to be Critick than a Minister I shall not here trouble my self with what is alleaged concerning Socinus and his Followers for there is a great deal of Passion and Injustice shewed in Confronting them with us seeing the Point here in Question is what our most knowing Ministers hold about this matter I confess the Socinians reject Transubstantiation and the Real Presence but it is moreover so much their interest to decry the Doctrine of the Fathers that 't is no marvel if they speak so unjustly of them They have built on the antient Heresies of Photinus Macedonius and Pelagius and seeing themselves opposed by Councils and by the writings of the Fathers this hath moved them not only to have no respect for them but likewise to lay to their charge things which they never believed to the end they might render them odious and marr their Credit So that Mr. Arnaud imposes on us when he tells us that the Socinians have no interest in acknowledging that the Writings of the Lib. 1. C. 5. Pag. 41. Fathers favour the Catholicks and that it would have bin more to their Advantage to deny this The contrary of which is apparent WHEN he should produce some of our Ministers who doubted whether the Writings of the Fathers favour us in the point of the Eucharist or who even believed they were against us should this appear so strange to us It is not an easy matter for a man to disentangle himself out of all the corrupt passages which are fasly attributed to the Fathers and set forth under their Names and from all the Artifices made use of to disguise their Doctrines I have written a Chapter on purpose in my Answer to Father Noiiet wherein I produce several Examples of this which the Readers may peruse at their Leasure Even Casaubon himself whom I now mentioned is one of them who hath fallen into this Snare for he hath taken two preparatory Prayers for the Mass to be the true and undoubted Works of St. Ambrose altho that in effect they are composed by Anselme Bishop of Canterbury Now if any Person has bin deceived like Casaubon and doubted whither the Fathers were for us must this be used as a Proof against us ought such a ones Mistakes to be the Rule of our Thoghts this certainly is contrary to reason BUT for one Minister or two whom Mr. Arnaud can bring against us we can produce a great number who have not hesitated in this matter Calvin himself who lived in a time when these Fopperies were scarely discovered yet asserts that the Fathers have retained the pious and orthodox Sence of this Mystery and affirms that not having found them at all to derogate Inst Lib. 4. C. 18. from the only Sacrifice of Jesus Christ he could not therefore consent to the charging of them with Impiety altho he doth not think them wholly excusable in the form of the Action To Calvin we may add Cook who was Tutour to King Edward of England and supposed to be Author of a Book intit'led Diallacticon Thomas Crammer Arch-Bishop of Canterbury Bp. Jewel Peter Martyr the Author of the Orthodox Treatise Andrew Volan the Divines of the University of Heydelberg Du Moulin Chamier Rivet Faucheur Mestresat and Blondel not to mention Du Plessis and Mr. De Saumaise nor several others who have written on this Subject by the Testimony of the Fathers which sheweth with how great precipitation Mr. Arnaud hath asserted that it is most false the most knowing Ministers are perswaded the Fathers are manifestly for them and the Solutions they give their Passages are good and Solid WHAT he mentions concerning Mr. Daillé is taken in a contrary Sence for he never designed to deny the Advantage we have in the Fathers touching the Eucharist nor leave it to be questioned His Book against Mr. Adam and Cottiby is an authentick Proof of this and being as yet thro Gods Grace in a Capacity to declare his own Thoughts there needs no more but to ask his opinion touching this Point and see what Answer he will make There will appear no Difference betwixt his Opinion and mine provided his Words are understood as he meant them Mr. Daillé sais 't is a hard matter to gather from the Writings of the Fathers De usu Pat. C. 2 their Opinions touching those Articles in Religion about which we differ because the matters they treat of are for the most part very remote His meaning is that it is a hard matter to find a formal and express Declaration of their Sence in these matters which should be declared in such Terms as these I deny or affirm I approve or condemn I reject or receive and the Reason he alleages do's sufficiently confirm this for he saies That the Matters they treat of are remote from our Controversies and that they thought not of us when they wrote MY Sence differs not from his and therefore I shall not fear to say with Ibid. him that they that expect to find the Belief of the Fathers clearly set down in their Writings are generally mistaken even as he who thinks to meet with the Affections and Desires of his Mind amongst the sound of Bells And indeed if we expect to find a positive and precise Rejection of the Romish Doctrine in the Writings of the Fathers like unto that which is at this day amongst us we shall be much mistaken and the Reason is apparent in as much as the Doctrine of the Church of Rome being not extant in the time of the Fathers they have not expresly condemned it for men are not wont to condemn Opinions before they appear Yet do's not this hinder but that the Fathers are against Transubstantiation by way of Negation that is to say by their Silence because they never inserted it amongst the Articles of their Faith they never
ruled the Church after their manner and drove away the Greeks whensoever they could do it with safety and as to the Rebellious and Obstinate Greeks who would not relent and embrace the Truth they severely punished them as they had done heretofore in the East and especially at Antioch He afterwards produces the Testimony of an Anonymous Greek Author which I shall here set down and so much the rather because of the Consequence which may be made of this History Since the Emperor Porphyrogennetu ' s Ibid. time to that of John Batatza ' s the Latins did nothing else but Plunder Cities and Islands They expelled the Orthodox Prelates from their Seats and substituted Cardinals in their Places who were of the same Belief with them And this they did at Constantinople Cyprus Antioch and other Cities and not content with this they constrained all the People not excepting the Priests and Monks to be of their Opinion and Communion and commemorate the Pope They were Friends to those that obeyed them but as to them that reprehended them they treated them as Hereticks and those that abhorred their Communion were punished openly even to the making them suffer Martyrdom and used in the same manner as the Kings and Tyrants handled the Primitive Christians Witness the holy Monks of the Isle of Cyprus whom they kept three Years in Prison because they would not Communicate with them Inflicting on them all manner of Torments and in fine not being able to make them acknowledg their Doctrine to be good being possessed with Rage they fastned them to their Horses Tailes and drew them over Precipices causing othres to be burnt alive John their Abbot having remained some time in the midst of the Flames calling upon God one of these furious Latins struck him down with his Mace into the Fire And thus did this Holy Man render his Spirit unto his Creator He farther adds that the Pope having sent some Monks as Spyes under pretence of a Pilgrimage to Jerusalem they saw the Patriarch Germain at Nice who complaining of these Cruelties received for Answer that the Pope was troubled thereat and if the Greeks would send any to make Peace they would be kindly received It was only saies he to deride and impose on us that they would have us send first to them as it were to accuse our selves and acknowledg our Error which plainly appeared afterwards by their Letters BUT to the end we may not think Leo Allatius who relates this Complaint of the Greeks is suspected by the Latins under pretence that he himself is a Greek by Birth it will not be amiss to see the Answer he makes If this Author saies he means the Greeks who remaining fixt to their Ceremonies embraced otherwise the Truth he is mistaaen For the Latins have Ibid. bin so far from driving them away that they have made use of them as often as they have Occasion If he means the Schismaticks and those that maintained the Errors of the Greeks he trifles for how can he imagine the Catholicks who are so Zealous for the Roman Church should suffer in a Country they had Conquered with the loss of their Blood the Greeks their Enemies and Adversaries to their Faith to live unpunished These erronious People must be reduced being Rebels to their own Faith not only by simple Banishments but by Fire and Sword And this is Allatius his Moderation which does not well accord with that which Mr. Arnaud attributes to the Latines BUT we need not oppose Allatius against him we need but hear himself to know whether the Latins did not use all manner of Violences to settle their Religion amongst the Greeks After the taking of Constantinople L. 3. C. 1. saies he the Latins possessed themselves of all the Churches they established a Latine Patriarch they filled Constantinople with Latin Priests they created a Latin Emperor who was Baldwin Earl of Flanders and prosecuting their Conquest in Greece they brought under their Obedience almost whatsoever appertained in Europe to the Emperours of Constantinople The Grecian Emperour fled into Asia having but three or four Cities left him which were all that for a long time remained under the Obedience of the Greeks Behold here then all Greece subdued not only to the Temporal Authority of the Latins but likewise to the Spiritual Authority of the Popes He adds a little after that the Popes Legats used such hard and rigorous Courses to constrain the Greeks to Communicate with the Pope that at length the Emperour Henry Baldwin ' s Successor was forced to take them off mauger the Legat Pelagus He tells us likewise L. 3. C. 7. in another place that Greece was at that time filled with Dominicans and Fryar Minorites that is to say Inquisitors as he himself calls them who had often performed this Office in France and Germany and signalized themselves by punishing an infinite number of Hereticks who made it the greatest part of their Skill to discover them and a great part of their Piety to have them severely Punished that these Inquisitors were in several places Masters of the Greeks and were ordered by the Pope to Confer with them and examine their Doctrine WERE not them of the Church of Rome fully perswaded of Mr. Arnaud's good Intentions towards them these historical Passages he has offered were enough to make him suspected For this deplorable Condition of Greece and all the East and the violent Means the Latins here used to plant their Religion for several Years together that is to say for near two hundred Years in the East and fifty eight in Greece might well introduce amongst these People the Belief of a substantial Conversion and there is methinks more reason to admire if this has not hapned than if it hath WE are not yet gotten to the end of Mr. Arnaud's Histories He tells L. 3. C. 7. us three things worth our Observation The first is that altho Constantinople was retaken from the Latins by Michael Paleologus yet they kept still several places in Greece and even whole Provinces as Achaia Secondly that the Latines were still Masters of divers great Islands as Cyprus Crete Eubeé Rhodes and divers other Places Thirdly that the Necessity the Emperours of Constantinople lay under of obtaining the Assistance of the Western Princes caused them to keep a continual Correspondency with several of them and to be in sundry particulars subservient to the Latins which remained at Constantinople so that there was always a great number there who made Profession of the Romish Religion Here is then the Latins again not only mixt with the Greeks in their ordinary Commerce but in several places their Lords and Masters and in a fit Capacity to make them receive their Religion LEO Allatius tells us likewise that when the King of England had Possessed De Perp. Consens L. 2. C. 15. himself of Cyprus and given it to the King of Jerusalem that he might
C. 20 Codin de Officiis Const Cap. 1. Rope to be fastned about his Neck and to be thus exposed thro out all the City with his Wife and Neece together with ten others bound after the same manner causing the two former of these to be flapt ever and anon on the Cheeks with the Entrails of a Sheep which is amongst the Greeks a kind of Infamous Punishment wherewith only the Vilest Offenders are treated and those who add Obstinacy to the Crimes of which they have bin Guilty He likewise Imprisoned four of the Chief Officers of his House two of which were his Kinsmen and there kept them a long time laden with Idem L. 6. C. 16. Irons This Severity seemed very great but not content therewith when the Pope sent Legates to Constantinople to Confirm the Greeks in their Obedience to him he made them Witnesses of his Cruelty towards the Opposers of this Union commanding a certain Bishop of Ephesus to conduct them to the Prison and shew them these four Persons who were of the chiefest Rank in Greece they were in a square Room each of 'em chained to a corner thereof and laden with Irons and that which was an Aggravation of their Misery was to be thus exposed a Spectacle to their Enemies WOULD we know the Motives inducing this Prince to use so great Idem L. 3. C. 18. Severity in this matter Observe we then what Pachymerus tells us He sent oftentimes Embassadors to the Pope and endeavoured to gain him by Presents For he plainly perceived the Danger lay on that side and that the Italians could not lye long Idle Wherefore he made Proposals of Union to the end he might be secure as to them and the better Dispose of his other Affairs These Embassies then were frequent and the Presents Magnificent not only to the Pope but likewise to several Cardinals and others whom he judged powerful in the Court of Rome In effect as soon as ever Pope Urbain the fourth received Raynald ad ann 1262. num 3. c. ad ann 1262. the News of the re-taking of Constantinople and the Progress of the Greeks he earnestly endeavoured to stir up the Princes and People to assist the Latins he wrote for this Effect to the Fryar Minorites in France and enjoyned them to Preach a Croisado on this occasion with the same Indulgences which had bin granted them that undertook the Holy War he wrote likewise to King Lewis upon the same account and threatned the Genoises who favoured Michael being at Varyance with the Venetians that if they forsook not his Allyance he would excommunicate them he wrote to the Prelates of England and France exhorting them to contribute to this War in short he forgot nothing he judged necessary in this Occasion Michael then seeing that the only means to shelter himself from this Storm Raynald ad ann 1263. num 22. was to fly to the usual Policy of the Greeks that is to say to negotiate the Re-union of the two Churches he thereupon wrote to the Pope Letters full of Respect and Affection to the Roman Church and having received such an Answer as he desired he earnestly applyed himself to this Business Mr. Arnaud himself is agreed on the Motives which set this Emperor at work Foreseeing saies he the Popes would not fail to arm the Western Princes L. 3. C. 2. P. 266. against him and that he had a potent Enemy in the Person of Charles D'Anjou King of Naples and Sicily with whom the Emperor Baldwin being driven from Constantinople was allyed he resolved thereupon to reunite the Greeks with the Roman Church that he might by this means deliver himself from the fear of those dreadful Croisado's which made the Greek Emperors tremble at that time in Constantinople the Sultans in Babylon and Grand Caire and the Tartars themselves as far as Persia It is certain adds he that this Re-union was carried on upon politick Respects AND these in effect were the true Reasons of Michael's Undertakings which being his greatest Interest he therefore left no means unattempted whereby to accomplish it Which Mr. Arnaud does still grant We may read saies he in Pachymerus that he endeavoured too violently to bring the Bishops over to his Will But did he not acknowledg it we need only L. 3. C. 3. P. 274. read what Michael himself saies in his harangue to the Greek Clergy assembled upon this Occasion I must acknowledg saies he that I have stisled within me the most tender Sentiments of Nature to accomplish my design You know Pachym L. 6. C. 15. I loved a Person with the same tenderness and Respect as if he had been my own Father and I believed I ow'd him more than my Father seeing he gave me the Communion and received me into the Bosom of the Church which I esteem more than the giving me Life and yet have I Sacrificed him to this Interest 'T is the Patriarch Joseph I mean I have violently handled several others even my intimate Friends and oppressed divers among your selves I have moreover several of my near Kinsmen in Prison there having bin no other Reason for their opposing me or my punishing them than only this Re-union with the Latins I think this is sufficient to Convince us that this Emperor abused his Power in Favour of the Court of Rome I confess those that succeeded him altho they had the same Opinion touching the Re-union yet used not the same Extremities nevertheless John Paléologus Raynald ad ann 1370. endeavoured earnestly to effect this and therefore went in Person to Rome in great Pomp to make his Declaration EMANUEL the second who succeeded him trod in the same Steps addressing himself to Pope Boniface the ninth who published a Croisado for his Assistance against the Turks and a while after he treated with Martin the fifth touching the Reconciliation of the two Churches In Fine John the seventh Paleologus came to the Council of Florence and Syrop Hist Concil Flor. Sect. 2. C. 5. sent his Clergy thither on the same Design WE may then well conclude the Latins wanted not Opportunities to introduce their Religion amongst the Greeks For first it is not to be supposed but that this great Passion these Emperors shewed towards this Union inclined the Minds and Hearts of several Persons as well of the Clergy as Laity to favour the Roman Church to embrace its Interests and accommodate themselves to its Doctrine We all know how weak and fickle the greatest part of mankind are they approve and esteem whatsoever is in Favour and Credit there being few whose Minds are not Byassed even in Religious matters by temporal Advantages Men commonly in such cases endeavour to Mollisy and take in a good Sence that which before was a Subject of Scandal they enlarge or diminish Objects to bring 'em to the Point they desire they hearken to nothing but what is pleasing and behold whatsoever opposes their Interest
was not then wholly extinct that is to say in the beginning of the 11th Century when Berenger appear'd THESE are Mr. Arnaud's first objections which as is plainly seen are not over demonstrative that the change we suppose is impossible Those which follow are not much better as will appear from the reflections we shall make on ' em The second order of these pretended Machins which he attributes to me is what he calls Machins of Preparations and he draws these from two passages the one of my first answer and th' other from my second The first is contain'd in these terms In this dark Age that is to say in the 10th the distinct knowledg of the true Doctrin was lost not only in reference to the Sacrament but almost all other Points of the Christian Religion The second speaks of the Ages which followed the first eight in these terms The first light which was taken from the people to keep 'em in ignorance Answer to the second Treatise Part 2. chap. 3. was God's Word The second was the clear and solid Expositions of the Writings of the Holy Fathers in reference to the Sacrament The third the knowledg of other Mysteries of Christianity which might strengthen mens minds and encourage their zeal for the truth The fourth was suffering natural reason to decay and fall into a kind of languishment And as to their senses they had open War declar'd against ' em THOSE that shall take the pains to read the 4th Chapter of Mr. Arnaud's Chap. 4. page 891. 9th Book which has for its title The Machins of Preparation Examin'd will find therein a prodigious profusion of words much heat and vehement declamations but very few things worth regarding wherefore passing by as I shall do whatsoever is useless and redundant the rest will not take up much time First he charges me with offering things without any foundation proof or reason I answer then Mr. Arnaud has forgot the proofs Page 892. we brought touching the disorders of the 10th Century and according to his reckoning the testimonies of Guitmond Verner Rollevink Marc Antony Sabellic John Stella Polydor Virgil Elfric Arch bishop of Canterbury Edgar King of England Genebrard Bellarmin Baronius Nicolas Vignier and the Author of the Apology for the Holy Fathers the defenders of the Doctrin of Divine Grace shall be esteem'd as nothing The one tells us That the truths of Religion were vanish'd away in this Age from men The other That therein was a total neglect of all ingenious Arts. The third That all persons in general so greatly indulged ' emselves in idleness that all kinds of Virtues seem'd to be laid asleep with ' em The fourth That the Monks and Priests minded only th' enriching ' emselves The fifth That the Bishops and Priests neglected the reading of the Holy Scriptures and instructing the people out of ' em The sixth That the Church-men spent their lives in Debauches Drunkenness and Vncleanness The seventh That 't was an unhappy Age an Age void of excelling men either in Wit or Learning The eighth That there were no famous Writers in it nor Councils nor Popes that took care of any thing The ninth That Barbarism and ignorance of Learning and Sciences either Divine or Human reigned more in it than in the former Ages The tenth That 't was an iron and leaden Age an obscure and dark Age. And the eleventh That 't was an Age of Darkness and Ignorance wherein excepting some few Historians there were no famous Writers on the Mysteries of Faith Mr. Arnaud knows all this and that we might increase the number of these Testimonies with several others were it necessary yet tells me with the greatest transport That I offer things without any ground proof or reason things which I know to be false and mere imaginations HE says adds he speaking of me that the distinct knowledg of almost all Chap. 4. page 829. the other Mysteries but that of the Eucharist was lost in the 10th Age. Now he knows the contrary of this and is persuaded of it seeing that as to the common Mysteries and such as are believed by both Parties and contained in the ancient Symbol it cannot be said they of the 10th Age were ignorant of 'em and yet as to the points controverted between the Calvinists and the Roman Church excepting that of the Eucharist all the Ministers his Brethren do frankly acknowledg that long before the 9th and 10th Century the whole Church believed what the Roman Church does believe at present of ' em Let him tell us then what are these truths of Faith the distinct knowledg of which were lost in the 10th Century 'T IS no hard matter to satisfie Mr. Arnaud These truths the distinct knowledg of which was lost in the 10th Century are the same which are contained in the Symbols Does he imagin that if a man be not ignorant of the Symbols that therefore he must know distinctly the Mysteries therein contained and does he put no difference between being ignorant of a thing consusedly knowing it and distinctly knowing it Do all those that know the Creed distinctly understand the Mysteries contained therein Certainly a mans mind must be strangely benighted that reasons after this manner They were not ignorant of the Mysteries contain'd in the ancient Symbols they had then a distinct knowledg of ' em If this Argument holds good we may attribute the distinct knowledg of the principal Points of Christianity almost to all kinds of persons to Artificers Husbandmen Women yea Children for there are few in either Communion but have heard of them and know something in 'em and yet it must be granted there are few of these who can be properly said to know them distinctly I pretend not to treat here on the common place of the confused knowledg and the distinct knowless This is needless 'T is sufficient to observe that the term of distinct knowledg is equivocal for 't is sometimes taken for the formal and express knowledg of a thing in opposition to the ignorance of this same thing or to what the Schools call an implicit knowledg and sometimes 't is taken for a clear and full knowledg in opposition to a confused and perplex'd one When the Author of the Perpetuity said that all the Faithful ought always to have a distinct knowledg of the Presence or Real Absence he took the term distinct knowledg in the first sense for he did not mean that all the Faithful must know clearly and fully the Doctrin of the Real Presence in every respect but that they had a formal express and determinate thought of rejecting or admitting it But when I said that the distinct knowledg of the Mystery of the Eucharist and almost all the other Mysteries of Christian Religion was lost in the 10th Century I took this term in the second sense meaning not that there was no more formal knowledg of these Mysteries that is to say that they form'd
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
but S. Paul This great Doctor would not have us to be concerned for these things which he calls Commandments and Doctrins of men which says he have some appearance of wisdom in a voluntary devotion and humility of spirit and in that they spare not in any kind the flesh Let Mr. Arnaud extol as much as he pleases the glory of the 10th Century by these mortifications he shall never persuade reasonable people that an age wherein appears on one hand an almost universal ignorance of all that is good a prodigious neglect of the mysteries of Religion an almost universal corruption of manners a strange kind of Devotion to all manner of Vices a deplorable relaxation of Ecclesiastical Discipline and on the other several Monasteries founded and outward austerity practis'd that this could be an Age of Benediction and Grace MOREOVER what we have said of Edgar King of England Dunstan Archbishop of Canterbury and the quarrel of the Ecclesiasticks in England has been grounded on good Testimonies William of Malmsbury tells us Edgar was reproached for dishonoring the first years of his Reign with Cruelties and strange Pollutions one of which was that being enamored with the Wife of Etelwold his Favorite he got him out one day into the Forrest to Hunt and there caused him to be cruelly murder'd Another of his wickednesses was the forcibly carrying away a Maid that he loved who to avoid his pursuits had cast her self into a Monastery and taken therein the Vail Another time falling in love with a Dukes Daughter and having given orders to have her brought to him the Mother who would not consent her Daughter should be dishonored substituted one of her Maids in her place who was also very fair which Edgar understanding he was thereat so enraged that he changed their rank and quality and made this Servant Mistriss over her own Mistriss He a while after espoused Elfride the Widow of his Favorite whom he had caused to be slain IT is said that Dunstan Excommunicated him because he had violated the respect due to a Monastery and drew out thence a Woman who wore the Habit of a Religious altho she was none and abused her It 's certain Guilliel Malm. lib. 2. c. 8. says he that Wulfritte for this was the Maids name was not a Nun but a Laick who fearing the King had taken the Vail which the King snatching from her abused her At which Dunstan being offended in that he dared to lust after a person that had only the Vmbra of Religion made use of his Pontifical power against him Now as we must judg of the zeal of Dunstan from the Historians own words so we cannot but say there was a great deal of hypocrisie in this action for is it not an horrible hypocrisie to have less regard to the Sacrament of Baptism an Ordinance instituted by God him-himself than to this human institution William of Malmsbury represents Dunstan displaying all his Pontificial Power to revenge the outrage offer'd to the shadow of Religion Vnde offensum says he beatum Dunstanum quod illam concupisset quoe vel umbraticè sanctimonialis fuisset vigorem pontificalem in eum egisse of the Consecration of Baptism or the enormity of the action he says never a word Let not Mr. Arnaud take it ill that I call this hypocrisie He says my censure is unjust because this Maid was Baptiz'd and so Edgar had violated in her the character and the consecration of Baptism as well as in the others But what signifies this remark This Maid was Baptiz'd without doubt and for that reason we esteem it ill that Dunstan grounded his severity and his Episcopal fury on a bare shadow of Religion without any notice of her Baptism AS to the quarrel of the Ecclesiasticks and Monks in England I have said nothing but what is grounded on the testimony of Polydor Virgil as appears by what I related in my Answer to the Perpetuity The Historian lays it upon the insatiable covetousness of the Monks neither does he excuse Polydor. Virg. Hist Ang l. 6. the Priests from the same charge and as to the image of the Crucifix that spake he says expresly there were several people of good report that believed 't was rather an Oracle of Phaebus than an Oracle of God which is to say that this voice was uttered not by the will of God but by the fraud of men What I also said that their disputations were not concerning the Gospel that they were all agreed to let that rest without understanding it without preaching it and without reading it is grounded on the testimony of Elfric Archbishop of Canterbury who lived at the same time for he was Primate of England in the year 989 a year after the death of Dunstan according to the report of Matthew of Westminster In these days says Elfric the Priests Elfric Ser. ad Sacerd. Miss in Bibl. Colleg. S. Bened. Cant. and Bishops are become so careless and idle who ought to be the Pillars of the Church that they regard not the holy Scriptures nor instruct Disciples that may become their Successors as we find several Holy men did who left behind 'em several good Disciples Their minds are more taken up with worldly Honors Concupisence and Covetousness than the Laicks and what a sad example do they give their Flocks not daring to speak of Justice because they neither love it nor observe it CHAP. VII Mr. Arnaud's Objections against what he terms Machins of Forgetfulness Examin'd The Examples of the insensible Changes alledg'd in answer to the Perpetuity Defended I SAID in my Answer to the Perpetuity That if we had this Dispute Answer to the second Treat ch 1. with Greeks or Egyptians we should not perhaps take it ill for them to ask us how this change was wrought but we cannot bear without some kind of regret and vexation these same Transubstantiators this very party that made the change who have used a thousand tricks insensibly to effect it that have made use of Fraud and Violence to hinder its being wrought with noise that have taken infinite care to deprive posterity of the knowledg of the manner how 't was done to come now to us and demand how this could be WHEREUPON Mr. Arnaud tells us first That we have in effect to Book 9. ch 8. page 9â—3 do with not only Egyptians and Greeks but likewise Moscovites Ethiopians Nestorians Jacobites Armenians and Indians that all these people make the same questions as the Author of the Perpetuity and require the same satisfaction But that Mr. Claude cannot answer 'em seeing they had no Paschasus nor Popes nor Monks nor Councils nor Croisado's nor Inquisitors to work this Establishment In the second place he says that I am unjust in accusing Page 954. the Catholicks of this Age for making the change in question and employing Croisado's and Inquisitors against us That these are not the same persons that were in the
in which he asserts the conversion of the substances of Bread and Wine into those of the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ with the subsistence of accidents without a subject and uses the very term of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If Mr. Arnaud has meant by the Greek Church the persons of that Party I have already declared to him and again tell him that I have not disputed against him We do not pretend to dispute the Conquests of the Missions and Seminaries let him peaceably enjoy 'em we mean only the true Greeks who retain the Doctrin and ancient expressions of their Church And as to those we are certain of two things the one that they hold not the Transubstantiation of the Latins which I believe I have clearly proved and the other that they alone ought to be called the true Greek Church altho the contrary Party were the most prevalent and possessed the Patriarchates Mr. Arnaud himself has told us that these Seats are disposed of by the sovereign authority of the Turks to those that have most money and we know moreover the great care that has been taken to establish the Roman Doctrins in these Countries thro the Neglect and Ignorance of the Prelates Monks and People whether by instructing their Children or gaining the Bishops or filling the Churches with the Scholars of Seminaries and other like means which I have describ'd at large in my second Book Mr. Arnaud perhaps will answer that he likewise maintains on his side that this Party which teaches Transubstantiation is the true Greek Church and the other but a Cabal of Cyril's Disciples I answer that to decide this question we need only examin which of these two Parties retains the Doctrin and Expressions of the ancient Greeks for that which has this Character must be esteem'd the true Greek Church and not that which has receiv'd novelties unknown to their Fathers Now we have clearly shew'd that the conversion of Substances Transubstantiation and the Real Presence are Doctrins and Expressions of which the Greeks of former Ages have had no knowledg whence it follows that the Party which admits these Doctrins and Expressions are a parcel of Innovators which must not be regarded as if they were the true Greek Church Let Mr. Arnaud and those who read this Dispute always remember that the first Proposition of the Author of the Perpetuity is that in the 11th Century at the time of Berenger's condemnation the Greeks held the Real Presence and Transubstantiation that this is the time which he chose and term'd his fix'd point to prove from hence that these Doctrins were of the first establishment of Religion and consequently perpetual in the Church Which I desire may be carefully observed to prevent another illusion which may be offered us by transferring the question of the Greeks of that time to the Greeks at this and to hinder Mr. Arnaud and others from triumphing over us when it shall happen that the Missions and Seminaries and all the rest of the intrigues which are made use of shall devour the whole Land of Greece For in this case the advantage drawn hence against us will be of no value 't will neither hence follow that the Doctrins in question have been perplex'd in the Church nor that the Greek Church held 'em in the time of Berenger's condemnation and what I say touching the Greeks I say likewise touching the other Eastern Churches over which the Roman Church extends its Missions and Care as well as the Greeks AS to what remains let not Mr. Arnaud be offended that in the refutation of his Book in general I have every where shewed the little justice and solidity of his reasonings and especially in the refutation of his first sixth and tenth Book I acknowledg he has wrote with much Wit Elegancy and polite Language and attribute to the defect of his subject whatsoever I have noted to be amiss either in his Proofs or Answers but 't is very true the world never saw so many illusions and such great weakness in a work of this nature and all that I could do was to use great condescentions in following him every where to set him strait I have only now to beseech Almighty God to bless this my Labor and as he has given me Grace to undertake and finish it so he will make it turn to his Glory and the Churches Edification AMEN AN ANSWER TO THE DISSERTATION Which is at the end of Mr. Arnaud's Book Touching the Book of the Body and Blood of our Lord Publish'd under the name of BERTRAM AND OF THE Authority of John Scot or Erigenus LONDON Printed by M. C. for Richard Royston Bookseller to the King 's most Excellent Majesty 1683. Advertisement THOSE that shall cast their eyes on this Answer will be at first apt to think these Critical Questions belong only to Scholars Whereas we have here several important matters of fact which are in a manner necessary to the full understanding of the Controversie of the Eucharist The Church of Rome pretends we have forsaken the Ancient Faith and that Berenger was one of the first who taught our Doctrin in the beginning of the 11th Century We on the contrary maintain 't is the Roman Church that has departed from the Ancient Belief and that 't was Paschasus Ratbert who in the beginning of the 9th Century taught the Real Presence and the Substantial Conversion And to this in short may he reduced the whole Controversie which was between Mr. Claude and Mr. Arnaud Mr. Claude has strenuously and clearly shewed that as many Authors as were of any Repute im the 9th Century have opposed the Doctrin of Paschasus and that consequently Paschasus must be respected as a real Innovator Now amongst these Writers Mr. Claude produces John Scot or Erigenus and Bertram or Ratram a Religious of Corby two of the greatest Personages of that Age and shews they wrote both of 'em against the Novelties which Paschasus had broach'd that one of 'em Dedicated his Book to Charles the Bald King of France and the other likewise wrote his by the same King's Order That the first having lived some time in this Prince's Court died at last in England in great reputation for his holiness of Life that the other was always esteem'd and reverenced as the Defender of the Church which seems to be decisive in our favour Mr. Arnaud on his side finding himself toucht to the quick by the consequence of these Proofs has used his last and greatest Endeavours to overthrow or weaken ' em And for this purpose has publish'd at the end of his Book two Dissertations the one under his own name and the other under the name of a Religious of St. Genevieve whose name is not mention'd In the first which is under the name of the Religious he does two things for first he endeavours to persuade that the Book of the Body and Blood of our Lord is not in effect Ratram ' s but
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
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